Topping E2x2 Audio Interface Review

[Xeonix]

Sorry guys its me again Is that okay? Not plugged anything. max gain

 

[AnalogSteph]

Considering that's an open input with maximum analog gain plus 20 dB of digital boost, this looks reasonable enough. The noise level should drop if you terminate the input.

 

[pier25]

The noise level should drop if you terminate the input.

Yes but in my experience the preamps on my E4x4 have resulted in more noise than expected. The specs claim -130dbu of EIN but the preamps are noticeably noisier than my Candem EC1 (external preamp) which has similar EIN.

On another topic...

I keep having issues with sample rate and my Topping in macOS. This time with Reaper. The project sample rate is at 192k and yet for some reason sometimes the interface decides to ignore the DAW and just run at 48k. The only way to reliably run the interface at the intended sample rate is to keep the Topping control panel open and manually select the sample rate there. This has caused me a couple of head aches already.

 

[Xeonix]

Hello guys, Is it possible to assign a hotkey for muting the microphone in the Topping E2x2 soft?

 

[Viper780]

Muting should be done on OS side.

 

[Xeonix]

Muting should be done on OS side.

Unfortunately, Windows 11 doesn’t have such a feature.

 

[Viper780]

I'm pretty sure Windows 11 has such thing

Try "WIN + Alt + K"

 

[MastahG]

Topping e2x2 vs Motu m2

Hello everyone,

This is my first message on this forum, but I've been visiting it for a long time to get information, so thank you for that.
I own a MOTU M2, and I'm very happy with it since, for the way I use it, I don’t think I needed much more (I only use it for production and mixing, but I never record).
The thing is, I started reading about this interface and decided to buy it just in case I might need its features in the future (on paper, it’s a better product than the MOTU).
So, I’ve been testing it for 3-4 days, and everything works as it should. The device runs very well, and all the good things people say about it are true.

But then came the moment to compare the audio output with the MOTU, and that’s when I started noticing some things.
First, I leveled the output levels, both the main output (the MOTU has more) and the headphone output. Once I did that, I started to notice that in the low end, the sound of the Topping is different and the more information there is, the more noticeable it becomes.


It’s as if the sound is flatter, a bit thinner in that area, which makes the higher bass frequencies stand out a little more. It’s hard to explain, but compared to the MOTU, the MOTU seems to have more information in the low end, more body—it just sounds richer.

It’s not a dramatic difference or something you’d immediately notice on a first listen, but if you do an A/B comparison, the differences become clear. I produce electronic music, and that frequency range is critical for me. I feel like the MOTU gives me more in that area, whereas with the Topping, I feel like I’m losing something.

of course I’m not saying things have to sound like the MOTU, but at this point, I prefer it over the Topping.
So, im going to return it
I really wanted to keep it because it looks excellent and has a lot of possibilities, but for the way I use it, that slight difference in perception makes me have to return it.

I’m probably being a bit drastic because, as I said, it’s not something dramatic, and no one would notice it unless they could compare it with another interface. But since I did compare them, I’m sticking with the MOTU.

That being said, I would still recommend the Topping to anyone thinking about getting it because, beside from that aspect in the low end, I didn’t notice anything strange in the rest of the spectrum. Plus, in other aspects, it offers way more possibilities than the MOTU

Value feedback here
Did you test with headphones?

I ordered mine yesterday and I also need to do a AB with my older Focusrite.
The last days I tried the Audient ID14, Focusrite 2i2 Gen3 and my old Focusrite solo Gen1. The old solo G1 sound best to me.
Also not easy to bring them to the same level.

The Motu M2 would be the last interface I check on my list because I cannot afford a new one. Just second hand. And second hand I cannot return.

I also produce electronic music. I hope my DT700 Pro X 48 ohms will be friends with the e2x2. Usually I produce and listen on not so loud headphone levels but I want to have all details and Bass. This was possible with the old solo G1

 

[Mugetsu]

Hello, guys, between this Topping E2X2 vs Audient ID4 MKII which one will be better to play guitar on Neural DSP plugins? Just that, maybe record my guitar but nothing more. My headphones are Sony WH-1000XM4 (I know, completely far away from what is recommended but it is what I have).

Cheers.

 

[staticV3]

Hi @Mugetsu! Welcome to ASR.

Check out Julian Krause's comprehensive reviews on YouTube:

 

[Mugetsu]

Hi @Mugetsu! Welcome to ASR.

Check out Julian Krause's comprehensive reviews on YouTube:

Thanks @staticV3

Since my main use is Amp simulators I guess Round Trip Latency is the value I was looking for (I've already watch the reviews before but for some reason didn't pay attention to that part). Audient ID4 MKII has better values in that area and when it comes to headphones Topping E2x2 is superior (but since I'll use Sony WH-1000XM4 cans I don't think that matters much).

I care more about latency so I guess Audient ID4 MKII will be better for me, but I would like your opinion if possible.

In real world experience is there a notable difference between a RTL of 3 to 5 ms and 5 to 8 ms?

Cheers.

 

[staticV3]

I care more about latency so I guess Audient ID4 MKII will be better for me, but I would like your opinion if possible.

In real world experience is there a notable difference between a RTL of 3 to 5 ms and 5 to 8 ms?

I'm sorry to say that I've never used my audio interface in a latency-dependent scenario, so cannot give you personal advice there.

 

[Pawlakbest]

I have an unusual request.

Can someone send me pictures from Windows Audio Settings from Playback tab? So something like this:

I wanted to know how E2x2 appears in settings (as 1 device, 2 devices for each output?). I would also appreciate the Properties tabs from it

Thank you

 

[pier25]

In real world experience is there a notable difference between a RTL of 3 to 5 ms and 5 to 8 ms?

No.

 

[half_dog]

Sorry guys its me again Is that okay? Not plugged anything. max gain
View attachment 467629View attachment 467630

It seems you set the interface up to 192kHz... Although this interface has nice an analog circuit, its ADC chip doesn't have the best specs, it uses noise shaping which pushes the noise to ultrassound region and in some cases (as using a high sample rate) it detected by the software as noise/signal. For an AUDIO recording device, its not a real problem. During the content production, a low pass filter removes it.

 

[pier25]

It seems you set the interface up to 192kHz... Although this interface has nice an analog circuit, its ADC chip doesn't have the best specs, it uses noise shaping which pushes the noise to ultrassound region and in some cases (as using a high sample rate) it detected by the software as noise/signal. For an AUDIO recording device, its not a real problem. During the content production, a low pass filter removes it.

When recording at 192k with my Topping E4x4 I did always get an ultrasonic pitch at around 75khz. I contacted Topping about it but they never replied

I did a test and the rogue pitch wasn't present when recording in the exact same conditions with the Motu M4 (same mic, same location, same cable).

I didn't dig into it to figure out if the unit itself was producing this pitch (and it was captured by the mic) or if it was produced by the internal circuitry.

 

[CedarX]

When recording at 192k with my Topping E4x4 I did always get an ultrasonic pitch at around 75khz.

75 kHz: does it really matter?

 

[AnalogSteph]

My first guess in terms of potential culprits would be the phantom power boost converter, which is built right into the interface after all. This is not unheard of, e.g. Archimago noted ca. 37 kHz interference on his old Focusrite Forte.

Now unless you are recording music for dogs, cats or bats, a -80 dBFS tone that high up is completely irrelevant in practical terms. Think about how many speakers can even reproduce 75 kHz at all... some will go to 40ish but an entire octave higher? Just notch it out if it really bothers you.

(It goes without saying that no audio for humans needs anywhere close to 192 kHz worth of sample rate. It can be quite handy to have around, e.g. I've been using realtime upsampling to work around some DAC filter issues in an IDT onboard audio chip, but if you have a decent DAC, 44.1 or 48 kHz tops is entirely adequate for the material itself. Nothing wrong with recording and editing in 96 or 192 kHz, of course, but the finished product doesn't really need it.)

 

[pier25]

75 kHz: does it really matter?

Not for most people but it does to me since I record material for sound design.

Edit:

In sound design it's commonplace to record at 192k and then reduce the sample rate 2x or 4x to slow down without interpolation. This makes ultrasounds totally audible.

 

[half_dog]

Not for most people but it does to me since I record material for sound design.

Edit:

In sound design it's commonplace to record at 192k and then reduce the sample rate 2x or 4x to slow down without interpolation. This makes ultrasounds totally audible.

I was talking about nose shaping, not specifically a pitch tone. I will investigate if my unit has this as well.
Usually I only use this high sample only for device measurements, have never used for recording. Did you try different cables, microphones, USB inputs, power supply (if you use any).