MOTU 828mk3 Review

[metakinetics]

I went ahead and took a leap of faith and bought a MOTU 828mk3, with some reserve about being a public beta tester, but feeling brave nevertheless. The fellow at Guitar Center was happy to extend my return policy from 14 days to 30 days due to the possibility of dissatisfaction, which sealed the deal for me. I've spent some time playing with it and I feel qualified to do something of an in-depth review as a full time audio professional, so that prospective buyers can make a well informed buying decision. I am using it with a brand new iMac Intel 2.4GHz 24" computer and Logic Studio, Adam A7 monitors in a well treated room. I am using driver version 1.4.7 with firmware 1.05 and boot-loader 1.01.

All in all, the 828mk3 is a remarkable piece of engineering. There are a lot of features crammed into this one unit rack space device, and it takes quite a few hours of tinkering to understand how they all work. The new DDS clock gives the A/D and D/A conversion a serious upgrade from the previous generation of multiple I/O rackmount devices in this price range, and is comparable with the new JETpll clock on the converters of the M-Audio Profire 2626 and PreSonus Firestudio. These new advancements in converter clock technology finally make great A/D and D/A conversion a standard feature in the sub $1000 price range, which is cause for much rejoicing in the audio community. You will hardly believe your ears when you hear the difference on truly great quality monitors or headphones!

Finally, we can all afford to have converters with jitter less than 250 picoseconds peak-to-peak. This is still not real 20-bit performance with 120dB of dynamic range (that would require less than 25ps peak-to-peak!), but is very, very good sounding for digital audio nevertheless and worlds beyond any built-in computer audio output. The sound quality in terms of jitter is comparable with and in some ways better than the jitter present in the well-respected TC Electronic System 6000. The difference in sound quality between units like the 828 and the Apogee Ensemble or RME interfaces is now much, much smaller than it used to be, and for most people on anything of a budget will not be reason enough to shell out the extra $500-$1000. The main difference you see in that extra $500-$1000 is in the quality of the microphone preamplifiers, which does not matter for everyone, particularly those hooking up a few hardware synths to the inputs.

Using high quality headphones and monitors, the difference in clarity and stereo separation between the 828mk3 and my M-Audio Fast Track Pro is quite evident. Most of the outputs (with the exception of the dedicated headphone output, see below) have a noise floor too low for me to hear. The device in general sounds excellent, and while perhaps not quite as good as an Apogee Duet, Ensemble or dedicated rackmount converter, its the best you're going to get with this amount of I/O unless you shell out almost three times as much for an Apogee Ensemble, which has somewhat better-sounding converters, but even then you get a bit less I/O and no DSP. For $750 you get 12-built in inputs and 14 built-in outputs with the expansion capability for 16 more.

The built in DSP EQ, compression and limiting is quite good, finally making it possible to record at high gain levels without riding the gain knobs, and with no artifacts! The compression is much better sounding than your average rackmount analog compressor/limiter used for vocal tracking. The EQ is very transparent and musical, and the reverb is versatile and very useful for sweetening a monitor mix, though not nearly as good as a nice Lexicon or convolution reverb plugin like Logic's Space Designer. The LA-2A modeled leveling amplifier is good enough to use for mastering, which is a godsend, and sounds very close to the UAD card plugin emulation.

No device is perfect however. There are, as was to be expected, a few minor issues with this generally wonderful and high value device.

Outputs are definitely on the hot side, which has been noted by several users. They would no doubt blow out my speakers if I ran the device and my Adam A7 monitors on the "0dB" settings. I experienced output this hot on my Edirol FA-101 card, however, which leads me to think that perhaps this is less of a technical flaw than a simple engineering decision. There is something to be said for making a device of this dynamic range with as hot an output as possible. It maximizes the usability of the outputs for processing, mixing out of the box, and live sound, even if it requires over 30dB of total attenuation when used in the typical studio setting to get it down to safe hearing levels. After all, if a device is capable of over a 100dB of dynamic range with THD taken into account from jitter, it should be able to produce over a 100dB signal! To give you an idea of the output level, I was still getting quite audible sound out of my A7s playing a mastered song with their gain set to -60dB and the output of the MOTU set to 0dB. This makes sense, as the signal I was getting from the monitors was about 40dB. The dynamic range of many other sub $1000 sound cards is only about 80dB, so it makes sense they would be 20dB quieter at maximum volume. Even with fairly weak amplification, this device can produce levels that approach the threshold of pain, so be warned!

I was also experiencing intermittent drop-outs in audio while playing with settings in the CueMix FX software, accompanied by very high-pitched (over 5KHz) sustained beeping noises that were not so terribly bad to my ears but probably would make dogs run away in terror. These phenomena accompanied by odd readouts on the metering display indicating that the ADAT outputs were active when they were not. I did a lot of research before buying this unit, however, and figured it may have had something to do with additional devices (e.g. hard drives, etc.) plugged into the firewire chain.

Despite the second port on most firewire audio cards and the extra firewire 800 ports on most new Macs, it is not usually a good idea to plug anything else into any other firewire port anywhere, whether via daisy-chain or another port on the computer. Unplugging my bus-powered firewire 800 drive altogether confirmed my suspicions, as the problems quickly vanished. It seems like the unit works fine as long as nothing else is plugged into any other firewire port, which may be of some concern to people with external firewire-only hard drives or other firewire cards. You will not be able to make use of any other firewire devices on your computer at the same time you are using this unit if you want to experience trouble-free operation.

Others have noted that it is impossible to separate the main headphone output volume from the main XLR output. This is true. However, listening to the mix and recording using two sets of headphones without having to turn off the monitors is still possible. Simply connect the monitors to the balanced TRS outputs 1-2, switch the main outs to the XLRs and the default outs to 1-2.

The only incurable annoyance is a high pitched, fairly quiet but definitely audible constant whining noise in the dedicated headphone output. This noise is not present in the (MAIN) headphone output. Checking other devices, I discovered quite a bit more noise coming from the built-in output of my iMac using the same pair of headphones, but no such noise at all coming from my M-Audio Fast Track Pro. I was not able to get rid of it, as the output makes the noise even when it is not connected to a computer. It seems completely unrelated to the level of the output and does not respond to changes in the setting. It is not noticeable when listening to music. I am not sure if others have experienced the same issue, but it is worth looking into. Perhaps it is a flaw with my particular unit, or perhaps it is inherent in the basic design of the output, I am not sure. One way or another I can always us the (MAIN) headphone output. I will try to find another unit and see if the noise is an isolated problem, and if so, will probably return it for an even exchange to see if I have better luck with the next one.

All in all, I am pleasantly surprised by the sheer volume of value in this unit. It is very expandable and seems fully capable of being at the heart of a professional studio.

[ltemma74]

that was a fantastic report. extremely fair and helpful. thank you very much for sharing your observations and opinions.

[AL24]

Thanks for this excellent review.
I own the MK3 myself and just like you have the same high-pitch noise on the dedicated phones out. I was just about to bring the unit back to get it exchanged, but now reading this review, this might be an issue with all MK3s?

[Mojofilter]

No device is perfect however. There are, as was to be expected, a few minor issues with this generally wonderful and high value device.

There is not a scant of objectivity in your review, metakinetics. Your efforts are appreciated but this thing reads like (and wreaks of) an ad drafted by a MOTU associate or paid endorser. Any negative point you make about the mk3 is accompanied by excuses how the malfunction can be attributed to user error. Obviously a cloaked attempt to persuade there are no real issues with the unit and to shift responsibility to the user.

Your review is moderately informative but it lacks credibility.

[earldrum]

I was also experiencing intermittent drop-outs in audio while playing with settings in the CueMix FX software, accompanied by very high-pitched (over 5KHz) sustained beeping noises that were not so terribly bad to my ears but probably would make dogs run away in terror. These phenomena accompanied by odd readouts on the metering display indicating that the ADAT outputs were active when they were not. I did a lot of research before buying this unit, however, and figured it may have had something to do with additional devices (e.g. hard drives, etc.) plugged into the firewire chain.

Despite the second port on most firewire audio cards and the extra firewire 800 ports on most new Macs, it is not usually a good idea to plug anything else into any other firewire port anywhere, whether via daisy-chain or another port on the computer. Unplugging my bus-powered firewire 800 drive altogether confirmed my suspicions, as the problems quickly vanished. It seems like the unit works fine as long as nothing else is plugged into any other firewire port, which may be of some concern to people with external firewire-only hard drives or other firewire cards. You will not be able to make use of any other firewire devices on your computer at the same time you are using this unit if you want to experience trouble-free operation.

Hi Meta:

I appreciate your review, but I have to ask you are you saying that just having a firwire hard drive that is "not on," but plug into any firewire port will make this problem oocur???

In my situation I only use the 828 MK3 "turn on," and no other firewire ports are engaged (with a working firewire product) and this problem occur very regularly to me. IMHO it is a deal breaker to buying the MK3 if you can't work without the possiblity of getting an ear piercing digital buzz through your headphones. My experience is that MOTU Tech doesn't even want to take the time to completely troublshoot this problem anymore - they just say "We are sorry and it will be fixed in the next firmware update!"

Another thing is how could I use my 828 MK1 (or an MK2, traveler, etc.) with the MK3 if I wanted to (which BTW was a selling point to me to have the additional A/D inputs) if it causes this type of digital problem or worse MOTU recomends that I don't use my other firewire ports while using the MK3???

The MOTU 828 MK3 does sound great and it is great news about the digital clock. BUT why spend the extra $500 ... you might consider not having to experience these types of "problems" (that we discuss here) and fact that you are drafted into becoming the beta tester for MOTU without compensation!

Oh BTW my consulting rates are $125/hour. At this point MOTU should be billing MOTU the cost of the MK3 in consulting fees based on my own troubleshooting, actual lost time in sessions. and time spent trying to get to and talk with MOTU tech support on the phone and online.

[monkey man]

Metakinetics, thank you for posting that thoughtful and extensive review.
Good stuff, and much appreciated.

There is not a scant of objectivity in your review, metakinetics. Your efforts are appreciated but this thing reads like (and wreaks of) an ad drafted by a MOTU associate or paid endorser. Any negative point you make about the mk3 is accompanied by excuses how the malfunction can be attributed to user error. Obviously a cloaked attempt to persuade there are no real issues with the unit and to shift responsibility to the user.
Your review is moderately informative but it lacks credibility.

Hmm... perhaps your critique of the review lacks objectivity, Mojofilter?
Overly harsh and hyperbolic, IMHO.

Why not cut the guy some slack and/or post your own review; I for one would be interested to read it.

[Phil O]

Finally, we can all afford to have converters with jitter less than 250 picoseconds peak-to-peak.

I've never heard of time and "peak-to-peak" being used together as a unit of measurement. Could you expand on this? Thanks.

Phil

[Mojofilter]

Hmm... perhaps your critique of the review lacks objectivity, Mojofilter?
Overly harsh and hyperbolic, IMHO.

Why not cut the guy some slack and/or post your own review; I for one would be interested to read it.

My statement was pure, unadulterated opinion and therefore needs no objectivity whatsoever. Because I don't find the review particularly credible does not obligate me to write one for your amusement. My perspective is still that the review seems like an attempt to obfuscate the issues with the mk3, regardless if you find the comments hyperbolic.

[monkey man]

Hmm... perhaps your critique of the review lacks objectivity, Mojofilter?
Overly harsh and hyperbolic, IMHO.
Why not cut the guy some slack and/or post your own review; I for one would be interested to read it.

My statement was pure, unadulterated opinion and therefore needs no objectivity whatsoever.

Sorry. I assumed objectivity was something we all aimed for.
That MO will get you into trouble sooner or later, methinks.

Because I don't find the review particularly credible does not obligate me to write one for your amusement.

... and I didn't say it did. I suggested that you could have either cut him some slack or posted an alternative review - you know, to back up those unadulterated, "unobjective" (by your own admission) opinions you posted.
The fact that I'd be interested in another viewpoint shouldn't surprise you, and ought not to be thought of as an effort to obtain amusement, but rather to... learn.

My perspective is still that the review seems like an attempt to obfuscate the issues with the mk3, regardless if you find the comments hyperbolic.

Fair enough. If you'd just said this without the hyperbole, I'd have said nothing.
I simply felt obligated to stand up for the guy who obviously meant well posting the review, in the face of, how did you put it?... "unadulterated opinion" that needed "no objectivity whatsoever".

Call me old fashioned, but I believe in fairness.
You wanted objectivity from the unpaid, unofficial, "unpublished" review and yet were reluctant to provide it yourself.
I most certainly would be interested in hearing your perspective on the MkIII, so if you change your mind, please write a mini-review... please.

BTW, I like your user name - very cool.

[dopamine3]

I most certainly would be interested in hearing your perspective on the MkIII, so if you change your mind, please write a mini-review... please.

As would I.
The more reviews the better.

[Mojofilter]

Sorry. I assumed objectivity was something we all aimed for.
That MO will get you into trouble sooner or later, methinks.

Please, enough with the patronizing drivel. You don't know me, "Monkey Man." I am well old enough, and my "MO" hasn't gotten me into trouble in over fifty years.

Call me old fashioned, but I believe in fairness.
You wanted objectivity from the unpaid, unofficial, "unpublished" review and yet were reluctant to provide it yourself.
I most certainly would be interested in hearing your perspective on the MkIII, so if you change your mind, please write a mini-review... please

Apparently, you're not old-fashioned enough. A dissenting opinion is not a bad thing, believe it or not, and my post and position are not unfair. You are apparently exceedingly thin-skinned to feel the need to rush to the aid of metakinetics. Maybe you should re-read the "review," and if you really think there is no opening for criticism or segue for rebuke, esp. in light of hardware issues with the mk3, we absolutely will have to agree to disagree. And still, my opinion does not necessitate writing a review on the mk3.

[ltemma74]

Mojofilter - Your observations about the original review are valid. Especially in light of the reported bugs. However, you shouldn't demand objectivity from others if you are not prepared to hold yourself to the same standard. It's a bad look. Even around here. And this is one ugly-ass crowd with all the gremlins, trolls, monkeys and hobbits...

[Mojofilter]

Mojofilter - Your observations about the original review are valid. Especially in light of the reported bugs. However, you shouldn't demand objectivity from others if you are not prepared to hold yourself to the same standard. It's a bad look. Even around here. And this is one ugly-ass crowd with all the gremlins, trolls, monkeys and hobbits...

I suppose some clarification of my comment is needed here. When I mentioned that my post was purely opinion and needed no objectivity I simply meant that it was not based on any knowledge of the mk3 (although I do own one), and that the review seemed slanted only to mask mk3 anomalies. I certainly expected a rebuttal from the original poster, but in no way did I intend my response to be perceived as careless effrontery. My apologies.

[monkey man]

Sorry. I assumed objectivity was something we all aimed for.
That MO will get you into trouble sooner or later, methinks.

Please, enough with the patronizing drivel. You don't know me, "Monkey Man." I am well old enough, and my "MO" hasn't gotten me into trouble in over fifty years.

Patronizing drivel? Yikes!
Er... I thought I'd made it obvious enough that that was a joke.

Call me old fashioned, but I believe in fairness.
You wanted objectivity from the unpaid, unofficial, "unpublished" review and yet were reluctant to provide it yourself.
I most certainly would be interested in hearing your perspective on the MkIII, so if you change your mind, please write a mini-review... please

Apparently, you're not old-fashioned enough. A dissenting opinion is not a bad thing, believe it or not, and my post and position are not unfair. You are apparently exceedingly thin-skinned to feel the need to rush to the aid of metakinetics. Maybe you should re-read the "review," and if you really think there is no opening for criticism or segue for rebuke, esp. in light of hardware issues with the mk3, we absolutely will have to agree to disagree. And still, my opinion does not necessitate writing a review on the mk3.

Mojofilter, you're way off target here.
You seem to have ignored the statements immediately preceding what you've quoted above.
For your convenience, they follow:

My perspective is still that the review seems like an attempt to obfuscate the issues with the mk3, regardless if you find the comments hyperbolic.

Fair enough. If you'd just said this without the hyperbole, I'd have said nothing.
I simply felt obligated to stand up for the guy who obviously meant well posting the review, in the face of, how did you put it?... "unadulterated opinion" that needed "no objectivity whatsoever".

I obviously agree with your reasoning and the merit of criticism.
I meant well in questioning the delivery as I was truly grateful for the most comprehensive review we've seen on the unit here so far.

Nobody's patronising anyone. Well, I'm certainly not at any rate:
You did call me "exceedingly thin-skinned", "not old-fashioned enough", said, "... dissenting opinion is not a bad thing, believe it or not", accuse me of "patronizing drivel", and refer to me as "Monkey Man" in inverted commas.
Well, I still like your user name, I still agree that you're entitled to offer us your angle (which I'd still like to hear, BTW), and I still think metakinetics didn't deserve quite the verbal spanking you gave him, a view I'm entitled to.
It's all good mate; I meant no harm, in fact I was trying to avert a possible conflict by attempting to get you to tone it down a little, especially as metakinetics had obviously gone to a bit of trouble in good faith, IMHO.

So it appears to me we're actually in agreement on all aspects except the merits of your semi-venomous method of delivery, which I acknowledge you're entitled to anyway.

Now, as I'm investigating all MOTU-related options for streamlining my workflow, I'm still keen to hear a critique, venomous or otherwise (I honestly don't care!), of metakinetics' review, or indeed more reviews.
FWIW Mojofilter, it sounds to me like you're experienced and articulate enough to provide us with a damned fine review, something I'll continue to hope you find the time to do.

Anyone? Mojo?

[earldrum]

Call me old fashioned, but I believe in fairness.
You wanted objectivity from the unpaid, unofficial, "unpublished" review and yet were reluctant to provide it yourself.
I most certainly would be interested in hearing your perspective on the MkIII, so if you change your mind, please write a mini-review... please

Apparently, you're not old-fashioned enough. A dissenting opinion is not a bad thing, believe it or not, and my post and position are not unfair. You are apparently exceedingly thin-skinned to feel the need to rush to the aid of metakinetics. Maybe you should re-read the "review," and if you really think there is no opening for criticism or segue for rebuke, esp. in light of hardware issues with the mk3, we absolutely will have to agree to disagree. And still, my opinion does not necessitate writing a review on the mk3.

Hi Monkeyman:

It would be nice if let Metakinetics defended his comments, but instead you have hijacked this important review with a day of wasted banter with Mojo --- who doesn't seem to be taking the bait by the way.

Do you think you can drop this banter and address the real issues of the MOTU 828 MK3 review or do you really have that much time on your hands to argue and debate nothing.

BTW, other than Mojo, I am the only other person who has asked some real questions about Meta's review and I have recieve no response from him on my questions.

Maybe this review is nothing but a MOTU planted public relations review??? I came to this conclusion because the "spin" has not stopped for 2 days now! Can we move on???