Page 3 of 4
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:35 am
by HCMarkus
daniel.sneed wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:16 am
HCMarkus wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 9:22 am[...] In most 1/4" to 1/4" situations, using TRS > TRS cables does the trick, as the ring is floated when plugged in to the TS Jack on an unbalanced input.
Sorry to disagree somewhat, HCMarkus. I've encountered many situations where unabalanced inputs are sleeve AND ring to ground. On these devices, using TRS-TRS cable will short negative terminal of the sender-device (here Motu 828).
In case of doubt, it is easy to check ring-sleeve connection (or non-connection) on receiver side. You only need a TRS-TRS cable and a basic multimeter.
Interesting. That would mean the manufacturer used a TRS Jack with extra wiring, adding expense for no reason. Could the inputs in question actually be impedance balanced?
https://www.sweetwater.com/insync/impedance-balancing/
Your methodology for resolving any question is a good one. Zero resistance (short) between ring and sleeve would be a problem.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:28 pm
by dfiorucci
So I was awaiting this interface but the lack of AVB and Thunderbolt 3 makes this a no go for me.
I was basically looking for a 828 ES with Thunderbolt 3 instead of Thunderbolt 1.
Would have been perfect for my needs.
Maybe the shortage of chips is what lead to their decisions on this.
Please Motu make a Thunderbolt 3 version of the 828 ES with all of the same bells and whistles.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:30 pm
by dfiorucci
Also the change in the case looks very similar to the Presonus cases?
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:49 pm
by dfiorucci
James Steele wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:15 pm
monkey man wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:09 pmJames Steele wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 6:31 pmI would be really interested to see if the new 828 supports “Direct hardware playthrough” in DP? That is really one of the features I miss most from the PCI hardware.
Agree 100%.
Yeah... honestly, things seemed so much easier with the PCIe-424 based system. You could enable "Direct hardware playthough" in DP and did not have to mess around with CueMix (or in my case) the AVB Mixer app as much. Yes... if you wanted some "confidence delay/reverb" you had to use CueMix, but it wasn't that big a deal. Plus, again, I found the CueMix app so much easier to deal with than the web-based AVB mixer and router.
So yeah... I might seriously consider selling off my 828es and 24Ai (now might be a good time due to shortages of units in stock) and go with the new 828 and then get a couple of those cheap Behringer ADAT expander units for the times I want to bring in a hardware synth.
Let me know if you decide to sell the 828 ES I bought a Presonus 32R last Thanksgiving in anticipation of a new Thunderbolt 3 828 ES so I'm interested in the 828 ES at this point.
Thanks,
Dana
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:21 am
by georgemc
James Steele wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:15 pm
monkey man wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:09 pmJames Steele wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 6:31 pmI would be really interested to see if the new 828 supports “Direct hardware playthrough” in DP? That is really one of the features I miss most from the PCI hardware.
Agree 100%.
Yeah... honestly, things seemed so much easier with the PCIe-424 based system. You could enable "Direct hardware playthough" in DP and did not have to mess around with CueMix (or in my case) the AVB Mixer app as much. Yes... if you wanted some "confidence delay/reverb" you had to use CueMix, but it wasn't that big a deal. Plus, again, I found the CueMix app so much easier to deal with than the web-based AVB mixer and router.
So yeah... I might seriously consider selling off my 828es and 24Ai (now might be a good time due to shortages of units in stock) and go with the new 828 and then get a couple of those cheap Behringer ADAT expander units for the times I want to bring in a hardware synth.
If you only want ADAT *in* and don't care about out, you can pick up old 2408s and the like for next to nothing second hand, which will be perfectly fine for bringing synths into your setup. Easy to configure from the front panel alone. The Behringer expanders seem to have some bleed issues and, more annoyingly for me at least, the line ins are on the front of the unit.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2024 1:43 pm
by mikehalloran
dfiorucci wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:28 pm
So I was awaiting this interface but the lack of AVB and Thunderbolt 3 makes this a no go for me.
I was basically looking for a 828 ES with Thunderbolt 3 instead of Thunderbolt 1.
Would have been perfect for my needs.
Maybe the shortage of chips is what lead to their decisions on this.
Please Motu make a Thunderbolt 3 version of the 828 ES with all of the same bells and whistles.
There is no reason I know for a new Thunderbolt audio interface to exist. CoreAudio does not support TB audio which means it's incompatible with iOS/iPadOS where Apple does not allow third party drivers. Technically, USB 3.x audio isn't supported either but a USB 3 connection is over USB-C is — when that works which isn't always.
But what about the speed? A look at the RTL numbers published by marketing departments show that the fastest TB3 interface (1.9ms for PreSonus) is not that many microseconds faster that the 828's
Round Trip Latency (RTL): ~2 ms (32 sample buffer at 96K) with the drivers installed. Core Audio over
"Fast USB 2" usually advertise as
2.59ms (M•Audio Air). MOTU doesn't tell us the CoreAudio rating of the M2/4/6 but they do advertize
Class-leading, Ultra-low 2.5 ms Round Trip Latency (at 96 kHz with a 32 sample buffer).
If one took those marketing numbers at face value, that's 600 microseconds between slowest over Core Audio and fastest over TB3. The speed of sound is actually quite slow and usually calculated at 1,125 ft/s (767 mph; 1,235 km/h) at sea level, 70° F @ 40% humidity.
Anyway, the reason I'm posting is that, while looking up info for another thread, I noticed that the new 828 no longer supports SMPTE (LTC). It's gone. No idea if I will ever need it again but that's a potential deal breaker for me. OK, my AIR 192|14 doesn't have it either. My MTP AV and 828mkII FW are slower over USB 1.1 and FW400 but keeping current with SMPTE could be a reason that would compel me to buy a new audio interface anytime soon.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2024 10:01 am
by nerve
It’d be nice to have a low latency driver on iOS. iOS does support USB3 AND Drivers now…at least on the iPad Pro:
https://developer.apple.com/wwdc22/110373
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:26 pm
by mikehalloran
That’s not exactly what it means. DriveKit allows developers to incorporate USB3 and other drivers into their apps beginning with iPadOS 16. It does not add this support to Core Audio. It could happen with ipadOS 18 — don’t know, haven’t seen it yet.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:49 pm
by nerve
I've read that CoreAudio supports USB3.0 and on iOS….
I will test when the 828 arrives…I reached out to Motu but waiting for a reply…
According to that video… it seems you would no longer need Class Compliant Core Audio on iOS… if MOTU’s low latency drivers run on driverkit…
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:29 pm
by nerve
I can confirm Core Audio does support USB3 on both iOS and MacOS.
This was tested with the 828 (2024) M2 iPad Pro and the M2 Mac Mini, latest/current OS.
Using Core Audio, no driver, the latency is higher @(13ms) on macOS. With the latest
I have requested @ MOTU for a low latency driver for iOS. We shall see…
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2024 8:23 am
by mikehalloran
nerve wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:29 pm
I can confirm Core Audio does support USB3 on both iOS and MacOS.
This was tested with the 828 (2024) M2 iPad Pro and the M2 Mac Mini, latest/current OS.
Using Core Audio, no driver, the latency is higher @(13ms) on macOS. With the latest
I have requested @ MOTU for a low latency driver for iOS. We shall see…
How did you test this? Unless you used a cable that supports USB 3 only and does not support USB 2, you didn’t.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2024 10:11 pm
by nerve
mikehalloran wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 8:23 am
nerve wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:29 pm
I can confirm Core Audio does support USB3 on both iOS and MacOS.
This was tested with the 828 (2024) M2 iPad Pro and the M2 Mac Mini, latest/current OS.
Using Core Audio, no driver, the latency is higher @(13ms) on macOS. With the latest
I have requested @ MOTU for a low latency driver for iOS. We shall see…
How did you test this? Unless you used a cable that supports USB 3 only and does not support USB 2, you didn’t.
Not sure what you are referring to? I think you called me a liar?
I used the cable that comes with the 828. The 828 displays the operating protocol. It displays USB 3 when connected to core audio on both M2 Mac mini and M2 iPad Pro. Are receiving different results? or just guessing?
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2024 7:11 am
by mikehalloran
Nobody is calling anybody anything.
MOTU would not be stupid enough to ship with a USB 3 cable that doesn’t also support USB 2. They are separate protocols and cables exist that support one, the other or both.
I’m a longtime member of the USB-IF and more than a little knowledgeable of such things. USB 3 only cables do exist but since you didn’t use one, I’m fine with my earlier comments.
DriveKit allows MOTU to write a USB 3 driver for iPadOS 16 and up but there’s nothing in the App Store. Those companies that do offer USB 3 and TB3 only interfaces are no doubt hard at work on this but MOTU doesn’t offer those currently so they have no compelling reason to write a driver that isn’t needed—they could change their minds but the gain is only a few hundred microseconds. iPadOS 17.4 does not support USB 3 CoreAudio and it’s not expected—Apple can always change that, of course. This means that the connection to an iPad is over Fast USB 2 which is more than fast enough as I’ve already shown.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2024 10:06 am
by nerve
Thanks Mike. But you may want to check your sources…
The 828 2024 displays USB3 when connected to the iPad, not USB2.
The RME UFX III USB3 interface also works in class compliant mode on iOS.
I reached out to Motu to verify and they too confirmed that the 828 works in USB3 on the latest iPad Pro.
Re: MOTU announces new 828 interface
Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2024 1:41 pm
by miles_b
mikehalloran wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2024 1:43 pm
dfiorucci wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:28 pm
So I was awaiting this interface but the lack of AVB and Thunderbolt 3 makes this a no go for me.
I was basically looking for a 828 ES with Thunderbolt 3 instead of Thunderbolt 1.
Would have been perfect for my needs.
Maybe the shortage of chips is what lead to their decisions on this.
Please Motu make a Thunderbolt 3 version of the 828 ES with all of the same bells and whistles.
There is no reason I know for a new Thunderbolt audio interface to exist. CoreAudio does not support TB audio which means it's incompatible with iOS/iPadOS where Apple does not allow third party drivers. Technically, USB 3.x audio isn't supported either but a USB 3 connection is over USB-C is — when that works which isn't always.
But what about the speed? A look at the RTL numbers published by marketing departments show that the fastest TB3 interface (1.9ms for PreSonus) is not that many microseconds faster that the 828's
Round Trip Latency (RTL): ~2 ms (32 sample buffer at 96K) with the drivers installed. Core Audio over
"Fast USB 2" usually advertise as
2.59ms (M•Audio Air). MOTU doesn't tell us the CoreAudio rating of the M2/4/6 but they do advertize
Class-leading, Ultra-low 2.5 ms Round Trip Latency (at 96 kHz with a 32 sample buffer).
If one took those marketing numbers at face value, that's 600 microseconds between slowest over Core Audio and fastest over TB3. The speed of sound is actually quite slow and usually calculated at 1,125 ft/s (767 mph; 1,235 km/h) at sea level, 70° F @ 40% humidity.
Anyway, the reason I'm posting is that, while looking up info for another thread, I noticed that the new 828 no longer supports SMPTE (LTC). It's gone. No idea if I will ever need it again but that's a potential deal breaker for me. OK, my AIR 192|14 doesn't have it either. My MTP AV and 828mkII FW are slower over USB 1.1 and FW400 but keeping current with SMPTE could be a reason that would compel me to buy a new audio interface anytime soon.
The quoted "fastest" latency here isn't quite right. When my 828es was working properly, I was achieving 1.0-1.1ms RTL in Logic Pro (at 96kHz) over Thunderbolt 2. If memory serves, I was getting 1.3ms on my Apogee Element 24. The DAD AX Center is able to achieve ~0.6ms RTL over Thunderbolt 3. There are plenty of reasons for new Thunderbolt interfaces to exist, particularly in high-end applications. A key technical advantage, in terms of low-latency monitoring, is that Thunderbolt has DMA, while USB does not. Of course that requires custom drivers, but the payoff can absolutely be worth it. Custom drivers are preferable for USB applications as well, because CoreAudio will not deliver your device's fastest-possible latency. The future of pro recording isn't necessarily centered around iOS / iPadOS, and the presence of Thunderbolt doesn't preclude an interface from also supporting USB.