Does MOTU gear sound bad?

[PG]

Hi, I´m in a process of upgrading my studio and I am looking at different ways to get a 16 channel 24/96 system. MOTU seems to offer this. With FW - two 8 Pre's or an 869MK3 plus an 8 Pre. Affordable and great features.

Now when I read at internet forums like Gearslutz everybody seem to agree that MOTU boxes do not sound very good compared to the Focusrite Safire interfaces or Steinberg MR and UR interfaces. All in the same priserange. Some people seem to hate MOTU????? What's up?

Has anybody here compared say the 8 Pre to any of the above mentioned interfaces?
Are MOTU gear really that bad?

[SixStringGeek]

No MOTU gear isn't that bad. I don't know why GS doesn't seem to like MOTU but they are pretty biased over there for some reason.

OTOH, here is some interesting comparisons done awhile back. Among other things, it seems the 828 MKII was a lot better than its reputation.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... hread.html

Source

[Agent of Random]

MOTU gear = Good

Gearslutz = Bad

[mikehalloran]

>Does MOTU gear sound bad?<

Nope. Very good, actually.

[HCMarkus]

Hi, I´m in a process of upgrading my studio and I am looking at different ways to get a 16 channel 24/96 system. MOTU seems to offer this. With FW - two 8 Pre's or an 869MK3 plus an 8 Pre. Affordable and great features.

Now when I read at internet forums like Gearslutz everybody seem to agree that MOTU boxes do not sound very good compared to the Focusrite Safire interfaces or Steinberg MR and UR interfaces. All in the same priserange. Some people seem to hate MOTU????? What's up?

Has anybody here compared say the 8 Pre to any of the above mentioned interfaces?
Are MOTU gear really that bad?

Take a look at this Gearslutz Thread and note the placement of the MOTU interface (the 828mkII):

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... ker-6.html

FYI, Audio Diffmaker compares the difference between two audio files. The testing protocol that resulted in the list displayed in the linked thread involves passing an audio file thru the listed interfaces' D to A and A to D converters, recording the result, and comparing the resulting file with the original. An objective test that shows, if nothing else, that excellent results can be obtained with any modern converter. It also shows that the MOTU unit tested is no slouch, ranking number two, just below one of the latest and greatest, the Lynx Hilo. (The only aberrant placement I noted in the list is the Apogee Symphony. Note there are two different scores for each interface. The Apogee scored very high in the criteria that is not being used to rank interfaces in this list. In NMS' list [see below] the Apogee ranked just below the Hilo, with the MOTU 828mkII and 2408mkIII following a place or two below)

Most Gearslutz audio interface discussions consist of various individuals telling us they find (converter/interface being discussed) "warm" or "dull" or (insert your favorite descriptive word or phrase here), with no objective perspective.

This is one of the few discussions of audio conversion in which objective information is presented.

There was another thread (NMS' thread, which was taken down for a variety of reasons having to do with personality clashes and name calling) in which a lengthier list of tested interfaces included the MOTU 828MkIII, which I understand has the same converters as the 8Pre. Interestingly, it did not perform as well as the MkII, but it still made a respectable showing, as I recall scoring higher (more accurate conversion) than any Focusrite or Steinberg interfaces, which were both pretty far down the list, as they are in the linked thread.

If you checked out the thread NMS links to, you can sample some of the vitriol that caused his thread to be taken down. The final nail in that thread's coffin was NMS removing the data that had been generated with the assistance of a number of others. Last time I looked, the moderators were suggesting NMS' data might be made available somehow. HIs testing protocol involved passing the audio thru the DA/AD 10 times, then comparing the result with Diffmaker. The 10x test more dramatically showed the difference in conversion accuracy. In his thread, many identical units were tested by different individuals, with consistent results.

Personally, I find the Diffmaker results objective and interesting. You may as well.

[dcoscina]

I have a 2408mk3 and 424/pci-e and I can't really tell the difference between that and my Apogee Duet. The MOTU smokes all FW interfaces as far as latency and reliability. I can lower my sample buffer a lot more.

[NazRat]

MOTU gear sounds like KaKa (in Kontemporary terms). That's why the hardware has been around for 20+ years.

[HCMarkus]

I am assuming this is sarcasm, else you would not be using a mkIII yourself... or else I know not what Ka Ka means.

[Releaux]

You know, there have been a ton of albums recorded and released on MOTU, Mackie, Behringer, Alesis, and all sorts of other "budget" gear without 99.9% of the listening audience ever being able to tell the difference. Or caring, for that matter. Remember that most people now think MP3s sound just fine.

If you're setting up a new studio and have David Bowie or the Cleveland Philharmonic booked as your first client, maybe a MOTU interface won't be your first choice, but for nearly anything else you're going to do, it will serve its purpose admirably.

With regard to GearSlutz, I've found a lot of useful, interesting posts, a lot of posers, a lot of snobs, and a lot of great people. But one of the most telling trends I've seen lately is that people are now starting to find value in the "sound" of older digital gear like Ensoniq samplers and the Quadraverb. A lot of it is just fashion.

I'm as susceptible to Gear Acquisition Syndrome as anyone else, and GearSlutz hasn't helped that at all (shakes fist at the Show Us Your Studio threads), but one of the most important pieces of advice I can pass along is to spend more time writing music than comparing spec sheets on your audio interface.

[James Steele]

...but one of the most important pieces of advice I can pass along is to spend more time writing music than comparing spec sheets on your audio interface.

Word.

[HCMarkus]

...but one of the most important pieces of advice I can pass along is to spend more time writing music than comparing spec sheets on your audio interface.

Word.

I fully agree, but must add that, on occasion, we all have to buy gear that will assist us in realizing our musical creations. When such times arise, I (and most other audio folk I know) prefer to buy gear that performs well.

Hence my pleasure in finding sources of objective information, like the referenced Audio Diffmaker test. It is far more informative than any spec sheet, and certainly more so than all the blather that proliferates and predominates on GS.

To put things in perspective, I've been on a technical bent as of late due to the fact I am in the midst of a studio upgrade spurred on by my new Mac. But I also just finished volume one of a significant project and have a number of other smaller projects in mid-stream. A times like this, I find that dipping my toes in the technical pool can be a refreshing change of pace from the creative processes.

In addition to my roles as a composer, producer and performer, I am also an Audio Engineer, and take the accompanying responsibilities seriously. So, yeah, I totally get it... don't waste time chasing technical perfection. But failing to use diligence in selecting gear may ultimately cost us, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi

[stephentayler]

Anyway, the question should be - Does MOTU gear sound good?

The answer is- in my hands, it sounds brilliant!

But seriously, what are we talking about here? ADs, DAs, mic pres? They all just sound a little bit different to others.

I have the luxury of sometimes working with 32 channels of the top of the range PRISMs, now they sound excellent!

But what is important to me is if I can get great results from just about anything. What MOTU's products offer is way more than the sound - it's the interface, the connectivity, the DSP, the software and how it all works together - all in all great facilities and value as well as great sound.

Personally I think it is all a matter of taste. Maybe it would be nice to have some really high-end DA converters to hang off the back of my MOTU interfaces, but on my budget for my project studio, it is just not a priority.

Cheers

Stephen

[HCMarkus]

Anyway, the question should be - Does MOTU gear sound good?

The answer is- in my hands, it sounds brilliant!

Cheers

Stephen

OP: Here's an endorsement you can take to the bank... check Stephen's discography

[Airyck]

I've gone through a lot of different audio interfaces.
The one thing that I've learned is that when you hit a certain level, everything above that is a barely perceivable difference in quality to the majority of people, myself included. MOTU interfaces in my experience are within that "grey" area. In other words they are just as good and capable of making great recordings as anything else with only slight differences in interfaces "above" them IMHO.

[Patrick_Bear]

If you want to read a lot about the specs and internal hardware of different audio interfaces spend some time at www.blacklionaudio.com. They are a modding company that open up popular interfaces and find ways to modify them for even better performance. They actually offer many MODs for Motu gear and a lot of them come down to proving the analog sections. It's interesting reading but it is a little depressing to know that my ears aren't good enough to hear the difference in the quality of a digital clock.