Want help deciding on audio interface, looked a lot at MOTU

[Paratripl]

Hello everyone I'm new here and are quite confused about the forum structure but I hope I'll learn but sorry of this is posted in the wrong directory, I'm using Mac and I'm thinking about getting a MOTU audio interface but need some advice on it first.

And just a tiny bit of my experience with MOTU, I've been using a MOTU Micro Lite MIDI interface for quite some time and I'm satisfied with it even though I'd want to want to upgrade it to a bigger one.

So I want to get a new audio interface now and it's because me and my UA Apollo x8 isn't really working out. I'm not really that into the UAD-platform and I want to go back to using native plugins and do so without audible latency (if I just use 1-2 stock EQ's or Compressors on 10-15 tracks during production stage).
I was very interested in the MOTU 16A but even thoguh I'm still interested I'm not as crazy about it as I was 2-3 months ago but I'm sure it would suit me fine, though I don't need all those outputs.

I've also looked into some other audio interface's from MOTU but I've found it kind of hard to compare them, guess you could say I'd like a mix between the 16A and the 828es, looking something like:
From 16A:
TRS inputs
Converters (if they're not the same?)

From the 828es
Main Out's
Outputs
Built in preamps (it's not a disadvanage but I'd buy a preamp if I got an audio interface without at least one preamp, which might be good actually but you know... money and decisions!)

And maybe just a touch of the M2/M4 with the Thunderbolt 3/usb-c port (instead of the old but equally fast (i know) Thunderbolt 1&2)

I'm gonna try to take my wishes short and then explain what I've thoughts about with the MOTU interfaces, maybe you can help me.
1. I want low latency and I want it even if I place a bunch of plugins on some channels (I'm not a heavy user so a bunch basically means 10 tracks with EQ and Compression, often stock ones, which I use a lot in the producing stage)
2. I want stability, can't work when the audio interface looses it's connection and I have to troubleshoot etc.
3. I want quality, meaning I want to feel I'm working with a professional product both in audio, in build, in software (the Apollo Console is laggy as hell when you scroll sideways and so forth, I feel it's kind of sad because otherwise it's quite well built, except for no DAW-integration)
4. I want a lot of inputs (24-32 (analog + ADATs, total amount of inputs) larger than that is probably not necessary but doesn't hurt except if I need to buy myself some dsub-to-trs-cables), since I don't want to use my patchbay when it's something I use every session.
5. I want and I need simplicity.


Is a MOTU audio interface for me? If so which one? Any chance anyone knows how that compares to compares to Presonus Quantum 4848's low latency? How does it compare to the RME UFX+ stability?
How does it compare to their audio quality and their converters? Ease of use and simplicity? If anyone has tried both I mean or maybe happen to know anyway because I feel that's what I'm comparing them to because those interfaces are my other choices.

What I've "got a problem with" about the MOTU interfaces I've been interested in is that they haven't upgraded them to be Thunderbolt 3/USB-C which isn't a big deal big Thunderbolt 3/USB-C is 6 years old now, that makes the tech that has TB1&2 feel a bit outdated, even if they're just fine. I just want my new audio interface to easily plug into my computer even in 2 years when I took it to a friends house and forgot the cable, you know. I hope they'll update them before I buy one / decides to go to another manufacture.
Then I've heard a lot of people complain about the web-UI to control the interface from, that it needs an update and doesn't look good, haven't really studied it and maybe I don't mind but that it hasn't been addressed makes me hope that MOTU is working on something a bit bigger and better, hardware or software I don't know but if they're not it just feels a bit lazy from their side but as I said I'm not sure and I'm not sure how big of a company they are.
That's about it, my complaints I mean, this text however will continue for many many more rows!
No I really hope it will not but I will end with this.

I want simplicity most of all but I want something powerful working in the background allowing me this simplicity and I want to go back to the DAW, working in my DAW only meaning I don't mind setting up a reverb for when I record my vocals and then just adjusting it once in a while but I want, say the sound of a drummachine routed to a drum bus in Logic, to stop if I press 'm' for mute in Logic, I don't want to open another software (even if it's a web based one) and mute every single track in there, it just messes with my focus too much to try to keep track of all the windows outside Logic when I have a hard time keeping track of the ones inside!
I hope this explains where I'm coming from. I just would like to get a simple but good audio interface, no fancy pancy functions really just easy to use, great soundnig interface with a lot of inputs 24-32 wouldn't mind 40 or 48 but it's just not something I feel I need right now.

Oh and right, I record mostly synthesizer but also a bit of vocal, guitar, bass.
I don't have a lot of outboard gear but some and therefore I'm happy about something like 8 outputs but 16 is the double amount but I don't mind it just would have traded them for 4 new inputs instead if I could .

Take care everyone, I appreciate all help I can get!

[HCMarkus]

Nicely written, but rather lengthy inquiry. As beauty is in the eye of the beholder, whatever your initial decision, you might want to buy your interface from someone with a good return policy so you can get a first-hand perspective with regard to your critical criteria before being irrevocably committed.

As for me, I can only say I like my 828es.

[Paratripl]

Yes I know, sorry, I have a hard time keeping it short as you might notice and I really tried here so just wait when I forget about it!

Anyway maybe a summary could be useful.

I'm not getting along with my UA Apollo x8 because of several reasons and I've decided to get a new faster computer and I'm going for the 27" iMac top/high end model (3,7 GHz Intel 6-Core i5 with upgraded SSD (and I'll upgrade the RAM myself to 32 GB).

I'll also change audio interface (there's where you guys come in ) to one that isn't built for DSP-usage in the way the UAD-platform is but instead a audio interface that works well for musicians and producers that want to record something with great quality (doesn't need to be high end but at least near the Apollo's quality meaning upper range of mid tier I guess...)

I also want and need lots of inputs so most other interfaces are sorted out on that or either quality or the price.
For outputs 8 is enough (I'm thinking about the 16A now with something like 2 main outs, 2 for headphones and 2 or 4 are for outboard or 2 for 2nd pair of headphones.

also care a lot about low latency, stability / good drivers with a fairly long support for them.

Better stop there but one more thing

Could you please share what interface you're using and what particular part with that interface you're very pleased with?

Anything you're not very happy about?

Thanks

[nk_e]

I have a 1248 and 16A. The 1248 is connected to an old MP 5,1 via USB2(!) and the 16A is connected to the 1248 via ADAT. (I also have an old 828mk3 connected to the 1248 via ADAT.) That combo gives me a ridiculous amount of IO.

I think the 1248 or 16A can probably handle your needs. If more IO is required, the ADAT ports allow the easy addition of gear.

I can’t meaningfully speak to latency because my results will be worse than yours given you have access to thunderbolt, but even via USB and with lots of things chugging along, I typically run things at 128 or 256.

I think it sounds superb of course. The browser based routing/mixing software is competent.

[Paratripl]

Thanks for contributing nk_e.

Okay, I might sound like a total noob but when you say you can run it at 128 samples.. I mean I might have missed that but let's say I run my computer and audio interface on 128 samples.

Then someone else has a computer that's a lot faster. If that person run at 128 sample, does that mean it's equally fast? Sorry I've not informed myself a lot about sample and sample rates etc but I thought it was like an amount of samples in a package that was processed by the computer but it all depended on the computer but now I feel a bit dumb since I don't know this and I'm a bit stressed at the moment but I'd like just if you can confirm what I wrote, if what I thought you said is what you actually meant etc. Thanks Sorry for a it OT

[nk_e]

No that isn’t it.

That setting will affect the overall system latency. The lower the setting, the less your overall latency but the more stress you put on your processor.The higher that setting, the greater the latency but the processor load is decreased.

Folks usually try to have that number as low as possible when you are recording instruments and overdubs. When you’ve passed that stage and are mixing, you can turn it up higher to allow the use of more plugins and such without spiking your CPU so quickly.

This might help.

https://ask.audio/articles/how-to-achie ... n-your-daw

Good luck.

[Paratripl]

That's what I thought, I mean if you meant that 128 samples was like 128 samples every 0.01 second and that it was universal because that would have been new to me.

I've always thought I never really knew how to think about these samples but my best guess was that maybe 128 samples was like 128 sample * the speed of the computers clockspeed but less simple.. But that would be weird since the higher the sample rate the more time the computer has to process the samples.. Sorry I think I just was stressed and I know what sample's are I just which it was easier to think about them or I guess I'll have to check it up and read through some informatino about them.

I've known about keeping buffer settings low for 10 years but never really understood it hehe.

But if we're talking abnout latency anyone have any numbers about the score between Presonus Quantum and MOTU 16A in roundtrip latency in a real world scenario? I know Quantum is very good but if the MOTU is right behind it's nice to know.

I would like to know more about everything though but text gets too long.

What do you feel about the sound? I mean people say that 16A has great conversion or sounds very good etc. I don't know how to hear that or listen to that and besides I'm mostly insted in AD rather than DA since I feel I record more than mix but of course I'd mix more if songs got done!

[Paratripl]

Sorry this thread spinner a bit off topic with the sample but let’s drop that. I understand enough.

Between the MOTU 16A and the MOTU 828es what are the differences inside the interface?
I mean except for ports and preamps what separates them? Do they have the same converters and in case they don’t; which one would you say has the “best” ones?

[nk_e]

My understanding is that the converters are the same, but maybe someone with more knowledge can weigh in. I think the difference really comes down to IO and what you think you will need moving forward. Good luck.

[Paratripl]

Okay. Is that the case for 1248 vs 828es vs 24Ai vs 16A as well?

I’m thinking of getting a 828es and expand it with either the 24Ai or the 16A.

I’ve heard so much good things about 16A that it’s hard to go forward if I’m not sure about which one sounds the best but I will probably not suffer from getting less good sounding one, I mean it’s orobabky not a huge difference for I was just realizing that the 1248 might also be good to consider.

I wrote down some words from their website for line inputs dynamic range (A weighted):
117 dB - 1248
118 dB - 828es
110 dB - 24Ai
117 dB - 16A

The Apollo x8 I use right now on the other hand, has a dynamic range of 123 dB.
I don’t want to downgrade as in hearing something getting worse but I don’t mind it if a few people would notice a difference but I’m not etc.

I’m not sure what these numbers actually mean in real life or in my situation or how big of a difference there is but the 24Ai seems to stand out with quite low numbers but as said I maybe wouldn’t mind but I’ll not pick 24Ai as my main interface anyway (16A maybe but I’ll have to get a preamp).

I hope someone can come in and share some of his or her experience to me/us. Maybe even MOTU themselves or are they attending this forum?

[monkey man]

Hmm... I was under the impression that the 16A and 1248 shared identical audio spec's, which is borne-out in the data you posted, but that the 828es wasn't quite-as-stellar in this regard.

Maybe I was wrong?

[Paratripl]

Yes I'm quite surprised about the numbers (even though I don't understand them more than "yes of course 118 is more than 119 but what does that mean or does it even matter?"

Maybe their website has the wrong numbers presented?
Here's their site for the 828es:
https://motu.com/products/proaudio/8pre-es/specs.html


If you want to compare it some more against the 1248 it's here:
https://motu.com/products/avb/1248/specs.html

And here's the 16A:
https://motu.com/products/avb/16a/specs.html


Another thing. The 828es isn't listed under "Studio" for their products, I found it under "Popular" but now when I looked I also found it under "Pro Audio Interface".. Ah their website is quite messy, they should get some graphic designer making it a bit easier to navigate and find stuff on, don't loose the information, just make it an extra click to get to it and I'm sure things would become a bit easier for people interested in their products.

[HCMarkus]

"Yes of course 118 is more than 119 but what does that mean or does it even matter?"

I think that a difference of 1 dB over a range of 118 is not going to be perceptible. Now, I'm not saying there might not be other differences, but my guess is no human could reliably differentiate between the sound of any of the MOTU Pro Audio units in an ABX test. Just sayin'.

My recommendation: Go with the feature set that works best for you. For me, the 828es was a no-brainer, as my prior interface was an 828mkII, and the es is a drop-in replacement (including the footswitch jack for punching in hands-free). I've been running mine for a little over two years with great results.