digi 002 or motu???

[Chris Parsons]

If you plan on running Ptools then you need to go with the Digi. DP will run on just about any interface. The Motu interfaces are great for the money, but not to be compared with higher end stuff (Apogee, Lucid, PTHD 192...)

Quite honestly, the 828MKII sounds pretty nice to my ears. And for all of the I/O you get for $750 it's a great buy IMO. It's also got 1/4" inputs for your synths and things.

-Chris Parsons

[malice]

Originally posted by Chris Parsons
If you plan on running Ptools then you need to go with the Digi. DP will run on just about any interface. The Motu interfaces are great for the money, but not to be compared with higher end stuff (Apogee, Lucid, PTHD 192...)

Lucid, Higher end ????


LMFAO

What Apogee ????

Some are great, some sucks IMHO

Motu 192HD do compare to PTHD192 and just smokes the Lucid ....

Motu 192HD is a very underated solution, and if you work with DP or use MAC with logic or Cubase/Nuendo, You might end with a very good option

Their customer service sucks donkey balls apparently, but I never had to call them since I upgrade to 192

FWIW, IMHO, AFAIC etc etc ...

malice

[Chris Parsons]

good point with the Motu HD192, I had forggen about that. Lucid isn't that bad buddy.

[aaronsternke]

Hey there,
I'm running a 002 rack on a dual 2.0Ghz G5, and it smokes! Seriously if you want to be able to easily integrate with other studios, Pro Tools really is the way to go. There are advantages to every platform, and it depends on what you want to do. The other thing I like about PT though, is that is just WORKS. Press 3 and you're recording, simple.

I have to disagree, from my experience, with the previous opinion about Lucid converters. I think they are on the level with Apogee, and I think both Apogee and Lucid smoke the MOTU and Pro Tools built-in converters. I think Apogee sounds better at 24/48 than the Pro Tools HD912 sounds at 24/192! The PT built-in converters, to my ears, seem to add a strange midrangey thing not in the original signal.

If you got a 002 and then something like the Apogee Mini-Me, you could use it (the Apogee) as your external clock, and run everything through it for better conversion, and better mic pres. I love the editing and functionality of PT, but the built-in pres and converters are just so-so IMO.

Happy buying. Can't recommend the G5 high enough... crazy fast.

Aaron

[malice]

Originally posted by Chris Parsons
good point with the Motu HD192, I had forggen about that. Lucid isn't that bad buddy.

It's not that bad, but I think this site is hosting a fair comparaison between Motu and Lucid with sample files that is quiet enlightning, you should make a search and hear for yourself ...

That was something that made me try the motu to be honest, as well as Slipperman good opinion over these converters, I must say that I never regreted the purchase ...

Of course there are higher end stuffs, but I would call them Lavry or Benchmark IMHO ...

Not the same ballparks as far as $ is concern

malice

[malice]

Originally posted by aaronsternke
I think Apogee sounds better at 24/48 than the Pro Tools HD912 sounds at 24/192! The PT built-in converters, to my ears, seem to add a strange midrangey thing not in the original signal.

The PT converters doesn't work well at 192. They induce some even harmonics to the signal. The Motu have the same problem. You have to compare all these at 96k or lower ...

malice

[aaronsternke]

Good call on the Bechmarks. I've recorded through their pres and converters and they are amazing. They're coming out with a little 2 channel mic pre/converter soon called the ADPre1, I think I may be picking one up... would be a great little upgrade to a 002 system.

Aaron

[STILL]

Just for more info - I have the older MOTU interface 1224 - which sounded a LOT better than a lot fo the stuff available at the time / price point. but once I added the Lucid AD/DA 9624 gear, I never looked back.

I have heard that the newer MOTU stuff is actually very decent sounding for the money, but I haven't used it so I can only pass on hearsay.

Very happy with the Lucids, might be happier with some higher end stuff, but I gotta move forward at all times, regardless of the gear ya know?

WB

[malice]

the sample is not online unfortunatly ...

the comments are, and by very reliable sources ...


http://gearslutz.com/board/showthrea...ght=motu+lucid


you'll forge your opinion of course

malice

[Mario-C.]

the motu is a great bang for the buck solution, i recently tracked some stuff for a reggae band @ high sample rates using apogees and motu's and the difference is not that big, the HD 192 is really good, clearly its no benchmark but 12 channels at that price...

on the other hand if you need to use pro tools well you need the 002

[STILL]

It looks like that sample was in mp3 form anways yes?

I'd be ill-inclined to use an mp3as a basis for this kind of test, mp3's sound like total ass to me unless they are above 192 kbps.

But I would be interested in Slippy's opinion, I don't know him but I agree with a lot of what he says, seems to know his stuff a least when I read it anways...

WB

[malice]

Originally posted by STILL
It looks like that sample was in mp3 form anways yes?

I'd be ill-inclined to use an mp3as a basis for this kind of test, mp3's sound like total ass to me unless they are above 192 kbps.

But I would be interested in Slippy's opinion, I don't know him but I agree with a lot of what he says, seems to know his stuff a least when I read it anways...

WB

First, it was equal or above 192kbps

Second, it was the same for both samples

Third, even if it is mp3, you gotta admit half of the audience will hear your music thru internet compressed idiotic medium wich leads me to reconsider buying hi-end converter anyhooo

fourth, I know Slipperman personally, you can relly on him. I'm sure he would tell the same about me as well ...

fifth, it's the internet, so you should take comments about gear for what they are and forge your opinion on real accurate personal tests, anyway ...

best of luck with that

malice

[STILL]

Well, at the end of the day, the only reason any of this matters is because WE care about it, becuase you're right, most people don't hear the differences and they are probably gonna hear it on an mp3 anyways....

That being said, those moments of "Ah, that's it!!" when you really get ahold of it are what make this sufferable eh?

WB

[malice]

Originally posted by STILL
Well, at the end of the day, the only reason any of this matters is because WE care about it,

Aaaaaaah,

thank you

I needed that, really ...

best to you

I'll be delighted to know your conclusions about a Motu192 vs Lucid test for that matter ...

You look like a man of good taste ...

malice

[STILL]

You look like a man of good taste ...

Thank you, I like to think so, but then again I'm also an insufferable bastard as well.....could be typing Tourette's....

I have noticed that at first glance the MOTU stuff always SEEMS very musical, but then later you notice that what seemed to be warmth and thickness culd also be interpreted as muddiness and lack of clarity and space aorund the sounds....something that became really evident to me once I got my Lucids...

Of course, this doesn't speak to the newer MOTU stuff, which I keep hearing about as being a WHOLE lot better.....

WB

[Fibes]

Still,

The 1224 and 2408 aren't in the same league as the 192 and even the 1296. One of the reasons i'm sticking with DP3 with MOTU hardware instead of going the 002 is that I'll be making a step back in converters. To go HD is the next question...

[malice]

Originally posted by Fibes
Still,

The 1224 and 2408 aren't in the same league as the 192 and even the 1296. One of the reasons i'm sticking with DP3 with MOTU hardware instead of going the 002 is that I'll be making a step back in converters. To go HD is the next question...

Oh, yes, Fibes is rigth here,

I'm talking about the Motu 192HD, not the previous stuff ...

Just wanted to make this VERY clear

malice

[zakco]

I haven't used Lucid converters but I have owned 3 generations of MOTU. I had a 2408 mkII, a 24i/o, and now the HD192.

I agree with the mouse, the 192 is an ENTIRELY different class of converter from the earlier MOTU stuff.

-Z-

[bigsal]

WOW a lot to read but i think i soaked it all in...


tough decision.. well i think i might just go with a dual g5 and 002rack for now.. learning protools would be nice.. but i mainly do my work in logic. i think recording at 96k is enough right now. also when it comes to vocals was gonna pick up a avalon 737sp and a neumann tlm .. think i'll be fine.. anyway i'll see how that goes. i really don't think since im sending my stuff out to be mastered that the difference between a 002 and motu 198 is so super different in sound. I guess eitherway i go as far as sound i'll be in the clear. (i hope) he he

[pounce]

i have a motu 2408mkIII that i use for headphone mixes and such. i also have a motu 192hd interface. not even close to each other in terms of quality. i prefer the 192 over my previous apogee and over the lucid i've heard. i haven't heard the newest apogee, but i've been told it's better than their last stuff. i'm guessing that of the motu192 (not previous motu converters), or the 002 that the motu would sound better. it depends now on if you are sure you are going to use protools or not. if not, the motu is a clear winner. then you can use DP, Logic, etc. or if you are going to use pro tools than get the 002 and get to work. i do think lucid is middle range stuff. apogee's newer stuff might renew my interest in them. the next real step up from the motu192, as malice pointed out, is the lavry, benchmark, or the like. to get better ain't gonna be cheap.

[adamcal]

I mainly run a native Logic/Nuendo/MOTU setup on a 3 Ghtz P4 and I really rocks along nicley, even so I recently picked up a 002R to do transfers have compatability and to have a play with the all mighty pro tools. (it came with version 6)

I must say after the power of Logic (even a old 5.5 on the PC) the pro tools software is really underwhelming, Im sure a TDM and HD system is better, buts its the UI that shits me beond belief. Sure there are one or two nice things but overall It just seems light years behind!

Im sure if its all you have used and know it well it would seem amazing, but in direct comparision and running on the same computer it seems slow and klunky where the native apps are like liquid (im sure someone knows what I mean), I cant say its tempted me into a full system.

What was the question again?

[Fibes]

Just for the hell of it. If i were to go out and get the 002 for some compatability with a few other dudes what are my (decent) options for an external converter that will give me 8 channels of lightpipe into the 002?

[pounce]

Originally posted by Fibes
Just for the hell of it. If i were to go out and get the 002 for some compatability with a few other dudes what are my (decent) options for an external converter that will give me 8 channels of lightpipe into the 002?

the 002 converters are decent right out of the box. solid middle range gear. lucid isn't an improvement. you'd need something like those nice benchmark modular pieces, or prism, or lavry. now we are getting expensive.

[Fibes]

I was looking at the Apogee rosetta 800 and the 16x, I'm wunnin' about those suckers.

[Henrik]

Hey all,
I checked my harddisc, and actually found the MOTU HD192/Lucid AD9624 comparison Malice mentioned earlier in this thread. I hope Imagine doesn't mind that I'm making it available again: Here

What you will hear is a drum loop. It plays two bars through the Lucid, then two bars through the MOTU, and so on, back and forth. The difference is quite apparent even though this is just two channels, and it's an Mp3. Since I wasn't in the room when it was done, I don't know which one sounds most true to the original source.

Best to all,
Henrik

[jlotto]

Originally posted by Henrik
Hey all,
I checked my harddisc, and actually found the MOTU HD192/Lucid AD9624 comparison Malice mentioned earlier in this thread. I hope Imagine doesn't mind that I'm making it available again: Here

What you will hear is a drum loop. It plays two bars through the Lucid, then two bars through the MOTU, and so on, back and forth. The difference is quite apparent even though this is just two channels, and it's an Mp3. Since I wasn't in the room when it was done, I don't know which one sounds most true to the original source.

Best to all,
Henrik

There is absolutley no difference in this loop. Either it's just the same loop through one converter or there r no differences between the Lucid & the Motu. I don't know if that's true. what I do know is that loop sounds exactly the same throughout. If there is a tiny difference, it's inaudible to us here. We listened thru Genelecs, ns10's, Augspurger Mains, & sony headphones- yeah we have some time to kill.

[malice]

There was a small difference (I can't check it now, I don't want to wake the kids and I'm not in the studio, I'm doing this from memory) ...

The motu one seemed a bit louder, but more in a dynamic kinda way, with slightly more bottom, but I will check that later ...

Still I can point a BIG difference, even if there is NO sonic difference.

the Lucid price is about the same for TWO channels than the motu for TWELVE channels, a sound card, Sample rate conversion, DSP monitoring, a basic recording software and 192 sample rate capabilities (although I'm not convince with this feature) ...

Some respected gear reseller I know is praising these Lucid converters and dissing MOTU ...

I wonder why

The wonderful world of the hype

hmmmm





malice

[tptman]

Geeze, I can hear a difference and I'm listening on a crappy set of 20/20bas out of an old 20 bit Layla. Maybe I should be a ME!


Listen for the difference in the first snare hit of the two loops. Big difference in oomph between the two.

[Henrik]

Originally posted by jlotto
There is absolutley no difference in this loop. Either it's just the same loop through one converter or there r no differences between the Lucid & the Motu. I don't know if that's true. what I do know is that loop sounds exactly the same throughout. If there is a tiny difference, it's inaudible to us here. We listened thru Genelecs, ns10's, Augspurger Mains, & sony headphones- yeah we have some time to kill.

Well, this is interesting. Many times when I hear A/B comparisons like these I often find the differences to be very subtle, while others will say "A just smoked B!!", and such. But in this comparison I can clearly hear the difference, on a crappy old Philips home system.

The MOTU seems louder (which it may be, perhaps they're not properly level matched), but also has more balls in the low mids. The Lucid seems more "fresh", which I guess could also be described as "anemic".

What I don't know is whether it's the Lucid that takes something away, or the MOTU that adds something. If it's the latter, I can clearly see a problem if you use say 24 tracks all recorded through the MOTU. You could end up with a build up of the low mids that may or may not be pleasing.

Cheers,
Henrik