The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
MOTU 1248, 8M, 16A Thunderbolt interface Audio Interfaces
Old 21st October 2014
  #631
Quote:
Originally Posted by chamberfolkjazz View Post
Thanks 12tone, I was hoping though to make it happen without buying extra gear :-(
Just plug the Motu into an ethernet port on Your main router. It needs to be on the same network as the MacBook. No need for a direct cabled connection between the Mac and Motu for updates.
Old 21st October 2014
  #632
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardtoe View Post
if any out in gearslutz land are following my advice to buy the 1248, you might want to factor in some kind of external clock to your purchase
Not so fast! Any good unit manufactured in recent times will function more accurately off it's internal clock. There will definitely be a difference between 16a and old Ensemble, but that's due to the Ensemble being a FAR more colored unit using far worse spec'd converters.

If you're interested in testing this more accurately, I would do a loopback with the Ensemble going direct from DA to AD, then one with the 16A DA to AD, then one with the 16a clocked off the Ensemble. No other variables, just a direct converter comparison.

If you want to critically assess these I would strongly suggest using your headphones off the 16A so Ergo isn't clouding things. You know my background when it comes to testing converters. An old flattering write up on the Ergo means nothing to me as I've subjected it to the same tests I've done with over 50 other units and it was in the bottom region of them, but with some startling artifacts (yes, on bypass). I thought it sounded decent while I had it, but the upgrade was not subtle when I replaced it. Your VXT8's, Ergo, and room will each be coloring things. You can test however you like, but I would be more trusting by removing these variables for a more truthful assessment.

If you're interested in doing this I can send you a test file which will also show distortion and any L/R phase inaccuracies.

Unless you like the added distortion and artifacts I don't think there's any need to incorporate those other units or start externally clocking.

Also, I assume you checked an analog VU in your chain to be sure that both converters were hitting the chain with identical output levels?

It's a good time to take a more precise approach here, as your perceptions have been floating around a bit. Normally you would not encounter an improvement to the sound by changing out the digital interface feeding your Ergo, since the Ergo is doing it's own clocking and DA conversion. So this was an odd initial observation.

Perceptions can go all over the place depending on what ideas you get in your head. This is why we use less volatile assessment tools to verify that we're not being fooled. Blind A/B/X testing can be another useful tool to try with the direct loopback files I suggested.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #633
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Not so fast! Any good unit manufactured in recent times will function more accurately off it's internal clock. There will definitely be a difference between 16a and old Ensemble, but that's due to the Ensemble being a FAR more colored unit using far worse spec'd converters.

If you're interested in testing this more accurately, I would do a loopback with the Ensemble going direct from DA to AD, then one with the 16A DA to AD, then one with the 16a clocked off the Ensemble. No other variables, just a direct converter comparison.

If you want to critically assess these I would strongly suggest using your headphones off the 16A so Ergo isn't clouding things. You know my background when it comes to testing converters. An old flattering write up on the Ergo means nothing to me as I've subjected it to the same tests I've done with over 50 other units and it was in the bottom region of them, but with some startling artifacts (yes, on bypass). I thought it sounded decent while I had it, but the upgrade was not subtle when I replaced it. Your VXT8's, Ergo, and room will each be coloring things. You can test however you like, but I would be more trusting by removing these variables for a more truthful assessment.

If you're interested in doing this I can send you a test file which will also show distortion and any L/R phase inaccuracies.

Unless you like the added distortion and artifacts I don't think there's any need to incorporate those other units or start externally clocking.

Also, I assume you checked an analog VU in your chain to be sure that both converters were hitting the chain with identical output levels?
These are all good ideas. That is why I suggested the gentleman listen outside the environment he is used to it may be a bit Midrange strong. An external clock is never the best choice to improve a Convertor. It will re-clock internally so you cannot Fix a inferior clock design that way! BTW, I am not saying it is. I am saying the effect clocking can have on imaging is just as important as distortion specs in the convertors or Analog path.

If you run a test the Three ways NMS suggested your test will get more information. The thing is the Best spec'd convertor on your test will not automatically sound the best in your production or situation. It depends on so many things.

If you like the Apogees detail but not the Coloration in the mids( that little edge), then you need a unit with just as good a clock but a different Frequency spectrum. That's the thing, how many records are made with Mastering convertors versus Mastered on Mastering grade convertors! Not many. You need some of that color, distortion etc. Most stuff is still being made on Digi 192's. Even Lower Spec'd Neve 1072 Preamps !

Specs are important but what really matters is how you interact with the Gear when you hook it up. If it gets you where your trying to go, it sounds good!
2 Cents more.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #634
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Not so fast! Any good unit manufactured in recent times will function more accurately off it's internal clock. There will definitely be a difference between 16a and old Ensemble, but that's due to the Ensemble being a FAR more colored unit using far worse spec'd converters.
nms,

It depends how Motu have implemented the Sabre design.

I'm not sure what ADC they use so I'll focus on the Sabre DAC / clocking.
Sabre has an internal ASRC (asyncronous sample rate converter) in the chip
itself. As such all samples are re calculated according to a separate output
clock.

With any ASRC there is an inbuilt type of digital PLL that will reject jitter
above a certain corner frequency. With something like the AD1896 used on a
few pro products, the corner freq was somewhere around 10Hz - this is pretty
good and will have a high jitter rejection capability.

With the Sabre, the DPLL corner frequency is adjustable from no jitter
rejection to as low as something like 0.1Hz. Having a sabre dac myself and
knowing a few other designers that use them, there are issues with this DAC
loosing lock when the DPLL is set too low and the IP stream has too much
jitter. It's fair to assume most pro designers will err on the conservative side
WRT jitter rejection versus stability and dropouts.

So the bottom line is, it depends how Motu have implemented the DAC as to
how it will react to jitter in the source.

Looking at your measurements, the center frequency lobe has substantial
widening at the base compared to Symphony so that does suggest some form
of jitter but what freq or if it is just noise / data related I have no idea.

As you can see - it's a complex world trying to optimise Sabre DAC both
objectively and subjectively.

IMV, Sabre is a very high performance DAC but it is also a very complex beast
to optimise. All of the various parameter changes can make subtle differences
measurement wise but be quite audible and change the character
significantly.

cheers

Terry
Old 22nd October 2014
  #635
Lives for gear
Does MOTU have any plans to make the DSP and hardware monitoring in the new AVB interfaces directly available in Digital Performer. I loathe multi mixer solutions and this would be a huge incentive to try out the combo :-)
Old 22nd October 2014
  #636
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardtoe View Post
I can't see how doing some tests to isolate the conversion from the reality of my mix situation can help me make a better choice?
I'm surprised you're not curious enough that you'd want to check it out in more depth. I like to know exactly what my gear is doing, rather than limit my evaluation to what I consciously perceive at the time. Isolating it from things that distort & degrade it helps you to more clearly evaluate it if you have weak links in your environment. The Ergo, your monitors, and your room create their own interpretation of reality in this case. As someone who designs/consults on/treats rooms professionally and owned one years back, I can say without hesitation that in a well treated room the Ergo does more harm than good. It's a good idea to evaluate the 16A accurately on its own as well as how it integrates with the rest of your environment. Using tools to verify what you think you're hearing is generally a good idea in this case.

Mentioning stuff like changes in the sound of the S/PDIF output of the Ensemble vs 16A, or improving the sound by clocking externally from that unit are really not good signs if both units are working correctly. I'd want to at least attempt to verify it with a few simple tests, especially if you're advising others based on it.
Converter designers will generally tell you that clocking externally will degrade the sound of any decently designed unit, with the debatable exception being high end clocks (ie: not a 2007 Ensemble).

You're certainly welcome to disregard this and do as you please. Just my $0.50
Old 22nd October 2014
  #637
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenelectro View Post
It depends how Motu have implemented the Sabre design.

I'm not sure what ADC they use so I'll focus on the Sabre DAC / clocking.
Has anyone seen this? Despite my feelings on the inherent flaws and the way it's implemented, the remaining null testing thread has the Symphony & 16A measuring nearly identical.Results this close are usually only seen when comparing two of the same unit:

Apogee Symphony I/O (Ajantis)
Corr Depth: 43.4 dB (L), 45.6 dB (R) Difference*: -51.2 dBFS (L), -50.1 dBFS dB (R)

MOTU 16A (davidbayles)
Corr Depth: 43.4 dB (L), 45.6 dB (R) Difference*: -51.1 dBFS (L), -50.1 dBFS (R)
Quote:
cheers

Terry
Cheers man! Don't be a stranger. That kind of intelligent technical introspective is in too short of supply around here.

Last edited by nms; 23rd February 2015 at 10:10 PM..
Old 22nd October 2014
  #638
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Motu is using the matching Sabre32 ADC with these.

Has anyone seen this? Despite my feelings on the inherent flaws and the way it's implemented, the remaining null testing thread has the Symphony & 16A measuring nearly identical.Results this close are usually only seen when comparing two of the same unit:

Apogee Symphony I/O (Ajantis)
Corr Depth: 43.4 dB (L), 45.6 dB (R) Difference*: -51.2 dBFS (L), -50.1 dBFS dB (R)

MOTU 16A (davidbayles)
Corr Depth: 43.4 dB (L), 45.6 dB (R) Difference*: -51.1 dBFS (L), -50.1 dBFS (R)
The fact that those two test so bloody close yet the Symphony has tight mids and the 16A has blurred, milky mids without any outside clocking tells me exactly how much these tests mean to me in the end.

You still have not even heard any Motu units, right? I suggest you have a listen and then come back with something based on both listening and measuring as otherwise you're just theorising.

Converter manufacturers may have been saying outside clocking 'does not make things better', but that it only creates wrongness that some perceive as rightness, but to my mind that is largely rubbish. Only the other day a good friend who had just bought an RME UCX and hated the sound of it instantly, stopped himself giving it back to the dealer pronto after trying clocking it from a Ross Martin PCM4222. Which made it sound untold more 'right' and less boxed in and stuck within itself. Sounded plenty wrong on its own.

In my reality, the argument hinges on the quality of clocking both ends, source and master. I understand why theoretically there 'should not be any gain' clocking from the outside, but in reality it seems as long as the clock used is sufficiently better than the to be clocked unit has to offer, it does indeed make a difference for the better. And I mean more focused, not more 'pleasantly degraded'. I once tried clocking my SSL Alphalink with an Aardsync II and it ruined the focus into a blurry, glowing mess, making a great point that it isn't universally going to help.

Also, whether you design rooms for a living or not, to just assume that Hardtoe, who produces and mixes for a living, can't tell what more or less focused mids sound like I do find a little unpleasantly condescending.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #639
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
The fact that those two test so bloody close yet the Symphony has tight mids and the 16A has blurred, milky mids without any outside clocking tells me exactly how much these tests mean to me in the end.
You're welcome to your perception, but we seem to disagree on gear with some regularity. Still, it's a complete disregard of logic (& basic math) to be this easily dismissive of the fact that two units would null that way. The order of ranking there is generally a joke, but don't act as if a null test is witch craft and means nothing. It shouldn't be a huge surprise considering their design similarities and what every measurement attempted so far as shown. You have an irrational adversity to technical testing. Converter design choices aren't like choosing the type of wood for a guitar. The primary goal for most converter designers is simply to convert between analog and digital with the least amount of artifacts possible. The only way this happens accurately is with the use of tools which can more reliably measure things in greater depth than what your ears can perceive. Unlike your ears, those measurement tools are never fooled by the brand on the label or the odd time you tweak a bypassed EQ. Minimizing artifacts by definition means what comes out is a more true representation of what went in.

Quote:
I suggest you have a listen and then come back with something based on both listening and measuring as otherwise you're just theorising.
If someone wants to send me one I will gladly, but the nearest unit is 8hrs away and I'm busy finishing construction on my own new room just in time to juggle music work and a new mon-fri PT consulting position. I'll probably just buy one in the new year but til then it's not happening.

Quote:
Only the other day a good friend who had just bought an RME UCX and hated the sound of it instantly, stopped himself giving it back to the dealer pronto after trying clocking it from a Ross Martin PCM4222. Which made it sound untold more 'right' and less boxed in and stuck within itself.
Hopefully Ross fixed things a great deal, because the clock output of the 4222 was not clean when I put it under a scope comparing to my Hilo. It was a dodgy little box. Regardless, conflicting anecdotes really are a dime a dozen. The forum is littered with them but with converters even more so than any other piece of gear possibly. For example: RME UCX high frequency issue ?

Quote:
it seems as long as the clock used is sufficiently better than the to be clocked unit has to offer, it does indeed make a difference for the better.
This is true. It depends on how well the slaved unit can sync to the external signal as well. I had a conversation with Marcel of Antelope recently who said that RME's SteadyClock dampens the effect of external clocking. He mentioned that there used to be a way to defeat SteadyClock just like you can with Lynx's SynchroLock, which is what they recommend to users of their 10M etc.

Quote:
Also, whether you design rooms for a living or not, to just assume that Hardtoe, who produces and mixes for a living, can't tell what more or less focused mids sound like I do find a little unpleasantly condescending.
Making music for a living doesn't make you immune to psychoacoustics. I can mix & engineer a record far better than hordes of guys who are able to pinpoint converter differences by ear better than I ever could. Who of us has never heard something that wasn't there? Can you say you've never nudged a bypassed compressor or EQ and thought "that's it right there"? I certainly have. I've witnessed too many examples of our volatile sense of perception. Hardtoe, like the rest of us (I assume) is human. Once you add in variables like room acoustics, speakers, program material, hearing damage, ability to consciously pinpoint fine details, expectation bias, etc etc.. you might understand why I spent time learning technical analysis as a reliable extra measure to find what my ears miss or confirm what I think I hear.

We're clogging up the thread a bit here though so unless it's important I think we can agree on what we already knew, which is that we're two different guys with (some) different views, doing things our own way!

Back on the topic of Symphony vs Motu AVB, it'll be really interesting as recorded comparisons start to surface. I really do think they poked around inside a Symphony at some point in the development of this new line.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #640
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
You're welcome to your perception, but we seem to disagree on gear with some regularity. Still, it's a complete disregard of logic (& basic math) to be this easily dismissive of the fact that two units would null that way. The order of ranking there is generally a joke, but don't act as if a null test is witch craft and means nothing. It shouldn't be a huge surprise considering their design similarities and what every measurement attempted so far as shown. You have an irrational adversity to technical testing. Converter design choices aren't like choosing the type of wood for a guitar. The primary goal for most converter designers is simply to convert between analog and digital with the least amount of artifacts possible. The only way this happens accurately is with the use of tools which can more reliably measure things in greater depth than what your ears can perceive. Unlike your ears, those measurement tools are never fooled by the brand on the label or the odd time you tweak a bypassed EQ. Minimizing artifacts by definition means what comes out is a more true representation of what went in.

If someone wants to send me one I will gladly, but the nearest unit is 8hrs away and I'm busy finishing construction on my own new room just in time to juggle music work and a new mon-fri PT consulting position. I'll probably just buy one in the new year but til then it's not happening.

Hopefully Ross fixed things a great deal, because the clock output of the 4222 was not clean when I put it under a scope comparing to my Hilo. It was a dodgy little box. Regardless, conflicting anecdotes really are a dime a dozen. The forum is littered with them but with converters even more so than any other piece of gear possibly. For example: RME UCX high frequency issue ?

This is true. It depends on how well the slaved unit can sync to the external signal as well. I had a conversation with Marcel of Antelope recently who said that RME's SteadyClock dampens the effect of external clocking. He mentioned that there used to be a way to defeat SteadyClock just like you can with Lynx's SynchroLock, which is what they recommend to users of their 10M etc.

Making music for a living doesn't make you immune to psychoacoustics. I can mix & engineer a record far better than hordes of guys who are able to pinpoint converter differences by ear better than I ever could. Who of us has never heard something that wasn't there? Can you say you've never nudged a bypassed compressor or EQ and thought "that's it right there"? I certainly have. I've witnessed too many examples of our volatile sense of perception. Hardtoe, like the rest of us (I assume) is human. Once you add in variables like room acoustics, speakers, program material, hearing damage, ability to consciously pinpoint fine details, expectation bias, etc etc.. you might understand why I spent time learning technical analysis as a reliable extra measure to find what my ears miss or confirm what I think I hear.

We're clogging up the thread a bit here though so unless it's important I think we can agree on what we already knew, which is that we're two different guys with (some) different views, doing things our own way!

Back on the topic of Symphony vs Motu AVB, it'll be really interesting as recorded comparisons start to surface. I really do think they poked around inside a Symphony at some point in the development of this new line.
You know what, no, it's not important. Just bear in mind that telling people how to go about their business while advising others, all while advising people yourself without even having heard a tool can be viewed as a bit of a joke, too. On some forums you are not even allowed to state an opinion on gear you have not used. For good reason.

I'll leave it there, before this becomes a really ugly psycho-everything discussion. There are enough of those on this site already.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #641
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Just bear in mind that telling people how to go about their business while advising others, all while advising people yourself without even having heard a tool can be viewed as a bit of a joke, too.
I understand how you could feel that way and don't expect you to understand or agree. After all the converters I've owned and the testing I've done, I think I can tell someone a lot more about a converter and with a higher & more reliable level of certainty by testing alone than is possible by listening. I think any established converter designer could do the same. I will and have bought converters based on testing alone, and this is because my first priority has always been transparency. As long as my ears agree afterwards then it stays. Two years on with my Hilo and haven't entertained the idea of replacing it even one of those days. There are just a lot of ways to measure if comes out is what went in. No witch craft necessary. God knows I don't choose analog gear this way though

edit: I don't think you can in any way equate properly coordinating & evaluating test recordings with people who advise based on hearsay and no relevant experience with something.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #642
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Like I say, in some forums you would have your posts deleted for saying things about boxes you have not used. Be well.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #643
Lives for gear
 

Oh well. Thread was great while it lasted. Plenty of good Q & A with an actual MOTU rep on these units.

Nice going nms, Hardtoe & Karloff70!



(hopefully a mod'll come along and clean house a little...)
Old 22nd October 2014
  #644
Lives for gear
 
Albert's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mecano View Post
Any chance to get AES/EBU or SPDIF out in a near future for the 16A? This will allow to use digital monitors without going through another set of conversion.
I agree with this request completely. I know rear panel space is limited with all that analog I/O, but the 16A currently shuts me out of my monitor controller and master converter, which have digital inputs. The lack of SPDIF and AES I/O seems like an oversight to me, and makes the unit hard to interface with other converters.

I'm still using my MOTU PCIe system, mostly because what I have missed in MOTU's offerings for years is the equivalent of the 308. I'd love to see a similar device (with SRC) that allows me to interface with my outboard hardware digitally.

Or perhaps an ADAT breakout box that converts to other formats?

But other than the lack of digital connectivity other than ADAT, the new MOTU line looks attractive.
Old 22nd October 2014
  #645
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
I understand how you could feel that way and don't expect you to understand or agree. After all the converters I've owned and the testing I've done, I think I can tell someone a lot more about a converter and with a higher & more reliable level of certainty by testing alone than is possible by listening. I think any established converter designer could do the same. I will and have bought converters based on testing alone, and this is because my first priority has always been transparency. As long as my ears agree afterwards then it stays. Two years on with my Hilo and haven't entertained the idea of replacing it even one of those days. There are just a lot of ways to measure if comes out is what went in. No witch craft necessary. God knows I don't choose analog gear this way though

edit: I don't think you can in any way equate properly coordinating & evaluating test recordings with people who advise based on hearsay and no relevant experience with something.
This is rudiculous. The power supply of a Unit can change the sound dramatically. To think you know how convertors will sound based on some graphs and test is fantasy. Sound quality is subjective. If it's as simple as clean specs why are there a million NEVE 1073 clones when there are far better spec'd Preamps? The Sound baybe, The sound! You love your Hilo, many people returned them hearing them as Bass shy! A high degree of accuracy can do that because Bass sounds smaller without distortion in the path.

This is the best part. All PCM conversion is colored, period. That method of conversion is colored, but it is cleaner than it used to be! That's it. The idea that a Cleaner PCM convertor will sound better than a less clean one in any studio set up is plain WRONG!
Old 22nd October 2014
  #646
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reborn View Post
This is rudiculous. The power supply of a Unit can change the sound dramatically. To think you know how convertors will sound based on some graphs and test is fantasy.
I don't think you understand what you have so delightfully decided to chime in on. If a PSU affects the sound, then that will show up in the test recordings! Pay special note to that last word.. Recordings. And yes, you can test if a converter is clean or not using the right tests. I'm pretty sure I clarify quite often that my priority is transparency and what can pass audio with the least measurable artifacts. In your urgency to lecture on subjective preferences you missed the difference between saying something "sounds best" as opposed to "is cleaner than".

Quote:
If it's as simple as clean specs why are there a million NEVE 1073 clones when there are far better spec'd Preamps?
Bad example. Do you know anyone who records everything they do through a 1073 clone and runs the whole mix itself through? I don't. Most converter designers aim for transparency, because typically that's what people want from converters. They want to convert with least degradation and don't want to imprint a noticeable color on everything that passes through it. As we all know, that doesn't go for everyone.

I think we've been doing more than enough debating in this thread for now. Unless its really that important let's return this thread to questions and user feedback. Preferably not involving me
Old 23rd October 2014
  #647
Soooooooo if I clock this to a BLA Microclock will I get it 90+% close to a Symphony? If so I will order it tomorrow. No lie
Old 23rd October 2014
  #648
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
Soooooooo if I clock this to a BLA Microclock will I get it 90+% close to a Symphony? If so I will order it tomorrow. No lie
Based on everything I know so far I would say yes and higher than 90%. Someone tried a null test of a recording made with each unit and they nulled to around -77dB! I'm still skeptical about whether external clocking is needed or would improve it though unless it's something like a 10M. If you have a nice clock you can find out for yourself if it's needed or not though. Hilo owners needing more I/O could really benefit with this combo since you'd just run it off the Hilo clock anyway.
Old 23rd October 2014
  #649
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
As others have surmised, we’re using the Sabre32 Ultra (ES9016, 8-channel version) and it sounds pretty stellar.
Hey Michael, I just realized there's nowhere which actually states that the Sabre32 were used for ADC. Can you tell us which AD converter chips are used here?
Old 23rd October 2014
  #650
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Based on everything I know so far I would say yes and higher than 90%. Someone tried a null test of a recording made with each unit and they nulled to around -77dB! I'm still skeptical about whether external clocking is needed or would improve it though unless it's something like a 10M. If you have a nice clock you can find out for yourself if it's needed or not though. Hilo owners needing more I/O could really benefit with this combo since you'd just run it off the Hilo clock anyway.
I lost the link to the thread, can someone point me in that direction?
Old 23rd October 2014
  #651
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
I lost the link to the thread, can someone point me in that direction?
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/10390368-post577.html

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/10491341-post633.html
Old 23rd October 2014
  #652
Here for the gear
 

1248 & 8M mic pres

I'd be very interested in hearing comments from users on the mic preamps on the 1248 and/or 8M. It seems like we've more than established the improvement and bang for the buck of the digital conversion on these new MOTU boxes but I haven't read much about the mic pres.
Any reports for actual users would be much appreciated - the more detail the better :-)
Thanks!
Martin
Old 23rd October 2014
  #653
Lives for gear
 
Cornvalley's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinBaird View Post
I'd be very interested in hearing comments from users on the mic preamps on the 1248 and/or 8M. It seems like we've more than established the improvement and bang for the buck of the digital conversion on these new MOTU boxes but I haven't read much about the mic pres.
Any reports for actual users would be much appreciated - the more detail the better :-)
Thanks!
Martin
Depends very much on what you're used to hearing. If your expecting the depth of tone and transient detail afforded by Millenia, Cranesong, Buzz.....etc. then you will be a little disappointed. But that is an unrealistic expectation, isn't it?
However, comparing them to previous Motu pres there is definitely a perceptible improvement, though the converter quality may have something to do with that. I don't know.
I'm interested to hear others opinions as well.
Old 23rd October 2014
  #654
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Hey Michael, I just realized there's nowhere which actually states that the Sabre32 were used for ADC. Can you tell us which AD converter chips are used here?
I am also curious about this as performance seems to vary between the units. The 1248 specs out differently than the 8m on the input performance (THD+N and Dynamic Range)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinBaird View Post
I'd be very interested in hearing comments from users on the mic preamps on the 1248 and/or 8M. It seems like we've more than established the improvement and bang for the buck of the digital conversion on these new MOTU boxes but I haven't read much about the mic pres.
Any reports for actual users would be much appreciated - the more detail the better :-)
Thanks!
Martin
Also am I curious about this - again.. the 1248 has like 10dB more gain on the preamps than the 8M...

Last edited by TheSiege; 23rd October 2014 at 08:12 PM.. Reason: typo helps question clarification
Old 24th October 2014
  #655
Gear Nut
 

the 10 db of gain difference between 1248 and 8m i believe has something to do with vlimit, but dont quote me on that. What bugs me is that the 8m has significantly less dynamic range than the 1248's mic pre channels, wtf what gives?

maybe im wrong. maybe motu knows that I actually need vlimit with 53db of gain but just don't know it yet.

I really really want a motu 1248. Anyone wanna buy my mackie blackbirds?
Old 24th October 2014
  #656
Gear Head
OSC Documentation

Hi MrMiller,

I just received my 16A today and my first impression (coming from a 828mk3) is that it sounds lovely and the routing possibilities are insane!

Got some questions regarding OSC support, as the documentation is somewhat confusing to me.

1) why didn't you make the documentation pdf searchable? It seems that the big list of OSC paths are image based and not text based, this is quite tedious when searching through the pdf.

2) Am i right to assume that if i wanted to change the value of the main mix fader i'd have to send the following OSC command to the 16A?

mix/main/0/matrix/fader/"float value between 0.00 and 4.00"

Can i also assume here that the values between 0. and 1. are from -infinity dB to 0dB? And that the values from 1.0 to 4.0 are overhead?

Cheers,

Ruben
Old 24th October 2014
  #657
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
On some forums you are not even allowed to state an opinion on gear you have not used. For good reason.
Interesting, and definitely a good idea. Would you mind sharing the name of one of those forums?
Old 25th October 2014
  #658
Lives for gear
 
emrr's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
in some forums you would have your posts deleted for saying things about boxes you have not used
Test data qualifies as a type of usage. Power supply quality absolutely shows up in tests with s/n ratios like this. Listening is opinion.
Old 25th October 2014
  #659
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emrr View Post
Test data qualifies as a type of usage. Power supply quality absolutely shows up in tests with s/n ratios like this. Listening is opinion.
lol. Fine, maybe in your reality. He didn't even extract that test data himself though, so as he has never been in the same room with the unit I am finding the notion of 'qualifies as a type of usage' quaint but in effect bollo**s I'm afraid.

Whether power supply quality shows up is neither here nor there. Why wouldn't it. Still doesn't tell you what the thing sounds like in the least. Just tells you what wrongness is NOT messing with your signal.

Listening is reality. Just because it happens to have loads of humans error potential doesn't change that. Otherwise I invite you to enjoy your music without speakers by watching any measurement tool of your choice from now on.
Old 25th October 2014
  #660
I gotta agree with Karloff here - measurements are a tool - ears are the judge

I have been doing a lot of listening to my 2007 Apogee Ensemble Vs The Motu 1248 clocked off of various sources, and I have yet to find a combination where the center image/transient reproduction of the 1248 is as solid as the 2007 Ensemble.

I really like the software and functionality and want to keep new guy, but according to the nms measurements it should be phenomenal

BUT it seems to be be weak in this key area of sound reproduction - this comes from listening on my monitors, the headphone outs, my iPod, and my home stereo

Giving it another go with a BLA Microclock MK2, but I'll not sure if I'll be able to get behind the 1248 for my own usage in the end - Reborn pointed out the imaging issue to me and ever since then, I have been noticing this more and more - the 1248 has more depth then the 2007 Ensemble, but without a solid centre image with pinpoint transient reproduction, it just doesn't go the distance for what I am looking for in sound quality

Gonna give it a bit more time before I decide and really dig into working with the micro clock mk2 clocking to see if I can get things where I need them to be...
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump