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 3rd February 2016
  #2311
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornvalley View Post
Hi mrmiller, why can't we get a talkback solution for the AVB line? That would make this hardware a complete system.
+1

Studio monitoring, A-B-C monitors, Surround monitoring, Mono, Dim, Talkback.
Old 3rd February 2016
  #2312
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
That's per-cable. Yes, you can daisy-chain through another device such as a hard drive and it will work. The upcoming firmware has a few fixes related to that but it should work as is. I wouldn't recommend daisy-chaining through a display, though. There are optical Thunderbolt cables as well, though they're a little expensive and fragile.
like these

optical

my original reply was in regards to max t-bolt copper length that the unit will accept to the computer. 3 meters is that correct?
Old 3rd February 2016
  #2313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mulcahy View Post
like these

optical

my original reply was in regards to max t-bolt copper length that the unit will accept to the computer. 3 meters is that correct?
You are absolutely correct—3 meters is the longest copper cable allowed by the standard. I forgot to include the quote but I was referencing Wiz_Oz' question to confirm that you can tie multiple cables together by daisy chaining through an intermediate device. Not the prettiest solution, but technically feasible. I was clarifying that the 3m limitation is per cable, not overall.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiz_Oz View Post
Is it possible ( i don't own any thunderbolt devices other than the 16A) if I was to purchase a hard drive that had two thunderbolt ports on it like the Lacie D2 Thunderbolt 2 drive

That i could connect --- iMac > 2m Thunderbolt Cable > Lacie > 2m Thunderbolt Cable > MOTU 16A
Old 3rd February 2016
  #2314
Lives for gear
 
Hokut's Avatar
 

1280 and 16A - TRS Outputs info from the MOTU PDF GUIDE

Page 45 says:
Mic inputs with preamps (XLR)
1) Do not connect a +4dBu (line level) signal to the mic inputs without using the -20dB Pad. It is recommended you connect line level signals to the quarter-inch inputs instead.

-(?)- I guess if we use the -20dB Pad we 'should' be ok to plug TRS to XLR Balanced cables to connect TRS Synth/Keyboards outputs to the 4 Mic inputs on the 1248?


TRS quarter-inch analog inputs and outputs (TRS balanced and Unbalanced plugs)
2) Quarter-inch analog outputs are not cross-coupled. Therefore, use a TRS plug with the ring disconnected. Not floating the negative terminal will short it to the sleeve ground and cause distortion.

-(?)- In the case we are not building our own cables, when you order TRS Balanced cables from an online shop there is no mention if the ring is disconnected or not. Is it not the case that normally Balanced TRS plugs have Tip Sleeve and Ring all connected? So buying TRS cables are we going to end up with distortion?

Last edited by Hokut; 3rd February 2016 at 08:15 PM..
Old 3rd February 2016
  #2315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokut View Post
-(?)- I guess if we use the -20dB Pad we 'should' be ok to plug TRS to XLR Balanced cables to connect TRS Synth/Keyboards outputs to the 4 Mic inputs on the 1248?
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokut View Post
TRS quarter-inch analog inputs and outputs (TRS balanced and Unbalanced plugs)
2) Quarter-inch analog outputs are not cross-coupled. Therefore, use a TRS plug with the ring disconnected. Not floating the negative terminal will short it to the sleeve ground and cause distortion.

-(?)- In the case we are not building our own cables, when you order TRS Balanced cables from an online shop there is no mention if the ring is disconnected or not. Is it not the case that normally Balanced TRS plugs have Tip Sleeve and Ring all connected? So buying TRS cables are we going to end up with distortion?
This only matters if you're connecting the interface's outputs to an unbalanced input. If going to unbalanced inputs, yes, using TRS with the ring connected will add distortion. If you're going into balanced inputs, use standard TRS.

I've sent a message to the manual editor to modify the text there to make it clear that this only applies when feeding the interface's outputs into unbalanced inputs.
Old 4th February 2016
  #2316
Lives for gear
 
jlaws's Avatar
If you use ts to ts for unbalanced connections, will that cause distortion?
Old 4th February 2016
  #2317
Lives for gear
 
Hokut's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
Correct.



This only matters if you're connecting the interface's outputs to an unbalanced input. If going to unbalanced inputs, yes, using TRS with the ring connected will add distortion. If you're going into balanced inputs, use standard TRS.

I've sent a message to the manual editor to modify the text there to make it clear that this only applies when feeding the interface's outputs into unbalanced inputs.
ah ok ,
good, thank you for the clarification
Old 4th February 2016
  #2318
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlaws View Post
If you use ts to ts for unbalanced connections, will that cause distortion?
Using a TS cable between the interface's balanced output and an unbalanced input would short the sleeve to ground. That means the amplifier would have to work harder to drive the signal. Best results are achieved with the ring not shorted, e.g. use a modified TRS cable.

What unbalanced input are you trying to output to? If you're going into guitar pedals or the like, you might want some sort of re-amp box which would take balanced in and spit out unbalanced at the correct signal level and impedance.
Old 4th February 2016
  #2319
Lives for gear
 
jlaws's Avatar
Oh. Thanks for that info. I haven't needed to do that but was just curious for future reference.
Old 4th February 2016
  #2320
Lives for gear
 
Monkey Man's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
I think I mentioned this before but if you're set on USB and uncomfortable with 1x, you could do the patching digitally via the routing tab rather than dealing with physical patching. Alternatively, you could sum pairs of inputs that are unlikely to be used simultaneously down to single stereos pairs. That way, everything will recall and be audible immediately. You just need to watch out for if you're playing the two at the same time ever, in which case you either do it in passes or switch up the routing.
I'm not sure I'm following, Mr. M.

This is definitely new to me; perhaps you mentioned it to someone else. Just so I understand - is the idea here to reduce the count to 32/32 max, which in turn allows 2x rates? If it is, I appreciate the suggestion. Very sneaky, mate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
Lastly, it's never a configuration I like to recommend, but you could connect both interfaces via USB and create a Core Audio aggregate device. They still need to be clocked together if you do this, and they probably should be on separate USB busses, but it might be doable.
There'll be 3 interfaces, 4 if I use AVB. If I did this for 3 instead of USB (64I/O), would I require more channels on my desk for monitoring - I've planned to use the interfaces "CueMix" style with only a couple of summed pairs for monitoring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
You've really got a bunch of options, even if you decide against connecting directly via AVB and an add-on ethernet NIC.
... which is still the best option for me? See my original post below. This was the one I'd hoped you'd respond to. The quotes above come from your response to my response to Robby's response to said post (below):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Man View Post
Funny this "AVB / USB on older Macs" subject has come up again, 'cause I'm now perilously close to finishing paying off my lay-buy for 2 x 24Ai and 1 x 16A to be run on a 2012 Mac Pro.

As the time draws nearer for the final payment to be made I find myself getting the jitters concerning the USB route once again. It's either:

1) Sell a bunch of synths and run 64 I/O over USB at 44.1kHz.

or

2) Keep all my synths, buy an extra 24Ai and run 88 I/O over ethernet AVB (using an AVB-capable PCI card) at 96kHz.

I keep asking myself, "Will the extra stability, higher channel count and sample rate prove more important in the real world than the 5ms or so additional latency and increased CPU load that the AVB connection would incur over a USB one?".

Over and over, day and night, this question repeats itself ad nauseum. I've avoided asking this 'til now because I feel bad that I chewed up plenty of Mr. Miller's time 6 months ago with a barrage of USB-connection-related questions; I was literally paranoid of glitches, clicks, pops and "loss of device / connection" issues... and to be honest I still am. It's a heck of an investment, this, and it's already been 18 months in the money-saving process.

As always, I'm extremely grateful for any input, musings, reassurances and what have you that anyone might choose to share. Thank you!
Nicky
Please feel free, should you have the time, to rant, ramble, muse, instruct or inform as you see fit, esteemed Mr. Miller!

I do very much appreciate your sharing your knowledge.
Nicky
Old 4th February 2016
  #2321
Gear Nut
 
Rafter Man's Avatar
We've all been observing with great anticipation over half a year as to what conclusion the Monkey Man will reach. The suspense is almost too much to bear.
Old 4th February 2016
  #2322
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post



Yes, they can be used as line inputs and there are -20 dB pads that can be engaged in the web app. See MOTU.com - Overview for more info.



Mr.Miller,

thanks for your response.

However, yesterday I have asked the same question to the sales guy responsible for Germany. He cleary said NO and that the B16 is not intended to be used for XLR line inputs. I have to use the A16 instead if needed with the respective XLR adapters.

I am now even more CONFUSED than before since both of you seems to be very knowledgable but with different views.
On the MOTU page unfortunately nothing is mentioned in this respect.
Old 4th February 2016
  #2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicsound-2 View Post
Mr.Miller,

thanks for your response.

However, yesterday I have asked the same question to the sales guy responsible for Germany. He cleary said NO and that the B16 is not intended to be used for XLR line inputs. I have to use the A16 instead if needed with the respective XLR adapters.

I am now even more CONFUSED than before since both of you seems to be very knowledgable but with different views.
On the MOTU page unfortunately nothing is mentioned in this respect.
Sorry for the confusion! Was this a sales rep at Thomann? I can get someone to reach out to them to clear things up. The Stage-B16 most definitely can handle line inputs with the pad engaged.

From the manual, p.9:
"MIC INPUTS. Connect up to 16 microphones here. Each input provides individual preamp gain (63 dB), switchable 48V phantom power and an optional -20 dB pad. You can also connect a line input with the pad engaged."
Old 4th February 2016
  #2324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Man View Post
This is definitely new to me; perhaps you mentioned it to someone else. Just so I understand - is the idea here to reduce the count to 32/32 max, which in turn allows 2x rates? If it is, I appreciate the suggestion. Very sneaky, mate.
Yes, that is indeed the idea. There are three ways to do that, in my mind. For all these scenarios, you would have all your outboard synths physically plugged in at all times and routed via AVB to the interface connected to your computer. Since you want to run at 2x, you are limited to 32 channels into the computer itself over USB at any given time.
  1. On the interface connected to the computer, treat the routing as a digital patch bay and route in the 16 synths you use most often. Save a preset so you can recall it later. If you need one of the other synths, just change the routing in the box to replace one of the existing unused ones. My assumption is that you never need to monitor/record more than 16 synths simultaneously.
  2. Sum two synths to a single stereo pair using the built-in mixer. Do this as many times as needed to fit everything within 32 channels. As long as the synths in any given pair aren't being played simultaneously or if you're fine with some synths being submixed, you'll be all set.
  3. Connect two interfaces to your computer via USB on different internal hubs (e.g. front and back ports or back port and a PCIe card). Create a Core Audio aggregate device so you can get 64 inputs at 2x spread between the two interfaces.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Man View Post
... which is still the best option for me? See my original post below. This was the one I'd hoped you'd respond to. The quotes above come from your response to my response to Robby's response to said post (below):
I think it's certainly the easiest solution if the slight latency and CPU overhead aren't deal-breakers. The other two options via USB are a little fussy as we're trying to work around the channel count limitations. On the plus side, the Ethernet NIC is a "cheap" experiment at roughly $50.
Old 5th February 2016
  #2325
Lives for gear
 
Monkey Man's Avatar
 

Well, it's finally settled then, Mr. Miller. Woohoo!

I figure the latency shouldn't be much of an issue because it should only be half the quoted 9ms or so due to the fact that it'll only come into play when playing VIs live and not for full-path sources such as vocals and instruments. Hopefully I've got this right.

As far as the additional CPU overhead is concerned, I remember that you weren't able to give me any idea of what to expect, so this unknown remains as the only potential "gotcha" at this point. The worst-case scenario is that I'll have to stick with 44.1kHz if it's significant, which is something I'll just have to live with should this be the case.

Last, necessary question:
Any update on which AVB-capable cards work well or is there one that's preferable over the others?

Thank you so much, mate; I appreciate your guidance more than I can say.

IMHO you're a true asset to the MOTU Team™!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafter Man View Post
We've all been observing with great anticipation over half a year as to what conclusion the Monkey Man will reach. The suspense is almost too much to bear.
Ha! Lucky for you it was only almost too much to bear, Rafter Man.

For me it has indeed been too much!
Old 5th February 2016
  #2326
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmiller View Post
Sorry for the confusion! Was this a sales rep at Thomann? I can get someone to reach out to them to clear things up. The Stage-B16 most definitely can handle line inputs with the pad engaged.

From the manual, p.9:
"MIC INPUTS. Connect up to 16 microphones here. Each input provides individual preamp gain (63 dB), switchable 48V phantom power and an optional -20 dB pad. You can also connect a line input with the pad engaged."

no, this was stated by the distributor in Germany.
Thanks for your confirmation that this is possible. However, I am still wondering about different views which might have a good reason.

Last edited by musicsound-2; 5th February 2016 at 06:13 PM..
Old 5th February 2016
  #2327
Lives for gear
 

Question:

Can I use the SPDIF in- and outputs of the 1248 to connect it with the AES/EBU in- and outputs of my lavry blue (assuming that they have still better converters ?!).
Old 5th February 2016
  #2328
Lives for gear
 

Question:

Can I use the web app to control the interface without being connected to the Internet (just Ethernet cable between Laptop and interface )?
Old 5th February 2016
  #2329
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicsound-2 View Post
Question:

Can I use the web app to control the interface without being connected to the Internet (just Ethernet cable between Laptop and interface )?

I think, yes you can do so, I have a router (without internet access) between them - I don't know if you need a crossed lan cable for a direct connection.
Old 5th February 2016
  #2330
tft
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicsound-2 View Post
Question:

Can I use the web app to control the interface without being connected to the Internet (just Ethernet cable between Laptop and interface )?
yes sure. you only need a direct network connection to the interface itself. it can be via ethernet (cable) or wifi, if you have wifirouter connected to the interfaces networkport.
the webapp runs inside the interface. the name webapp is probably confusing to many people, as "web" is a common word for internet today, but it's the correct term for what it actually is (an application, that is served/controled over networkconnection).
Old 6th February 2016
  #2331
Here for the gear
 
jacobamerritt's Avatar
 

Is anyone using the MOTU 1248 with Reaper? Is it working smoothly?
Old 6th February 2016
  #2332
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimGitz View Post
+1

Studio monitoring, A-B-C monitors, Surround monitoring, Mono, Dim, Talkback.
+1
Old 6th February 2016
  #2333
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacobamerritt View Post
Is anyone using the MOTU 1248 with Reaper? Is it working smoothly?
I have used it with Reaper (for testing purposes), yes it works well, at least with USB.
Old 6th February 2016
  #2334
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KimGitz View Post
+1

Studio monitoring, A-B-C monitors, Surround monitoring, Mono, Dim, Talkback.
+1
+ aux bus levelers/compressors
+ cascading devices to get more channel counts and dsp in one mixer for all avb devices
Old 6th February 2016
  #2335
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacobamerritt View Post
Is anyone using the MOTU 1248 with Reaper? Is it working smoothly?
I've used the 16a for remote sessions getting backing tracks down. Flawless inputting 12-16 tracks simultaneously (Windows 8.1 over USB). I don't use Reaper as my main DAW though so I can't tell you how it handles everything else but I'm guessing it would do it well or as well as anything else?
Old 6th February 2016
  #2336
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KimGitz View Post
+1

Studio monitoring, A-B-C monitors, Surround monitoring, Mono, Dim, Talkback.
+1

Add Windows Ethernet AVB card support.

(even if there was only one "recommended" card that it would support in windows)
Old 6th February 2016
  #2337
Here for the gear
 

MrMiller, can I request you add physical size specs to the website as I'm looking for some measuring equipment and tracking down the sizes has been problematic. I remember trying to find size specs before and it was difficult. I wanted to know what size rack case I needed (depth) for the 1248 without going downstairs to measure myself. And now I'm considering the Ultralite AVB as a more portable unit but can't find size specs at all (will assume same as MK3). Thanks.

David
Old 8th February 2016
  #2338
Here for the gear
 

Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornvalley View Post
Hi mrmiller, why can't we get a talkback solution for the AVB line? That would make this hardware a complete system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimGitz View Post
+1
Studio monitoring, A-B-C monitors, Surround monitoring, Mono, Dim, Talkback.
+1
Old 9th February 2016
  #2339
Gear Head
 

Hey guys, one question:

When you talk about a talkback solution for the avb devices, what do you think of ?

now, with the mixer you can already "build" a talkback, like the analog way: take 1 channel of the mixer with a talkback microphone, route it to the defined headphone outs, but not to the main mix. The mute button will act as talkback button - or am I wrong?

I liked the footswitch plug on the 828 but the 1248 does not have one.

How would a perfect talkback solution look like, as you wish it from motu?
What would be the difference to above suggested way?

As the digital way eat up one input, I've decided to do the talkback after the headphone signals go out of my 1248 as analog signal. it is better for me, so I don't have to "waste" 1 channel for talkback
Thanks.
Old 9th February 2016
  #2340
Lives for gear
 
Cornvalley's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGPS View Post
Hey guys, one question:

When you talk about a talkback solution for the avb devices, what do you think of ?

now, with the mixer you can already "build" a talkback, like the analog way: take 1 channel of the mixer with a talkback microphone, route it to the defined headphone outs, but not to the main mix. The mute button will act as talkback button - or am I wrong?

I liked the footswitch plug on the 828 but the 1248 does not have one.

How would a perfect talkback solution look like, as you wish it from motu?
What would be the difference to above suggested way?

As the digital way eat up one input, I've decided to do the talkback after the headphone signals go out of my 1248 as analog signal. it is better for me, so I don't have to "waste" 1 channel for talkback
Thanks.
there needs to be DIM on all channels, especially Main (speakers and talkback do not play nice together) assignable keystroke for talkback (mouse is clumsy).
It would be ideal to have footswitch but that would require a new hardware configuration. This can be totally software based.
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