|
Post by matt on Jun 21, 2018 12:36:34 GMT -6
Really? That’s surprising. I assumed they would be the same. What about the 1248? MOTU uses the Sabre chips on some of their units, including 16A, 8M, 1248, and Monitor 8. Also any unit having the -es suffix.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jun 21, 2018 13:54:38 GMT -6
If you can wait I have a feeling the 16amkII is right around the corner.....
The 16a is right on par with the Symphony MKII. They both have the same architecture, quality of build and same Sabre chips. The routing Motu has in the matrix, well you can buy a studio quality patch bay and they're almost the same price, even if you wanted to use the 16a as a digital patch bay.
Randy has two of them, AVB streams from both units to thunderbolt and shows itself as if it were one unit. If you're doing inserts in PT's that expandability and quality is the best you'll get for around $1,200.
But, if you have some time, I'd sit back and wait a little, ESS has went 2 more generations since both the Apogee and 16a. I'd bet it all at the next show they'll have the ES9038s and probably way better opamps because the technology since 2014 has exponentially gotten better for the same price, if not cheaper. Kind of a no brainer they'll launch the MKII of it this year.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 21, 2018 14:04:01 GMT -6
If you can wait I have a feeling the 16amkII is right around the corner..... Thanks, I am in no rush. I hope they announce something- today would be just fine!
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Jun 21, 2018 17:05:17 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 21, 2018 18:40:41 GMT -6
Really? That’s surprising. I assumed they would be the same. What about the 1248? You can tell by comparing the specs in the manuals. The breakdown has been fully covered on GS.
|
|
|
Post by sam on Jun 22, 2018 7:44:47 GMT -6
Have had a 16a for about 3 years now. Love it. I bought it blindly after shooting out a few converters. The Symphony was a clear winner but the 16a was half the price. After doing some research, I learned about the Sabre 32s and the implementation of them and decided to take a chance. VERY happy I did.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 22, 2018 8:45:45 GMT -6
Have had a 16a for about 3 years now. Love it. I just spent some time over on your site listening to some of your work- great sounding mixes and nice production! It's become very clear to me, that while conversion is important, it is only one piece of the puzzle. I think that sometimes this fact gets lost in the discussion; not in this thread, but I've read plenty where the emphasis gets too narrow. If some (or all) of those tracks were mixed through a 16A, I'm liking the quality. And welcome to RGO!
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 23, 2018 13:03:40 GMT -6
I just switched to Presonus Quantum.
It's expandable up to 96x96 I/O with a maxiumum of four Quantums on one Thunderbolt daisy chain.
You would make up extra channels with DP88 on ADAT or whatever your favored "octopre" type box is. I like the DP88.
Quantum is only $1,000 each and DP88 is at $700. Each Quantum can support 8 channels of SMUX at 96K. OR 16 ADAT channels at 48K or lower (two DP88s per Quantum).
I'm pretty sold on these things. Sound quality great and latency performance is class-leading, without venturing into PCIe cards and such.
|
|
|
Post by sam on Jun 26, 2018 7:55:00 GMT -6
Have had a 16a for about 3 years now. Love it. I just spent some time over on your site listening to some of your work- great sounding mixes and nice production! It's become very clear to me, that while conversion is important, it is only one piece of the puzzle. I think that sometimes this fact gets lost in the discussion; not in this thread, but I've read plenty where the emphasis gets too narrow. If some (or all) of those tracks were mixed through a 16A, I'm liking the quality. And welcome to RGO! Thank you for the kind words! I think about 90% of my demo reel was through those converters. And thank you for the warm welcome!
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jun 27, 2018 9:34:07 GMT -6
Anyone see that Motu just dropped an 8pre interface with ESS Sabre chips on the DA? Makes me think they might not be gearing towards a 16a MKII anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 27, 2018 10:32:54 GMT -6
Anyone see that Motu just dropped an 8pre interface with ESS Sabre chips on the DA? Makes me think they might not be gearing towards a 16a MKII anytime soon. Yes, I've looked at the 8Pre, could be that a move to newer chips is a way off. Perhaps with Summer NAMM starting, we'll see something from MOTU. I still haven't committed to the 16A yet, still looking at my options.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jun 27, 2018 10:39:02 GMT -6
Anyone see that Motu just dropped an 8pre interface with ESS Sabre chips on the DA? Makes me think they might not be gearing towards a 16a MKII anytime soon. Yes, I've looked at the 8Pre, could be that a move to newer chips is a way off. Perhaps with Summer NAMM starting, we'll see something from MOTU. I still haven't committed to the 16A yet, still looking at my options. I think this is the new thing from Motu from summer NAMM. Motu 8pre ES. Different than the old 8pre.
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Jun 27, 2018 17:25:13 GMT -6
I just switched to Presonus Quantum. It's expandable up to 96x96 I/O with a maxiumum of four Quantums on one Thunderbolt daisy chain. You would make up extra channels with DP88 on ADAT or whatever your favored "octopre" type box is. I like the DP88. Quantum is only $1,000 each and DP88 is at $700. Each Quantum can support 8 channels of SMUX at 96K. OR 16 ADAT channels at 48K or lower (two DP88s per Quantum). I'm pretty sold on these things. Sound quality great and latency performance is class-leading, without venturing into PCIe cards and such. These look like an interesting development from Presonus. Presonus quaility worries me but maybe they are trying to make a return to their earlier days. I know S1 V4 looks very interesting to me. Did you come from a Clarett? If so what made you move and how do they compare sound and driver wise?
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 27, 2018 17:45:34 GMT -6
I just switched to Presonus Quantum. It's expandable up to 96x96 I/O with a maxiumum of four Quantums on one Thunderbolt daisy chain. You would make up extra channels with DP88 on ADAT or whatever your favored "octopre" type box is. I like the DP88. Quantum is only $1,000 each and DP88 is at $700. Each Quantum can support 8 channels of SMUX at 96K. OR 16 ADAT channels at 48K or lower (two DP88s per Quantum). I'm pretty sold on these things. Sound quality great and latency performance is class-leading, without venturing into PCIe cards and such. These look like an interesting development from Presonus. Presonus quaility worries me but maybe they are trying to make a return to their earlier days. I know S1 V4 looks very interesting to me. Did you come from a Clarett? If so what made you move and how do they compare sound and driver wise? I was a little worried too, since I had a Firestudio Mobile one time and it was awful. But then I had the DP88 for a long time and it's one of my favorite converters. They are making some strides toward the higher end of things, for sure. With the DAW like you mentioned, and into the interfaces. I wonder about the mixers, too. I came from an Apollo/Clarett rig. I would rank the sound as roughly Presonus/Clarett/Apollo in order. But it's not a strict 1/2/3 there are small shades of difference in the placement in that order. They all sound "good" but some things are more or less preferable to me. The Apollo would be a more distant 3 than the other two. The Apollo silver is the most colored sounding, which in my opinion is not good for a converter. I still did some good work with the Apollos. I want to add my color with my microphones, plugins, etc, not the converters. The Clarett is very clinical almost clean and precise, but also has a specific "shape" to it to use an abstract term. It has a characteristic sound. I found the sound stage to be a little narrow, as my only real negative. The ADC on the Presonus is a little bit better for my ear, my tracks sound closer to what I want. There's just the slightest tangible bit of "hype" in the Clarett tracks. The Presonus soundstage is wider and slightly deeper. Overall it's a more neutral sound. Nothing really stands out about it. You just get what you get and I mean that in a good way. It is a very even and uncoloured presentation, which I really like right now. You sort of get what you put into it, which is my ideal converter quality. It gets out of the way and lets you hear your speakers and your front end pretty clearly. I bet there are even clearer converters out there, but not at this price. I'm interested in the Pro Ject DAC Dr. Bill and Brad McGowan are talking about. Driver wise the Presonus Quantum is by far my favorite. For decades I've been loathing the multiple driver/window/mixer setup and the Quantum does away with it entirely. The latency is so low that your DAW actually handles everything now. I can't even hear the round trip and my ears are very sensitive to latency. Cubase is reporting a 3 ms round trip at 128 buffer, which is the lowest I have ever seen. You can run dozens of plugins and the CPU meter stays low. It's a super-efficient interface. Clarett "Claimed" to be "this" but in practice it wasn't quite there. I find that the Quantum actually gets "there." I simply can't hear the latency. Since your entire computer is now a Quad-Octo-Duo-Plus-Plus Apollo is a distant last place in the driver/software comparison. The entire reason for the sad little UAD DSP chips has been negated by the efficiency and speed of Quantum. Apollo has great stable drivers but the whole thing now seems convoluted and out of fashion, and highly limiting. I guess it's sort of a "poor man's" HD system or something like that. RME strikes me as an obvious competitor at a much higher price point. It doesn't "look" expensive but I don't really care, the performance is really all I care about. The hardware interface is great as well. I prefer the front panel over any Apollo or Clarett. The only thing lacking is the headphone amps, they are weak. I'll be using my Tascam UH-7000 for that. Clarett is now on B-Rig duty. Apollos are now blissfully sold away. UAD Satellite Quad is here for my UAD plugin collection, which I am now bringing into questioning.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 29, 2018 16:37:43 GMT -6
I wanted to make an amendment to my long post above.
I think I still prefer the Clarett DAC over anything I have. The Presonus DAC sounds a little bit unclean to me in the high end. I am getting really picky. It's not too far off from an Audient or a Tascam UH-7000 though. I am just trying to approach the highest possible option for my main speakers.
However, I still prefer the Presonus ADC, I think it just sounds great. The front end and back end of these boxes are all a little different.
Never did I really like the Apollo DAC, either. I just never used it. I am really picky about DAC sound.
I was wondering why my last 3 songs sound so different than what I had recorded before. I think it comes down to the DAC. It's just not what I'm used to with the Quantum.
Yeah I could spend time learning it but I think I'll just plug the Clarett back in or maybe go shopping for a Pro Ject next month. Getting the perfect sound coming out of the speakers has been a lifelong pursuit for me and it is a matter of inches.
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Jul 1, 2018 14:16:59 GMT -6
I wanted to make an amendment to my long post above. I think I still prefer the Clarett DAC over anything I have. The Presonus DAC sounds a little bit unclean to me in the high end. I am getting really picky. It's not too far off from an Audient or a Tascam UH-7000 though. I am just trying to approach the highest possible option for my main speakers. However, I still prefer the Presonus ADC, I think it just sounds great. The front end and back end of these boxes are all a little different. Never did I really like the Apollo DAC, either. I just never used it. I am really picky about DAC sound. I was wondering why my last 3 songs sound so different than what I had recorded before. I think it comes down to the DAC. It's just not what I'm used to with the Quantum. Yeah I could spend time learning it but I think I'll just plug the Clarett back in or maybe go shopping for a Pro Ject next month. Getting the perfect sound coming out of the speakers has been a lifelong pursuit for me and it is a matter of inches. Thanks for your review, it gives me something to think about! Currently have a Apollo BF but I was looking at the Clarett for a mobile rig. The new presonus interfaces aren't available over here yet.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jul 1, 2018 17:00:54 GMT -6
I wanted to make an amendment to my long post above. I think I still prefer the Clarett DAC over anything I have. The Presonus DAC sounds a little bit unclean to me in the high end. I am getting really picky. It's not too far off from an Audient or a Tascam UH-7000 though. I am just trying to approach the highest possible option for my main speakers. However, I still prefer the Presonus ADC, I think it just sounds great. The front end and back end of these boxes are all a little different. Never did I really like the Apollo DAC, either. I just never used it. I am really picky about DAC sound. I was wondering why my last 3 songs sound so different than what I had recorded before. I think it comes down to the DAC. It's just not what I'm used to with the Quantum. Yeah I could spend time learning it but I think I'll just plug the Clarett back in or maybe go shopping for a Pro Ject next month. Getting the perfect sound coming out of the speakers has been a lifelong pursuit for me and it is a matter of inches. Thanks for your review, it gives me something to think about! Currently have a Apollo BF but I was looking at the Clarett for a mobile rig. The new presonus interfaces aren't available over here yet. Yeah there's a lot to think about here. Another thing I just realized is that my i7 CPU is now basically functionally identical to Apollo console but everything is native! I can run hundreds of plugins rather than simply a dozen or two. I can also track "Unison"-style in Cubase by putting inserts on the input channels (red faders) that show up in the Cubase mixer. This is kind of insane because it bascially takes a bazooka to the whole UAD worldview. It even goes beyond UAD because you don't have to commit to any plugins-you are free to change them at any later time you want. You can monitor through them still, and commit or not, your choice. You could call it revolutionary, I don't know. There are other systems that are capable of this but they are much, much more expensive. My RTL is never higher than 3 milliseconds or so so it's basically "solved" the latency issue. It's kind of amazing really. I remember being amazed by Apollo when I first got it 2 years ago, but this is the next level.
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Jul 2, 2018 5:10:29 GMT -6
I’ve used a 16a for about three years now. Love it. Recently added an 8a via AVB to do exactly what Matt wants to do, except 24x24 instead of 32x32. Love it.
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Jul 2, 2018 5:49:45 GMT -6
I would like to add that I chased the converter magic fairy for a while. It was a source of anxiety and a drain on my wallet. If you’re mixing for money, maybe you have to do it, but some folks (Wiz is a great example) make amazing sounding recordings through inspired performances, careful attention to the entire signal chain and years of experience. The 16a is plenty good enough for all but the 0.1% of us, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by forgotteng on Jul 6, 2018 6:34:46 GMT -6
I am quite happy with the MOTU avb. I am running a 24Ai, a 24Ao and a monitor 8 it sounds great and was affordable for my economy. Been running 3 years that way. MOTU support has been great too. I have some complex routing and it took me a while to get the network patching through my thick skull.
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jul 6, 2018 8:54:30 GMT -6
The routing is pretty awesome. I was frustrated with my previous interface and limitations on how protools does the patching (inserts have to match out number to in number, or at least they used to?) but on the MOTU any input can be mapped to any input number on the DAW. And you can set up mults and other complex patch chains, then map the output of that as a "normal" input to the DAW as well... save templates... all kinds of niceness.
|
|
|
Post by forgotteng on Jul 6, 2018 10:18:54 GMT -6
The routing is pretty awesome. I was frustrated with my previous interface and limitations on how protools does the patching (inserts have to match out number to in number, or at least they used to?) but on the MOTU any input can be mapped to any input number on the DAW. And you can set up mults and other complex patch chains, then map the output of that as a "normal" input to the DAW as well... save templates... all kinds of niceness. Yea I haven't even explored all the cool things you can do with routing. Every once in a while I need to figure something out and then I think about how easy it is to just reroute.
|
|
|
Post by subspace on Jul 6, 2018 11:26:05 GMT -6
Three years running on the 16A here as well. MOTU PCI interfaces were great for stability and latency on Mac back in the day, was happy to find their Thunderbolt interface performs the same but with converters you can forget are there.
I have a little Thunderbolt 2 dock I plug into the MBP and hang all the appliances off of, 16A on the TB2 port, 34" ultra-wide on the HDMI, Audient controller on the ethernet port, recording drives on eSATA, etc. It's like all the PCI expansion slots I need built into a tiny box.
The browser-based routing matrix/digital mixer is cool, I have a cheap access point plugged into the 16A's ethernet port and two iPads in the tracking room for cue control. I route the live inputs to one subgroup and all the computer returns to another so balancing tracking levels against playback is simple.
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Jul 6, 2018 19:40:59 GMT -6
Here’s a cool thing you can do with two Motus hooked up via AVB: I have a 6-slot lunchbox with mic pres in all six. When I want to record drums in the living room, I use the lunchbox, the 8a, and a 100’ Ethernet cable. Plus I can run headphone mixes back the other way. All of this is templated in the Motu router. Nice!
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 6, 2018 23:26:32 GMT -6
Three years running on the 16A here as well. MOTU PCI interfaces were great for stability and latency on Mac back in the day, was happy to find their Thunderbolt interface performs the same but with converters you can forget are there. I have a little Thunderbolt 2 dock I plug into the MBP and hang all the appliances off of, 16A on the TB2 port, 34" ultra-wide on the HDMI, Audient controller on the ethernet port, recording drives on eSATA, etc. It's like all the PCI expansion slots I need built into a tiny box. The browser-based routing matrix/digital mixer is cool, I have a cheap access point plugged into the 16A's ethernet port and two iPads in the tracking room for cue control. I route the live inputs to one subgroup and all the computer returns to another so balancing tracking levels against playback is simple. The web based control is super cool. All interfaces need to implement this so that the band members can each create their own cue mixes on their own.
|
|