Motu hardware sucks! do you feel me?

[suenamusic]

Is it just me or does MOTU hardware and most other popular recording interfaces geared toward home studios suck in their sound quality? I swear the quality of sound these harware units put out is sterile and not musical. I've been frustrated and set back in releasing any music because of this issue. I reference to commercial cds all the time and can't get anywhere near their sound and musicality.

I've upgraded to Logic pro 7.1 from Logic 5 because I read some comment somewhere about the sound quality of Logic Pro. But after upgrading, I think software has nothing to do with sound quality. Somebody help me on this issue. Please!

Here's my set up in case someone catches something I'm missing in the recording and/or monitoring chain:

AKG414 & BLUE Dragonfly mics into UA 2-610 tube preamp & AMEK 9098 preamp/eq. Then the preamps go into a MOTU 2408mkIII and a MOTU 24io audio interface inputs. Everything is recorded and sequenced using Logic Pro 7.1 and monitored through a pair of KRKs nearfield. I also have many sound modules and synths patched into the Motu hardware and I use EXS24 samples as well. If anybody has any ideas why I'm getting thin, imageless and unmusical sound quality let me know. I know my mics and preamps were not cheap. And Logic Pro is supposed to be a high end professional product. So I've narrowed it to the MOTU line of audio interfaces I'm using. I'm convinced they are consumer grade and not professional at all. If I'm wrong and someone out there has produced commercial grade music through these units let me know. Maybe mine are defective. I look forward to your comments and seasoned advise. Peace!

[ski]

Logic itself has little bearing on overall sound quality, and I'll qualify "little"... I've had occasions to compare the sound of the same tracks playing back from Logic 4 (four) and PT (prior to the introduction of HD). It was always the concensus of myself and the engineer that the PT tracks sounded a little more open and clear. Then recently I had occasion to make the same comparison between Logic 7 and PTHD. Same engineer, and we concluded that the tracks sounded a little better playing back from Logic.

 

The differences were fairly miniscule, the kind of thing which perhaps only seasoned ears would hear, but certainly not enough of a difference where, were we to be making a record on one system or the other, would make or break whether the final mix was commercially viable.

 

Seems like you're trying to equate cost with sound quality. Things don't always pan out that way. 414's and Dragonflies, while they may be costly, are on my top two list of the harshest sounding mics ever made. Some voices are complimented by them while others are made to sound horrible. So whether you're using the right mics to record (whatever you're recording) has to be taken into consideration.

 

You're complaining about thin and imageless music. I don't know that the 2408 is going to contribute greatly to any loss of imaging. Panning is panning and the acoustics of your room and placement of your speakers are going to have more of an impact than your convertors as to whether the sound is smeared or not. Maybe you need to set your pan law differently in Logic to get more extreme imaging. Hard to say without hearing your stuff.

 

Some people don't feel that MOTU stuff is up to snuff, and others have no problem with their gear. An engineer I respect greatly recently got a 2408mkIII and is very happy with its sound quality. He was a former RME user. I wouldn't doubt that a Lynx Aurora would sound better than a 2408, but we're also talking many times the cost.

 

Maybe the best thing for you to do would be to rent (or otherwise purchase on evaluation) some different audio interfaces and do some A/B comparisons. For example, if you were to get an RME Fireface and set up an aggregate device with your MOTU, you could then play a 2-mix out of Logic and bounce between the two devices. See if you hear a difference.

[fader8]

suenamusic,

 

ski makes some good points. Converters alone aren't going to provoke the kind of response you're having to your music.

 

For years I had a classic car hobby. When tuning a big engine, it is dead impossible to get that baby to purr like a kitty by messing with the carburetion unless you absolutely knew for a fact that the ignition was set up perfectly first.

 

That's how it is with your gear and your room. All the best gear on the planet is going to sound like dog if your room sounds like dog. How do commercial mixes sound when you play them in there? How long have you been mixing?

[David Nahmani]

If you click the banner at the top of this website, you'll have a chance to listen to Joe Hedges' album, which was recorded through a MOTU interface. It is my opinion that the album sound quality is on par with commercial recordings.

[dkgross]

I'm pretty thrilled with the sound of my Motu 828MKII...tho...the Apogee Ensemble is calling Mr. Visa Card.....

 

[Waterboy]

If you click the banner at the top of this website, you'll have a chance to listen to Joe Hedges' album, which was recorded through a MOTU interface.

 

I didn't know Blumpy used Motu stuff .... interesting

[Logic Pro]

If you click the banner at the top of this website, you'll have a chance to listen to Joe Hedges' album, which was recorded through a MOTU interface.

 

I didn't know Blumpy used Motu stuff .... interesting

Motu does suck, sorry i agree, they use horrible parts, MOTU is all show., they clone dig hardware and Opcode's Studio Vision Pro software,

 

i wish Gibson supported SVP today, it was simple and great.

[David Nahmani]

I'm not a huge MOTU fan but to say it sucks... I mean you can make a great sounding record with them, and the proof is in the link at the top of the forum.

[marcel72]

Is it just me or does MOTU hardware and most other popular recording interfaces geared toward home studios suck in their sound quality?

 

No, and IMHO, yes.

 

I did 2 album projects with a friend a few years ago. First was done with Digi 888s, all we had. 16 bit, pretty bad latency, constant compatibility issues, already ancient by this time (2001?) Mixed on a Mackie 8 bus, again, what we had. The second was done on his brand new MOTU 24 I/O. Sounded cool (probably the increased bit depth) during tracking and was so much easier to use, we thought we had it made. This record got mixed on a Neve 8068 through a TDM system with gobs of the best outboard you could want...

 

Guess which one sounds better?

 

In the end, the 888s were old and cranky, and slow, but they were professional audio equipment. The 24 I/O was not, and it showed. No amount of mix gear or tricks could cover it up.

 

I continue to use MOTU gear (2408 and PCI 424), but pretty much in the role of interface only. I use Apogee converters on the front and back of it, and only push low priority stuff (FX, BG vox, etc) out thru its analogue channels come mix time. It is a flexible, stable, and affordable piece in this role, but professional it is not.

[suenamusic]

First of all thank you all for responding. I definitively will take the advice to A/B with other equipment when the opportunity is available. I know I'm monitoring in a less than ideal room but as a home studio it's what I have to work with for now. Ski, You mentioned setting the pan law in Logic might help with imaging. can you elaborate on how I can do this?

I know it's difficult to accurately address the situation without hearing what I'm talking about so if anyone is interested here's a link to myspace where you can listen to some compiled excerpts of my recordings and give your assesments:

http://www.myspace.com/suenamusic

Thanks and Peace! Suena! music

[suenamusic]

Marcel72,

you mentioned you use the MOTU as an interface only and the apogee converters as the front and back end. Can't you bypass the MOTU altogether and use the Apogees as an interface/converters on their own? I'm confused a little on this. I thought a/d converters were audio interfaces in their own right. Can you elaborate on this.

Thanks & Peace!

[David Nahmani]

I thought a/d converters were audio interfaces in their own right.

An audio interface is a device that gets a digital audio signal in and out of a computer.

 

A converter is a device that converts an analog signal into a digital signal, or vice versa.

 

A lot of consumer audio interfaces have converters built-in, so one device is all you need to get an analog signal in and out of your computer --> hence your confusion.

[xs4is]

suenamusic,

 

If you are really looking for a better interface, try Black Lion Audio:

 

http://blacklionaudio.com/

 

They are in the business of modifying interfaces by replacing the cheap consumer components and replacing them with very high quality components. I've talked to a couple of people that have had the service done and they really really liked the difference.

 

--> X <--

[fromage]

I use a MOTU traveler, and for your every day gigging I think it sounds great. Once I get the extra cash I am obviously going to get something beefier (I have my eye on a Metric Halo in particular), but the Traveler doesn't sound like s#!+ by any means..

[toysun]

...You're complaining about thin and imageless music. I don't know that the 2408 is going to contribute greatly to any loss of imaging. Panning is panning and the acoustics of your room and placement of your speakers are going to have more of an impact than your convertors as to whether the sound is smeared or not. Maybe you need to set your pan law differently in Logic to get more extreme imaging. Hard to say without hearing your stuff..

 

I really respect Ski's opinions here on the forum and think he's "got it" but I have to disagree with the above. I am absolutely not an "audiophile guy" - I'm just happy to have sound come out, but when I got my ULN 2, the first good interface I've ever had (after Roland VS880, Sonorus studio I/O, 828 mk I, and Firebox) I was blown away by the really improved stereo separation. It was mindblowing! Now that's on monitoring, but I assume I'm gaining also on recording.

 

My 2c,

 

John

[Logic Pro]

I'm not a huge MOTU fan but to say it sucks... I mean you can make a great sounding record with them, and the proof is in the link at the top of the forum.

That record took talent, that i agree with, motu and M-Audio is another story., while you can still record with them i think the trouble and quality is just harder to work with as the engineer and producer.

[David Nahmani]

To be totally truthful, Blumpy clocked the MOTU with an Apogee clock, and didn't use it exclusively for the whole album, just for certain tracks.