Direct Competitor for MOTU 24IO

  • Thread starter Thread starter bgavin
  • Start date Start date
B

bgavin

New member
Is there a direct competitor for the MOTU 24 I/O box?

I'm pretty sure this is what I'm looking for: 24 channels @ 96 KHz into a high powered PC type computer. VIA chipsets have always been a piece of shit, so I was thinking about trying it with the new nForce boards.

But.. I went back and read all the past MOTU posts, and am very concerned about this card/drivers/box being poorly implemented on the PC platform.
 
I went back through all the posts here with "MOTU" in the subject line. There is a consistent theme of poor customer service and poor driver support for the PC platform. I understand MOTU has been around a very long time, for the Mac platform.

I own a computer business, and understand fully the lack of support problems that happen with crappy drivers. My fear is spending top dollar for the MOTU 24 IO, then winding up with compatibility issues with chipsets, processors, and drivers in general. I don't mind spending the cash, but I do NOT want any compatibility hassles. I want it to work.
 
RME hammerfall series eg Digiface. You can use it with whatever converters you like eg RME, Apogee, Lucid, Benchmark Media etc. RME has a very good reputation for high quality sound cards and drivers. You'll have to check with them regarding motherboard compatibility (I believe they have a list on their website) though if you going to spend that much on a soundcard setup why not go with the safe option of Intel CPU and Intel motherboard / chipset.
 
I don't have a problem going with either Intel or AMD. I use AMD because they do the job for business machines, and at a significant cost reduction over a similar performing Intel machine. That said, I cannot build machines at wholesale cost for what my clients can buy a new Dell machine. So, I recommend they buy Dells right now. I cannot come close to $699 even at wholesale prices.

I looked quickly at the RME site, but did not see anything with 24 channel input to the computer, as is the MOTU 24-IO device. I'm looking in this thread to see if there is a direct competitor (24 channels vs 24 channels) to the MOTU.
 
The RME hammerfall series has 3 adat inputs ie 24 i/o when connected to appropriate converters. Take a closer look at their website and the digiface.

An intel cpu with an intel motherboard / chipset has the widest compatibility with all soundcards.
 
You can connect three converters that are mic preamps as well. Look at 8 channel mic preamps eg presonus digimax.
 
Personally, I run a Alesis HD24 for recording and the bulk of my A/D/A converters and use the MOTU for transfering in and out of the PC for editing. The HD24 is more reliable than any computer and no latentcy issues. YMMV.
 
I like the idea of using a standard IDE drive in the HD24.

Can you give me more of a rough idea how the HD24 is used in a live recording environment? I'm new to recording, so pardon the dumb questions, and please spell it out for newbies.
 
Well, the HD24 only has +4 balanced inputs and outputs so it relies on external mic preamps to get into it. In a live situation you could get signal from a front of house mixer assumming it would have direct outs from its channels and busses available to give you or you can split the mics and have your own preamps or a mixer to make feeds into it.
 
I do all my recording live, then mix at home. I tap into either the direct outs or the inserts of the house console. I've been using 2 ADATs but recently got a steal of a deal on a Mackie MDR 24/96 and will begin recording with it in the next couple of weeks (I needed more tracks).

The advantage, as Track Rat pointed out, is that a standalone recorder is optimized just for recording, whereas a PC has to do a billion things. Once your tracks are captured, you can use the PC to mix and manipulate to your heart's content with the knowledge that you have a backup of the original in case your computer crashes or whatever.

I looked at the MOTU 24 i/o myself, but was just too leary of the potential for the PC to freeze up. All my research shows that just about any of the 24 track standalone hard disk recorders are very stable in the tracking of large numbers of tracks. The primary differences are in the compatibility with different hard drives and means of transferring files to a computer. The Alesis HD24 is probably the most compatible with any available IDE drive, and with the Fireport I hear it is seamless to transfer files to a PC. I would have gone this route personally if I hadn't stumbled on this Mackie for $900 and just couldn't justify that extra $1000 to get what the Alesis had to offer.

Darryl.....
 
A house mixer never enters into my equation.

I want to confine this specifically to self-contained, live performance recording. No PA support, no mixers, no FOH hardware. I will do the mic'ing and the recording of the raw tracks.

The MOTU offers me 24 mic/line channels, mixing on the card DSP chip for near-zero latency. At the first take, it seems like a high quality solution for much less than the Alesis + Mixer concept.

I'm in the computer business, so go-fast hardware is not an expense to me for this project.

[ edit ]

A crash during a live performance recording is definitely worth considering. I can see where the dedicated HD24 would be much less prone to crashing. Too bad this stuff doesn't run under Linux.
 
bgavin said:
A house mixer never enters into my equation.

I want to confine this specifically to self-contained, live performance recording. No PA support, no mixers, no FOH hardware. I will do the mic'ing and the recording of the raw tracks.

The MOTU offers me 24 mic/line channels, mixing on the card DSP chip for near-zero latency. At the first take, it seems like a high quality solution for much less than the Alesis + Mixer concept.



you cannot plug a mic directly into this unit. you will still need a mixer with direct outs, or a bunch of preamps with analog 1/4" outs. the better option for you would be perhaps an hd24 with (3) digimax pre's. then you can hook the hd24 up to your pc via ethernet to transfer tracks. you would not even need to buy the motu.
 
Yep, you are correct. The MOTU accepts -10 or +4 levels, not MIC levels. The Digi stuff is too pricey for my amateur needs.
 
bgavin
I don't know of a 24 i/o that would compete with the 24i/o from MOTU, however if you are leary of the drivers and chipset issues you should ask at the MOTU boards: unicornation.com and a couple at yahoo. I run a MAC so can't comment on the windows side of things.

Hope that helps.

T
 
I found out above that the MOTU is not a MIC level input device. (doh!) This means I need mixers, etc to handle the mics. Right now, I'm using Rane equipment for mics, but I do not have 24 channels' worth.

I'm not yet clear on the concepts of "direct outs", "groups" and "busses" as applied to mixer consoles. How do these individual mics remain unique for individual track recording?

Somehow or other, I want to get 24 channels of mic input into the recording device as each on a separate track. That way I can mix the various drum tracks (kick, snare, hat, etc), and balance them with the other instrument tracks.

Am I missing something, or is this the right method?
 
The basic concept is that mics or instruments need to go through a mic preamp to get to the levels required by any kind of recording gear. A mixer is the logical solution for lots of inputs. Most medium range mixers (and higher end also) have either direct outputs or inserts for each available mic input (some mixers only have direct outputs for a few channels).

The direct outputs are derived from the mic input, through the internal preamp, through the mixer's eq section, and through the channel fader for each applicable channel. The direct out will usually be a balanced (+4) signal output which represents the signal coming from that channel onto the mixer master bus, and this can be used to record the individual feeds. The only issue with this is that you need to leave the faders alone during recording or your signal will be affected by the fader movement (unless you want that, I guess).

Another option is to use the channel inserts to do the same thing. You have to be careful to only plug your cables into the first click on the insert connection, though (or build special cables which is another topic altogether). These signals are usually unbalanced (-10) but are not affected by the faders, only the mixer preamp section.

For what it sounds like you want to do, the "groups" and "busses" are not an issue you need to worry about for the recording aspect (unless you need to manage more than 24 tracks, that is). The groups and busses are used for mixing, however, and there are multiple ways to use these in that process and I won't belabor the point here.

I hope this helps out. I started down this same path a couple of years ago when we started trying to figure out how to record our worship services at our church, and I'm now finally beginning to be happy with the results of what I'm able to capture.

Darryl.....
 
DDev said:
The only issue with this is that you need to leave the faders alone during recording or your signal will be affected by the fader movement (unless you want that, I guess).


Darryl.....




most larger formatt recording mixers (ie mackie 8 buss, etc) have a second row of faders (or knobs) that are used for monitoring so that you dont have to mess with the recording levels.
 
just got one of these, where do I get the drivers from, looked on the motu website and it doesn't seem to have them anymore????
 
Back
Top