Thread: MOTU conversion/audio quality vs APOGEE & RME

At certain point I've found conversion to be far less important then a lot of engineers seem to dress it up to being. I've used M-audio, alesis low end and high end convertors, m-audio, PreSonus, motu, echo, RME, apogee, API and more. The line that conversion doesn't matter to me is at the RME line. M-audio, presonus, alesis masterlink, echo, motu are all under that line. Alesis adat hd's are fine, RME, Apogee and the like are fantastic. I'm not saying that the analog part of a BURL isn't all this and then some but my previous statement is were I draw the line. In the lower end I like presonus stuff and I could be fine with motu. The cheaper the conversion the better you need to be at tracking and the better front end you'll need to have. So overall the cheapest is RME and a good clean pre. I tend to not like clean pre's as much with presonus and motu convertors so I end up using API or something else. On the other hand an Audient 8 channel pre into an RME will get you a pretty solid chain. That will be 3k for 8 channel of pre's and conversion which is pretty unbeatable.

I am quite happy using my ensemble and RME convertors.

I'm another one that really doesn't give much of a lick regarding converters. It's your microphone selection and the front end preamp that really gives you your sound, flavor & color. I'm fine with lowerend converters and higherend preamps. I utilize Edirol/Roland-UA1EX, M-Audio-Transit, ALESIS HD 24XR, MOTU 2408mkII and am perfectly happy with with those for conversion purposes.

Sloppy engineer
Mx. Remy Ann David

Totally disagree. Many of you are fooling yourselves if you believe this. This is as ridiculous as believing 1/4 tape sounds as good as 1 in. If you don't have excellent converters, you aren't doing anyone justice. Converters are top on my list and I hope they only improve.

I'll agree there are three basic groups. Low end is low end, mid level is mid level and high end is absolutely more true and more open than all the rest. Are we really trying to find out what something sounds like going through converters that are resticting and have a sound to them. Until you use high end, how can you even make this assumption? Better yet, until you use Lavry, you cannot know why I love Lavry converters.

Everything makes a difference and everything we record goes through our converters. The question is, there is a point where it becomes that last 2% and is it worth it to you. If I'm spending 50 grand and comps, pres, mic etc, absolutley. I want them to sound like they were designed to sound like. I want pristine space to mix in and I want a good start from the get go.

I definitely hear a difference. Low end converters are more metallic and less open. The bass is more flabby, the mids are more honky and the highend is more metallic and zzz. Its harder to mix and its hard to know if thats a mic or what.
If you put all the finest gear through a low end converter, do you really think you would be able to make a true assessment of any (mic, preamp, comp, eq)?
So much is being judged through modest converters. We buy them and spend way more trying to correct good after bad.

Nothing wrong with our choices from a financial perspective but the truth is, there is definitely a difference.

I guess I was speaking from the standpoint of having worked in analog tape? 30 IPS always sounded better than 15 IPS at 15 IPS was more financially practical and/or necessary due to reel size limitations. I actually loved Scotch 250 but had to use 226 on Scully's due to the depth of erasure issue. The quality of the sound still came through. But I guess I'm comparing apples to oranges? Maybe it's because I haven't eaten yet today? I mean this evening. This morning? Yesterday. My blood sugar must be low?

Hey! How about a nice Hawaiian Punch? Shure!
Mx. Remy Ann David

Okay, this is as ridiculous as saying 15 IPS sounds as good as 30 IPS but I would also compare sample rate to IPS. Either way I look at it, converters are an extremely important part of sound, especially pristine sound and especially when we are discussing and trusting opinions on flavours and transparency of gear.

Not pointing fingers here, just making a general statement that I couldn't have known this until I had access to the gear I'm using now. Its why I'm so apposed to buying into Pro Tools Hardware. It has a sound. I don't want a sound, I want an open transparency.

Originally Posted by bigtree

Not pointing fingers here, just making a general statement that I couldn't have known this until I had access to the gear I'm using now. Its why I'm so apposed to buying into Pro Tools Hardware. It has a sound. I don't want a sound, I want an open transparency.

If I was going after transparency I would have the same/similar view that you have. For me music has never been about "hi-fi" or being true. It is about grit and everything being an instrument. If I can't hear my eq's color or pre amp's color I am not happy. With convertors I am mostly looking for something that won't get in the way.

You are missing the point, I'm going for real grit too but I don't want it to be part of my converters. I don't want my converters to paint everything pink. What I want with converters is a big open highway that allow my grit to be grit without pink in it.

We're confusing transparency with clinical, boring and dynamic headroom.

I guarantee an API 550b will sound better in a mix that went through Lavry converters or comparably equivalent than it will through a mid level brand, hands down. I guarantee if we were to do the exact mix and only switching converters, the mix that used higher end, "transparent" converters would sound more open with better lows, mids and highs and have a more forward sound ( grit, or classical) . That's what I'm talking about.