MOTU 828 vs. DIGI 001 Options

I am looking to get a new system for audio recording. I am leaining towards the Motu 828, but I know the DIGI 001 is a hot seller. Will I sacrifice quaility by going with the Motu 828. Are the Preamps as good? And sound quality?

Mainly, we want to use it to create our first CD. So we'll be recording vocals, instruments etc. Will one lend itself to this application better than the other? What about quality? What about OS X support?

What about for a newbie to learn, is the documenation on the MOTU 828 good enough that anyone could learn it easily, even a newbie, or do I need a book? Do they have books?

I will also use it to sweeten some video work from Final Cut Pro. I here the Motu Digital Performer is great for this, especially since I could mix Surround sound with it. Any thoughts here.

I basically like the MOTU better, but don't want to get something that will lessen the quality of the CD.

[bitterfly]

Hi.
I am also considering these two systems and was basically leaning towards MOTU as well. That's why i was really surprised when I went to the  2 major music stores in Manhattan: Sam Ash and Manny's and asked the guys at the recording section what they would recommend. Both said that in their opinion the choice was obvious - Digi 001. People in both stores didn't even have a trace of a doubt.
So now this dilemma becomes even more difficult....

I have done a lot more research. From what I have gathered, most people who use ProTools and Like it swear by ProTools, and for this reason recommend the Digi001. They say, you can use it in any studio around, cause most have ProTools.

However, most of them to whome I explain my needs then agree teh Motu 828 and Digital Performer would be best. I do video and DVD work, so for mixing the Digital Performer is better for me. It allows SMPT time code, as well as 5.1 surround mixing. And I have yet to meet a person who didn't like the Digital Performer software. As well, for what sound recording we do, the portablility of the 828 is a much better solution for us.

As far as from those people who don't use ProTools, or aren't recomending one cause they like Protools. Most of these people have said either one, both will work well, and give you the same sound quality. And a lot of people who have used both have even gone as far to say that the Motu is a much better package. With better PreAmps, and they would go with that package. No one had anything bad to say about the Motu.

In all, most people I have talked to that have used it are very upbeat. Also, it deals better with latency, due to it's new technology. So I am pretty much sold on it.

And some people have bought the Digi001, and used the Digital Performer software with it. Then they can use ProTools or Digital Performer. This seems to be the biggest thing. People who recommend the Digi, do so because you can use protools. Protools only works with Protools Hardware, however, other software will work with Protools hardware. So, that's the gotcha, if you have to have Protools, then you need the 001, if you are OK with Digital Performer or with out Protools, then the Motu 828 sounds to be an equal if not superior product that will work great.

I hope I didn't ramble too much and that this helps,

Greg

[bitterfly]

Hi.
Thanks a lot for your post. I was also doing some more research and the results that i came up with are exactly similar to yours - people like ProTools and recomend DIgi 001, as well as people who like DP use it with Digi 001. The only big limitations that I heard about the ProTools package is that you're limited to 24 tracks. And if you use MOTU hardware you don't have much choice but to use their software.
So i guess i really have to choose now:)
Thanks again and good luck!

I am also looking into this. Heres my posts from another forum.


Does the 828 suck? It seems like alot of people would want to get there hands on it! I need some honest reviews here.


I am very new to the audio recording and editing world but Im jumping into it with both feet and if Im going to do it I wanna do it right. The specs on the Powerbook G4 Im getting are 500mhz, 256 ram, 20 gig HD and DVD drive and a Motu 828 for the ovious reasons. This is a hard to heavy rock band with some acoustic songs as well. The band consists of 1 vocal, 1 electric guitar, 1 bass guitar, 1 keyboard for some intros and sound fx and stuff which the bass guy plays, and 1 drummer with with a standard setup with 2 bass drums and 3 electronic drums going into a mixing board and then to a Roland vs 840 ( I think, which I would like to maybe integrate into the G4/Motu setup [ it has a spdif and optical outs] ) which they are using right now to record and practice with in a small recording studio they are renting. Will this set up be good enough for making an album that doesnt sound like a demo? I plan on learning the ropes from these guys and maybe turning it into a small business or record label ( who knows ). I want to use a laptop for several reasons. 1 I need portability. I will be traveling from Los Angeles to Las Vegas to do recordings with my friends band. 2 I already have a desktop pc. 3 Take it to record other bands (make money to pay for this monster). 4 For fun like watching movies on it. And so on...... Am I wasting my time and money trying to do this or am I going to make an impact worth while? Man, I have so many more questions I need help on but Im to tired to think of them. I just hope theres someone out there that can help. Should I use adiodesk(which comes with the motu), protools, or vegas audio?



Well I just met a guy at a Carvin guitar shop that uses the Motu 828 and hes gonna let me see it in action this sunday when he records some vocals in his studio. He says its good but I wanna see what he uses, what it sounds like, how he uses it, anything and everything....He says hes recorded 60 tracks at once with the Motu and some light pipe device at 24 bit and 96hz.



I have read on the web somewhere that if you have a firewire external hard drive and the Motu 828 running at the same time it can cause latency and other problems because the two devices are then sharing the same pathway via the firewire. Thats why the Motu uses the firewire. It needs to be able to use all that bandwith when it wants to. The recording of audio has to be seemless and real time or else its gonna sound like junk. The same reason you wouldnt want to be running other programs while recording. Well thats my theory anyway. I am not a profesional. Im a very new newbie. Heck, I havnt even bought my system yet. Im waiting to see how that guys Motu performs this sunday and hoping the price of the Powerbook G4 Titanium goes down below $3,000(well the model I want at least). Nowing my luck the price will drop the day after I buy it.


OTHERS POSTS


if you monitor your inputs through your software, thats where you run into latency (delay from sound to hearing it in your headphones)
i was in a session yesterday for a major label artist(christian label) and when i walked in his setup consisted of:
1 - mac g4 titanium
2 - moto 828
3 - firewire club mac external HD
running logic audio.

they decided to track at the studio we were at for the mic selection.
i was playing acoustic and could hear a slight latency on my guitar but not anything that would mess any one up. i was totally impressed. the producer/engineer had to leave for a bit and just unplugged the firewire and power cables and was gone. came back, plugged the two cables back in and powered up and was ready to go in about 5 mins. amazing! and w/ the external drive, there was never a single dropout or hiccup. again, i was blown away!



Alot of people dont like it because you can only monitor 2 channels on input. Its a flaw in the hardware design which has been confirmed by the tech people at MOTU.





Well I hope this helps someone.

In answer to your questions does the 828 suck. By no means no. I have a friend who uses one. He loves it and said the sound is great. Everyone I have talked to said the sound quality is equal if not better. And that the PreAmps are actually a little better. The 828 also has better monitoring to defeat latency, a nice plus. Also, all the connectors on the 828 are balanced, I don't think this is so with the Digi001.

Those who like the Digi 001 don't like it as much for the hardware, as the software they are married to ProTools. Those who aren't in the need of ProTools love the 828. As I will use it for Video work. The 828 is a much better option for me. It is very high quality, and offers what I need. And the Digital Performer software is no laky. Here's a quote from a Motu Sales rep.

'The 828 interface was on the cover of Recording magazine last month. You
might want to check that out.
Digital Performer was used to score Planet of The Apes, American Pie II, and
the Oscar nominated U-571 movies. It's a standard tool for sound for
picture. DP 3 also imports and exports OMF files for Avid and ProTools
compatibility.

The 828 interface is a Firewire unit. The 001 is PCI based. MOTU also
makes a PCI based audio system. I've enclosed a comparison of the 001 and
our 2408 audio interface. The 828 and 2408 have the same audio
specifications on their analog converters. The 828 also has two channels of
mic preamps.

I look forward to answering all your technical questions.

If I can be of further service, please let me know.

David Roberts - MOTU

MOTU Audio 2408mkII
-------------------
True 24-bit convertors provide an impressive 105dB dynamic range

Analog inputs and outputs use balanced/unbalanced connectors

PCI-324 card is 96kHz ready

Word clock I/O provided for synchronizing your 2408 with other gear in your
studio - master or slave

AudioDesk allows you to edit and spot to timecode

Track count depends host CPU - up to 72 tracks on a Power Macintosh G3

Extensive front panel metering for all analog and digital I/O including
clock

Broad 3rd party plug-in support from Antares, Arboretum, Audio Ease, Kind of
Loud, Metric Halo, Cycling O74, DUY, TC|Works, Waves and others

Sturdy steel rack mount chassis

24-channels of adat optical where you need them - on the rack, where your
adats are

24-channels of Tascam TDIF

Expandable to 72 channels of input and output - choose from a variety of I/O
expansion options to meet your specific requirements

24 inputs and outputs available at the same time using a single 2408

ADAT 9-pin sync on PCI-324 card

Sample accurate transfer with ADAT and sample accurate transfer with Tascam
via Digital Timepiece


Digi 001
--------
98dB typical dynamic range using their O24-bit¹ converters

Outputs on 001 are unbalanced and prone to hum and RF interference

No provisions for 96kHz upgrade

No word clock available

ProTools LE has no support for editing or spotting to timecode.

ProTools LE limits you to 24 tracks

No metering on the I/O box - not even a signal present or overload LED.

Minimal RTAS audio plug-in support

Rack mount ears bolted to desktop box

Only 8-channels of adat optical - with the optical connector on the PCI card

No Tascam TDIF support

Not expandable - no additional I/O options

A maximum of 18 inputs and outputs at the same time

No ADAT 9-pin sync

No sample accurate transfer ability

Also, check out the forums hear at http://www.musicplayer.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi

Most everyone that has tried one here was very pleased with the Motu 828.

That's what I have decided to go with as well.

Greg

[bitterfly]

Upon further research and after talking to more people I think I am going to get Motu 828 too.
Thanks for all your comments.

Now the only thing else I need to know is if the>>>>> POWERBOOK G4 TITANIUM<<<< and the Motu 828 will be able to record and do whatever else I need to do without an ultra fast external firewire hard drive. The specs on the Titanium I want to get are 500 mhz, 256 ram, 20 gig hard drive ( which I plan on making four 5 gig partitions ), and DVD drive.

[dickwolf]

Motu 828 is definitely the way to go. Out of curiousity, why'a Tibook?
Besides the fact their portable and rate high on the aesthetic lust level, why?. For the same money you could get a Quicksilver 733mhz or stripped down 867mhz. I originally was lookin' into to Tibook but when I looked at building a home studio it wasn't the way to go.

If having a good size screen (as the reality on a screen gets lost fast w/ a small monitor), upgradeability and well a computer that'll go farther in the long haul (ecspecially audio wise) aren't your needs then get the Tibook.

It's just something to consider. After the fantasy wore off and i looked at some of the limits of the 'laptop studio', I had to play it safe.