digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

The following is a message I sent to MOTU preceded by their response. I forwarded this to Digidesign to get their side of the story, but have not yet heard back.

Perhaps somebody from Digi would like to respond to this letter from MOTU. I would like to hear why I would want Digi 001 over the MOTU 1224.


Ethan,
Thank you for your interest.
I can only do part of Digi's job for them ;-) My info on the Digi 001
comes from their web site.
The 001 is a combination of software and hardware. Digi wants you to use
all-Digi products, so there is no support for any third-party software
with the 001 hardware. We have tested Digital Performer with a beta
version of the 001. The audio inputs and outputs worked with our direct
I/O drivers. This functionality could be changed by Digidesign at any
time.

The MIDI sequencer in ProTools 5 looks a lot like Performer version 3
(circa 1990). One difference between ProTools 5LE and Digital Performer
is that PT 5LE does not send or receive sync.

According to the Digi site, the resolution of the 001 converters is 24
bit. They claim a dynamic range of 98 db. We get 98 db of dynamic range
from the 20 bit converters on our 2408. In other words, we get the same
spec at 20 bits that Digi gets at 24 bit. The 24 bit converters on our
1224 interface are rated at 116 db dynamic range.
Our hardware system includes a range of four different audio interfaces
which cover ADAT Lightpipe, Tascam TDIF, S/PDIF, Toslink, AES/EBU, 20 bit
and 24 bit A/D-D/A converters. All our audio interfaces have word clock
input and output. Sample accurate ADAT sync is built into our PCI card.
The maximum number of 24 bit I/O on the MOTU system is 72 channels. In
order to upgrade the MOTU system, you buy additional rack interfaces.
The most expensive interface we make is the 24i which has 24 channels of
balanced, +4 db, 24 inputs. The cost for the 24i rack unit is $1149.00.

The Digi 001 can not be expanded unless you upgrade to ProTools TDM
systems. I expect you'll be checking out the cost on that!

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

David Roberts - MOTU
[email protected]

>Digidesign told me I should ask you rather than them how compatible the
>new Digi 001 dig audio i/o is with Dig Performer 2.5.
>
>Please also tell me how you feel the Digi 001 compares to your
>comparable system, the 1224. Please compare with as many specific stats
>as possible.
>
>Much obliged!
>
>-Ethan

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

I would really like to know the LATENCY of Motu compared to Digi. I´ve heard that Digi wins...

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

I've heard from several users on this forum
that the latency sucks big time on the Motu
systems. To me, there is too much money on
the line for PT not to kick Motu's ass down
the line. Yes, there are not as many features
on PTLE and inputs/outputs/throughputs on
the 001. But, the system is obviously meant
for poeple like me who want an all inclusive
gateway into recording on the computer. As time goes by, upgrades add-ons (smpte-ruler,
96k support, midi-features)will be added and
PT will slaughter the MOTU system. By the
way, some of you complain about the tech
support. I've heard nothing but bad news
about the tech support at MOTU, unless you want to give them a chance to bash the 001.
They don't even have a forum to bash their
products! What does that tell you??

The 001 is NOT perfect, but i'd rather
by a baby pro-tools that i can take into
a 'real studio' and have it run on a
TDM system, than throw my money at MOTU.
And you know what, there are many, many
more that feel the same way.

And if you don't like it, i'm sure the
002 is not too far off in the distance.

haze

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

First off MOTU service via email is extremely good. I have emailed them over 30 times and have always recieved a response to my question. I currently own Digital Performer 2.5 which contains Audiodesk which is what comes with the 2408. I seen the 001 video and sorry to say but Audiodesk has a MUCH better interface and 10 times the amount of plugins that are also real time. The latency on the MOTU has just never bothered me.However, I am not that crazy about the reverb.

PT LE looks way out dated. Come on Digi how hard would it have been to make it look better? I think Digi is just getting into this type of market cause they know in a year or so computers will be able to handle the processing like their TDM stuff.Bet their ****ing in their pants. I am patiently waiting for a better 001. Maybe thee 002. We'll have to wait and see.

Take care.

Scott

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

Here is Digi's response to an email with that original letter included:


The fact remains that MOTU's gear will never work with ProTools software
which is industry standard and state of the art in terms of digital
audio
recording and editing features. Just like their 1224 the Digi001
features ADAT Lightpipe, S/PDIF and high quality 24 bit A/D-D/A
converters. Head to your local Digi authoirzed retailer and check out
how easy the 001 is to use and how great it sounds and we think the
choice will be easy.

I didn't find this response to be quite as technical as I was hoping. I did think MOTU's response was more indepth and specific. In fact, I think I got better responses on this forum from Digidesign fans than from the techs at the company.

Latency is a good issue to discuss. Would somebody like to enlighten me as to how the models compare? Does anyone know? How well do softwares compensate?

And doesn't MOTU make some good points in their original letter? Don't you guys think the inability to upgrade is a little offensive? Someone here mentioned their excitement about the "002." Digidesign seems to have it set up that you would have to go out and buy an entirely new system if a 002 came out. There are no ways to attach new units or upgrades to the 001. And isn't the 98db of dyn range a little low compared with many of the other models out there? Most of them are at or around 120db, which to me, the somewhat uneducated consumer, seems a lot higher than 98.

Also, I wonder if there is any other way to open non protools sessions in protools. I guess plug-ins really couldn't translate, but is there NO other way to get your tracks onto a protools system? Is protools LE the only program that has that ability?

And even if I got the DIGI 001, I probably wouldn't always use the protool LE, since my studio will still be largely midi based and my Dig Performer has VERY strong midi capabilities, so I wonder how well the 001 is going to function out of its software environment. Apparently DIGI is not supplying any software drivers for its unit.

Any comments or answers to my questions are much appreciated.

[This message has been edited by ewhite (edited 11-17-99).]

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

Motu no matter how you spin it the bottom line comes down to this.

1. LATENCY (no truly professional studio could make a dime if they advertised that they have a 2408).

2. Look in any add for a recording studio. No one says "Hey come record here, I have performer and a 2408".

3. Pro Tools software/hardware is in the serious studios and they are not ashamed to let you know it.

4. The 001 is a quality interface, not the "best" interface but it's quality for a good price. The 2408's are okay and they offer quite a few added features (adat sync ect..) but the 2408 is not a high end interface either.
To me it comes down to do you wanna start learning pro tools software now or later.
If you stay serious with your music you'll end up in front of a pro tools system sooner or later in somebodys studio.

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

You honestly think studios are going to advertise that they have 001's? (actually will there be any "studios" with 001's?)

You don't see studios advertising 2408's but you see plenty saying that they're running Performer, Logic, Cubase, Vision, etc. Buying gear based on how many ad's you've seen it in is about the worst reason I've ever seen.

I have seen a few interviews with guys doing film scoring who are using 2408's. So you do have "professionals" "making a dime."

What exactly are the latency numbers for the 2408 anyway - the 001 latency isn't terrible, but it's not great either. And you say that the 001 is a "quality" interface, but the 2408 is merely "ok". Have you compared the two? And motu does have the 1224 available.

My point isn't to plug the 2408, merely to point out that Pro Tools isn't the only game in town.


Mike

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

The fact is, any latency over 10ms is pretty much unusable if you have to go through it. I'm considering getting the 001, because I'm wedded to the Pro Tools UI and I'm not so into MIDI and I intend to use it primarily as an audio tracking tool and mix on a real PT system or better yet through an SSL with plenty of outboard.

I'm considering getting the Roland SRV-3030D as both an outboard reverb and a better set of 24 bit converters (they say unweighted DR >110 db). The outboard reverbs are going to have, at a minimum, a 10-20ms predelay placed on all of them, whether I want it there or not, because of this latency problem. I owned a 2408 a year ago, for a couple days, and returned it because of this.

Host-based systems just have too much latency here at the end of the 90's...in two or three years, it might be better, or perhaps some smart programmer will demonstrate there is a fix to the problem, which is automatic latency compensation.

In the meantime, once host-based, stay host-based, don't go in outboard loops, and monitor by y-ing the signal before A/D conversion, and the latency is irrelevant. The fact the 001 has eight analog outs rather than just two really only helps if you're taking _everything_ out of the computer at once, but you'll already be submixing plenty before you can squeeze through those 8 outs (or 18 if you have external D/As...more than two of those is a waste of money as far as I'm concerned, unless you're mixing on SSL or something).

MOTU's hardware is pretty neat, there you're using their high-end system at low-end prices; with digi they feel they're being generous giving us the features and quality of the 001 so cheap compared to their flagship. Digi can afford to do this only because of its vast superiority in user interface. MOTU suffers all the problems of the German DAW makers and worse since they override the system WDEFs. I can't even figure out what button they think actually closes a window. They went out of their way to confuse their users in a fit of flashy egomania.

Really we won't know the right choice here until we can sit down with both systems and do a practical A/B. I would say MOTU's response above is a little more candid than digi's. If you do a lot of MIDI work, then go MOTU, and take a look at Logic as an alternative UI. If you do mainly audio, then 001 with external converters is a more usable system IMO. Don't rush into this decision. Once wedded to a way of working, you will be pretty much stuck there.

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

carlone

First off.

Who was talking about doing this to make money?
If that is what your doing I wouldn't advertise a true "Pro Tools" setup with a $1000 unit like the 001, you'll look like a true fool.
As far as learning Pro Tools, after working on the 2408 and seeing the Digi 001 video I could learn it in a day or two. Once you work with one they all function basically the same.
Don't let the name make you buy it. Look at all options for the $.

Re: digi 001 vs. MOTU 1224
 

peppertree or anyone.

I'm new to the DAW thing. I was trying to follow your last response and got lost like a newbie. Tell me if this will work or will I most likely run into latency problems.

I want to track into the 001 say all 24 tracks. Then, maybe only using one or two plugins, submix those 24 tracks down to 8 or 16 outputs. I want to run the 8 or 16 outputs into my analog console to further mix and add some midi tracks to the mix. Then, I want to loop that back into the 001 to bounce to disk.

Is that too much to ask from a host based system? Will one of the Pro Tools systems do this? I know the 001 is new so a gut feeling would be helpful too.

Thanks