Ha. I bought the MOTU 2408 many years ago. A versatile box for sure, but noticeably bad sound quality. I would never buy anything analog from them again.
Funny -- a few years after that purchase, I read a review (in Electronic Musician IIRC) of the successor model, and the reviewer barely even mentioned the audio performance, sticking mostly to describing all its wonderful patching & routing abilities. His audio review consisted of something like: “I recorded some synth tracks, and they sounded fine.” Nice. Michael p.s., Canada’s sesquicentennial (150th birthday) is approaching, and I’ve written five articles about the Canadian technology scene (& tech history) that will appear one-per-day this week. The first is: http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/benchtalk/4458540/Happy-150th-Canada--The-Engineers To see the rest as they appear, hang out at: http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/4420255/BenchTalk There is arguably some surround-sound content in the series ;-) A Sound on Sound review of the larger box says: "MOTU don't publish any specifications for the 8Pre's analogue circuitry, such as frequency response or signal-to-noise ratio. While it might be nice to know these things, it could be argued that exact figures are almost meaningless to the typical user the 8Pre is aimed at. In any case, modern digital electronics design almost always ensures that signal-to-noise ratio and bandwidth are no longer the key concerns for the performance of an audio interface." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20170626/41828530/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
