MOTU 2408 mk3 -vs- original 2408

[Mark Carleton]

I record acoustic guitar music on a PC and am considering upgrading my
original MOTU 2408 (20-bit) system to the newer 2408 mk3 (24-bit)
system. Are the A/D converters significantly better with the 2408
mk3? Will I be able to hear a difference? Are there better systems
out there for the money?

Right now, most of what I record will end up on CDs (44.1 khz /
16-bit). What are the benefits of recording and editing at 96 khz /
24-bit when the end result will be on a CD?

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I record acoustic guitar music on a PC and am considering upgrading my
> original MOTU 2408 (20-bit) system to the newer 2408 mk3 (24-bit)
> system. Are the A/D converters significantly better with the 2408
> mk3?

Almost certainly. They can't be using the same chip for all of these
years and converter chips get better about twice a year.

> Will I be able to hear a difference?

Depends on what you're recording, what you're recording with, what
you're listening on, and what you care about (and listen for). In
general, I'd suspect not. If you have some money burning a hole in
your wallet, look for other places to spend it. The MOTU stuff isn't
the greatest, but it's not dreadful.

> Are there better systems
> out there for the money?

Always.

> Right now, most of what I record will end up on CDs (44.1 khz /
> 16-bit). What are the benefits of recording and editing at 96 khz /
> 24-bit when the end result will be on a CD?

Better output, if you have better input.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I record acoustic guitar music on a PC and am considering upgrading my
> original MOTU 2408 (20-bit) system to the newer 2408 mk3 (24-bit)
> system. Are the A/D converters significantly better with the 2408
> mk3?

Almost certainly. They can't be using the same chip for all of these
years and converter chips get better about twice a year.

> Will I be able to hear a difference?

Depends on what you're recording, what you're recording with, what
you're listening on, and what you care about (and listen for). In
general, I'd suspect not. If you have some money burning a hole in
your wallet, look for other places to spend it. The MOTU stuff isn't
the greatest, but it's not dreadful.

> Are there better systems
> out there for the money?

Always.

> Right now, most of what I record will end up on CDs (44.1 khz /
> 16-bit). What are the benefits of recording and editing at 96 khz /
> 24-bit when the end result will be on a CD?

Better output, if you have better input.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mark Carleton]

(Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:<znr1100624149k@trad>...
> In article > writes:
>
> > I record acoustic guitar music on a PC and am considering upgrading my
> > original MOTU 2408 (20-bit) system to the newer 2408 mk3 (24-bit)
> > system. Are the A/D converters significantly better with the 2408
> > mk3?
>
> Almost certainly. They can't be using the same chip for all of these
> years and converter chips get better about twice a year.
>
> > Will I be able to hear a difference?
>
> Depends on what you're recording, what you're recording with, what
> you're listening on, and what you care about (and listen for). In
> general, I'd suspect not. If you have some money burning a hole in
> your wallet, look for other places to spend it. The MOTU stuff isn't
> the greatest, but it's not dreadful.
>
> > Are there better systems
> > out there for the money?
>
> Always.
>
> > Right now, most of what I record will end up on CDs (44.1 khz /
> > 16-bit). What are the benefits of recording and editing at 96 khz /
> > 24-bit when the end result will be on a CD?
>
> Better output, if you have better input.

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
how much the A/D converters affect this.

[Mark Carleton]

(Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:<znr1100624149k@trad>...
> In article > writes:
>
> > I record acoustic guitar music on a PC and am considering upgrading my
> > original MOTU 2408 (20-bit) system to the newer 2408 mk3 (24-bit)
> > system. Are the A/D converters significantly better with the 2408
> > mk3?
>
> Almost certainly. They can't be using the same chip for all of these
> years and converter chips get better about twice a year.
>
> > Will I be able to hear a difference?
>
> Depends on what you're recording, what you're recording with, what
> you're listening on, and what you care about (and listen for). In
> general, I'd suspect not. If you have some money burning a hole in
> your wallet, look for other places to spend it. The MOTU stuff isn't
> the greatest, but it's not dreadful.
>
> > Are there better systems
> > out there for the money?
>
> Always.
>
> > Right now, most of what I record will end up on CDs (44.1 khz /
> > 16-bit). What are the benefits of recording and editing at 96 khz /
> > 24-bit when the end result will be on a CD?
>
> Better output, if you have better input.

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
how much the A/D converters affect this.

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
> Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
> response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
> how much the A/D converters affect this.

I suspect that if you compared recordings made with each side-by-side
you'd notice a difference. I also suspect that unless there's
something you DON'T like about what you have now, or unless you're
striving for the best you can afford at any given time, you won't
really care about the difference.

You might get more bang for your buck by trying different mic preamps.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
> Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
> response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
> how much the A/D converters affect this.

I suspect that if you compared recordings made with each side-by-side
you'd notice a difference. I also suspect that unless there's
something you DON'T like about what you have now, or unless you're
striving for the best you can afford at any given time, you won't
really care about the difference.

You might get more bang for your buck by trying different mic preamps.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Geoff Wood]

"Mark Carleton" > wrote in message >
> Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
> Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
> response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
> how much the A/D converters affect this.

The Mk2 is 24 bit too, but 'only' 44k1/48K sampling rate. I had a M1 and
upped to a Mark 2. I less less necessity to up to the Mk3's 96K, though you
pays yer money .....

With the '24' bits to play with, record levels are less critical to maintain
good sound.

Everything else in you recording chain is likely to make more difference
than the converters at this price point. Like moving yyoir mic a few inches
!

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"Mark Carleton" > wrote in message >
> Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
> Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
> response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
> how much the A/D converters affect this.

The Mk2 is 24 bit too, but 'only' 44k1/48K sampling rate. I had a M1 and
upped to a Mark 2. I less less necessity to up to the Mk3's 96K, though you
pays yer money .....

With the '24' bits to play with, record levels are less critical to maintain
good sound.

Everything else in you recording chain is likely to make more difference
than the converters at this price point. Like moving yyoir mic a few inches
!

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"Geoff Wood" -nospam> wrote in message
...
>
> "Mark Carleton" > wrote in message >
>> Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
>> Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
>> response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
>> how much the A/D converters affect this.
>
> The Mk2 is 24 bit too, but 'only' 44k1/48K sampling rate. I had a M1 and
> upped to a Mark 2. I less less necessity to up to the Mk3's 96K, though
> you pays yer money .....
>
> With the '24' bits to play with, record levels are less critical to
> maintain good sound.
>
> Everything else in you recording chain is likely to make more difference
> than the converters at this price point. Like moving yyoir mic a few
> inches !


Jeeze - I really shouldn't post first thing in the morning with no glasses.
Mind you, some probably think I shouldn't post full-stop....


geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"Geoff Wood" -nospam> wrote in message
...
>
> "Mark Carleton" > wrote in message >
>> Thanks for your response. I record my acoustic guitar with a pair of
>> Neumann KM-184s through a Mackie 1604-VLZ Pro. I like good bass
>> response, warmth, and round (not thin) treble response. I'm curious
>> how much the A/D converters affect this.
>
> The Mk2 is 24 bit too, but 'only' 44k1/48K sampling rate. I had a M1 and
> upped to a Mark 2. I less less necessity to up to the Mk3's 96K, though
> you pays yer money .....
>
> With the '24' bits to play with, record levels are less critical to
> maintain good sound.
>
> Everything else in you recording chain is likely to make more difference
> than the converters at this price point. Like moving yyoir mic a few
> inches !


Jeeze - I really shouldn't post first thing in the morning with no glasses.
Mind you, some probably think I shouldn't post full-stop....


geoff

[chetatkinsdiet]

I agree with Rivers...imagine that...I'd spend the grand or so that
you'd pay for the new MOTU and grab a really nice two channel pre. If
you're really just recording acoustic gtr primarily, how bout a nice,
clean, big sounding pre.....grace, great river or something like that.
You will notice a HUGE diff between that and what you've got now on
those mackie pres.
Just a question also....i guess it depends on your whole recording
chain but if you're primarily just recording a couple of tracks at
once, why the 2408? I'd think you could get a much nicer two channel
interface for similar money.
later,
m

[chetatkinsdiet]

I agree with Rivers...imagine that...I'd spend the grand or so that
you'd pay for the new MOTU and grab a really nice two channel pre. If
you're really just recording acoustic gtr primarily, how bout a nice,
clean, big sounding pre.....grace, great river or something like that.
You will notice a HUGE diff between that and what you've got now on
those mackie pres.
Just a question also....i guess it depends on your whole recording
chain but if you're primarily just recording a couple of tracks at
once, why the 2408? I'd think you could get a much nicer two channel
interface for similar money.
later,
m

[Mark Carleton]

(chetatkinsdiet) wrote in message >...
> I agree with Rivers...imagine that...I'd spend the grand or so that
> you'd pay for the new MOTU and grab a really nice two channel pre. If
> you're really just recording acoustic gtr primarily, how bout a nice,
> clean, big sounding pre.....grace, great river or something like that.
> You will notice a HUGE diff between that and what you've got now on
> those mackie pres.
> Just a question also....i guess it depends on your whole recording
> chain but if you're primarily just recording a couple of tracks at
> once, why the 2408? I'd think you could get a much nicer two channel
> interface for similar money.
> later,
> m

Typically I record no more than 3 tracks at a time. One of the things
I like about the 2408 is that it has SPDIF and ADAT lightpipe
connectors. I have a POD-XT pro that I hook up to the 2408 through
SPDIF. I like to use the reamping feature of the POD-XT pro where you
record a dry track digitally along with processed analog tracks.
Occasionally, I will hook up my old ADAT via lightpiple to transfer
songs to my computer - although this is becoming more and more rare.

I did get a used 2408 mk3 on ebay. I've recorded a few songs at 96
khz / 24 bit which I converted to 44.8 khz / 16 bit. I do notice a
difference in the sound quality. I like the extended dynamic range
when recording acoustic guitar with 24 bits.

I do think a mic pre will be my next purchase. I don't have a lot of
knowledge on these things, so I need to do some research and get info
from others. I have a CD that samples a variety of mic preamps using
acoustic guitar and vocal recordings. I need to give it a listen
again and see which ones I like best.

Regards,

Mark