Audio interface shootout reveal: UA vs PreSonus vs Focusrite

This is the reveal video for the blind test shootout between the Focusrite 4i4, PreSonus Quantum, UA Apollo, and PreSonus Studio 68c.
That video can be seen here • Audio Interface Mic Pr...
Download the files from the shootout here www.mediafire.c...

[@jl1848]

Even though people picked favorites while listening blind, I'd be surprised if they could pick those out consistently. I used a match plugin to compare them, and other than the "air" one (which has essentially a tilt EQ on it), they are all pretty much identical, and practically null. Thanks very much for the test.

[@RyanNoyes11]

Thank you so much for doing this. It’s a bit freaky to admit this, but just watching this through KZbin which compresses everything horrendously, and THEN an iPhone through its own internal speakers-I could still hear major differences. My hunch was that C was a PreSonus. Far and above my favorite. Thanks again!

[@longship44]

Thanks for taking the time to do this comparison. Your work here was very helpful.

[@t3reeproduction314]

To be honest all 3 companies will do the job.. its not a night and day difference I know a lot of beat makers and engineers scream you need a universal audio to make great music just like you need protools the industry standard to make a good song.. and Im not knocking those companies they make great products.. this just shows that its more about the creative process.. good idea's..good mixing..good recording practices will make a good song...💪🏾

[@wwlittlejOfficial]

I think the details separating modern interfaces sound quality are sooo minute. In practice they hardly make or break a great track... all all are light years better than any tech used to make the records of the past.

[@CoolCat11]

Thanks so much. I have been researching, watching videos... Aaaarrrggghhh. Your tests were the most useful I've seen.

[@darb.musica]

Thank you for this comparison. I listened with a pair of Yamaha HS80m speakers, and Sony 7506 headphones. The difference that I hear between the interfaces is very subtle. All five sounded good to me

[@gutenbird]

Had picked the E as the UA but also thought D was in the ballpark. It just was more robust on every recording. This was pretty helpful as I thought the first 2 were a bit thin.

[@TheMathieujm]

Very well done. And very explicit whith the 96k wav files. There are also some volume adjustments to be done with the springs samples. Thanks for this useful and complete shootout.

[@MartinLang1625]

This is great! I have been racking my brain on which company to go with. Even though I realize that models also differ in sound, this is great to see the similarities also. Thanks.

[@kingjmusic4413]

A and E sound very similar and those 2 are my favs

[@epochphilosophy]

Okay but who is doing the singing?

[@axemanfishing2703]

Man o man, your a great guy to do this for us. Thank you! I listened on really crappy behringer ms16's on my main desktop computer, and "A" sounded nice on my crap system. Noticed no difference on any of the others on my pc set up. NOW, I need to do this again, using my recording PC and my near field monitors to really hear what is going on. I often worry about the new generation listening to stuff on phones and garbage systems, so, makes me wonder if I should invest more in quality pres and converters, but then think, why? I only know a handfull of folks like myself who still have audiophile high end amps and speakers to listen to music anymore. Seems to be a dying breed and this is sad, because the experience of listening to high end mixes by your favorite bands, is an experience that is exceptional in itself if you've never heard it. Folks are really missing out in my opinion.

[@dat_chip]

Oh wow, I was pretty wrong. Great test, and a good challenge too!

[@seventhplace]

It looks like the tracks were duplicated five times from one original file. If that’s the case, that means you would have recorded the original on one of the interfaces. That also means that each track is hearing the same preamp on top of the playback converters of each unit. That would defeat the purpose of this test. It would be better to record a new take for each track using preamps of each unit without an original file

[@drplastic007]

Thank you for the reveal video!

[@musick777]

Well done shootout. I figured out A and had a good idea what C was. I think I liked the Apollo the least!

[@seventhplace]

It looks like the tracks were duplicated five times. If that’s the case, that means you would have recorded the original on one of the interfaces. That also means that each track is hearing the same preamp on top of the playback converters of each unit. That would defeat the purpose of this test. It would be better to record a new take for each track using preamps of each unit without an original file

[@dub-a-youproductions897]

If your going to use the higher end presonus interfaces why are you not using Focusrite's Clarett range in the shootout?

[@mvoproject]

Could you make the battle Zoom UAD-2 vs Motu M4 vs PreSonus Studio 68c ?

[@damonsummers]

Great video, helped me immensely, thanks for posting

[@levijessegonzalez3629]

How are the CONVERTERS on the Quantum? I'm interested in Playback quality for listening to music. How does the quantum stack up against the others?

[@TheAudioCzar]

Quantum d/a converters sound fine to. Things that beat it to me are more expensive. Dangerous, Antelope, lynx. But I use the Quantum as my main playback d/a, when I mix I switch over to the pure2

[@levijessegonzalez3629]

@@TheAudioCzar interesting. Is there a big difference between the pure2 and the quantum on playback?

[@philm3271]

Thanks for doing this video!!

[@Sandytuck]

Hi,, That was a great comparison man Just shows the most expensive are not necessary the best . Good vocals with no effects . Have you done a comparison with the AXe Multimedia supposedly good for guitar and voice. Cheers thanks Les.

[@bpardomusic]

Thank you again! Hugely helpful!

[@lilsavdabest]

C sounded best overall, E sounded best when it got loud and when you could see the waves peaking hard, it seemed to have a certain smoothness when encountering clipping, instead of just accepting that the signal was clipping.

[@GuitarSundayChannel]

Just tested the 68c at home with Win 10, although sound is great, monitor mixing seems an issue. Presonus‘s software control ‚universal control‘ seems to have no mixer... did witness same issue?

[@TheDigitalMedia]

I guess then if hardware fidelity isn't the determining factor it would come down to software. I'm in the market for an interface so I'd love to hear which product has the best software and which has the best-designed UI.

[@dcoverzsessions]

can you make a test between and some more..like audiofuse? maybe apogee ensemble? motu m2? thanks!!

[@levijessegonzalez3629]

Hard to tell with youtube compression, but when you're listening to your master tracks, how do you like the Quantums XMAX Preamps? They get a lot of hate online because they been around for a while and people feel their old or outdated, but do they hold up?

[@TheAudioCzar]

there are ok to me. they will get the job done, but I will always use an outboard preamp when I can. But I will say the XMAX pres aren't muddy and have a decent low mids. I'm actually impressed by the sound for an interface pre. I'm not a fan of interface, I feel I get a better sound with stand alone pres.

[@levijessegonzalez3629]

@@TheAudioCzar thanks for all the information.

[@jasminr.671]

Hello thank you so much for the great interface comparison! Which Apollo were you using the twin duo MK1or Mk2?

[@Trinityshogun]

I liked sample E for the vocals, acoustic guitars and drums.

[@crissbmajor3990]

This is A great Video Ever

[@crissbmajor3990]

Thanks very Eager Am Mr Wyndzy Mixing Engineer

[@jeffreyfburke]

I just ordered the 68c. What do you think about it

[@AirplaiTv]

Thanks so much for your videos. Quick question: How did you configure the M-audio 2626 to work as a preamp with the Quantum? I am using two but I was only able to set up one.

[@TheAudioCzar]

The 2626 has to be configured to work as a preamp in standalone mode. This is done the control panel for the 2626. If you don't have a firewire computer to access the control software I don't know how else to change the settings. With that done you can connected it as adat to the quantum

[@AirplaiTv]

@@TheAudioCzar do you have to use two adat cables (in and out) or can you get away with just one, if all you need is more inputs?

[@TheAudioCzar]

@@AirplaiTv if your doing just inputs you just need one adat cable

[@AirplaiTv]

Can’t seem to get it to lock with one cable. Darn!

[@TheAudioCzar]

@@AirplaiTv I'd try a word clock cable, I have never been able to clock over adat

[@samuelellringmann3424]

nice! I chose c and e as well.. kinda glad i didnt choose the cheap stuff, but at the same time I'm not 100% certain that the slight change in sound quality is actually worth the price difference. Guess one would have to try and see how the sound develops in a mix

[@EgeDai]

one track might not do the trick, but every little drop combined makes the difference

[@seventhplace]

It looks like the tracks were duplicated five times from one original file. If that’s the case, that means you would have recorded the original on one of the interfaces. That also means that each track is hearing the same preamp on top of the playback converters of each unit. That would defeat the purpose of this test. It would be better to record a new take for each track using preamps of each unit without an original file

[@edwardmobley7126]

I'm curious as to how the audient the premiums with compared to the PreSonus

[@GeoffBosco]

Second

[@mostyles328]

The Apollo is the nicest colored sound, no surprise, but you really don't want that in an interface...You can always at that, but you can't take it away. I think UA interfaces are highly overacted. Good musicians = good music. The gear just doesn't matter anymore. Just need a few good preamps to bring you mic level up to good clean level and a little compression to even out the signal....Keep the rest in the box. Nice video!

[@ancientalien815]

I see you have the scepters back up. Gave up on the kali's?

[@TheAudioCzar]

I was just reviewing the Kali's. I liked them, but still saving for the PMC Result 6's

[@ancientalien815]

@@TheAudioCzar I own the scepters also. They are very good monitors. But they are my least favorite out of the monitors I own. I have the alpha 65's, jbl 4328p's and 306p's. The 306p's are $89 each on eBay right now. I much prefer those over the scepters. Just personal taste.

[@levijessegonzalez3629]

Last question bro, lol. How are the headphone amps on all these? What would you say is your favorite sound-wise?

[@TheAudioCzar]

I don't the headphones on either. At home and at the studio I have the monitor station v2 and use the headphone amps on those

[@phillipebragaoficial]

Good voice guy,, I have a project and studiolive v.2. And I think the studio one a good Daw, but one thing disturb me , the convert sound maybe short. Looks like that preamps cause bad coloration 😔 I have good mics, and wonderful room , in my case I’m trying record drums , the result seems Old songs. thanks for

[@connorbonnell]

Wow, I'm thoroughly confused. I though C-Quantum sounded the best, and D-Studio68c sounded the worst. After checking Presonus' website, they both have the same XMAX preamp. The Studio68C sounded like it didn't have enough headroom, and it was distorting the signal. I wonder what is causing the difference if the preamps are the same.

[@tribeofdavidstudios9446]

Converters

[@mvoproject]

Cool. I was right that A is "Aired" Focusrite.

[@seventhplace]

It looks like the tracks were duplicated five times from one original file. If that’s the case, that means you would have recorded the original on one of the interfaces. That also means that each track is hearing the same preamp on top of the playback converters of each unit. That would defeat the purpose of this test. It would be better to record a new take for each track using preamps of each unit without an original file

[@luckymark0]

you rock

[@ancientalien815]

I mixed up b and c. I own a quantum too...go figure.

[@metalfather8139]

not really enough range in a voice alone to test these through KZbin compression.

[@moneynheartbreakz]

I had picked C & E. I’m glad because those the 2 I’m interested in getting anyway. I might just go with the Apollo tho.

[@okibaykal]

Great Video What Helps Me My FRIEND THNX...

[@wwlittlejOfficial]

I'm late to this party but I see one GLARING flaw with the source material: Its clipping, which is audible in the playback. Each interface is going to handle the clipped signal differently, save for like brands using the same (?) converters. yet We don't hear that distinction. It should be more pronounced. I'm guessing there's an inherent flaw with testing.

[@itconnects6693]

It’s 2019 why are you comparing the silver apollo twin

[@NominalTopic]

Thank you for this. I thought that "C" was the best at handling the male vocal and "E" was better at everything else. Yeah...I'm shocked!

[@ConstantinoOfficial]

Hi what did you end up with?

[@TheAudioCzar]

PreSonus quantum

[@ConstantinoOfficial]

@@TheAudioCzar awesome thanks- Do you find on large projects but you can drop in towards the end on really low buffers without problems?

[@TheAudioCzar]

@@ConstantinoOfficial I've never had a problem with cpu usage. I also have 64gb of ram, but I normally mix at 512.

[@seventhplace]

It looks like you duplicated the track five times. If that’s the case, that means you would have recorded the original on one of the interfaces. That also means that each track is hearing the same preamp on top of the playback converters of each unit. That would defeat the purpose of this test. It would be better to record a new take for each track using preamps of each unit without an original file

[@Tryggvasson]

if you watch the first video you'll understand how the test was conducted, and why it's the same source signal, which is actually the best way of doing a test.

[@seventhplace]

@@Tryggvasson Actually it's not

[@Tryggvasson]

@@seventhplace actually, it is, and you still haven't checked out the first video before responding, so at this point, you're arguing for argument's sake.

[@seventhplace]

@@Tryggvasson Olaf Tryggvasson I didn't need to watch the first video to understand why this test is just ill conceived. It should be obvious that an accurate test should have been done by actually recording the same source under the same conditions,played back accordingly.Every vocal take etc. that was recorded should be played back on the same device it was recorded on. That would have been a pure test. I watched the second video, which was recorded a month prior,even though I didn't need to (since you couldn't explain it) just in case I missed something revolutionary or wasn't aware of some new technology. Watching it just reaffirmed my initial thoughts to a deeper degree. All files were played back though a mult which played one recording simultaneously to each interface. That means,for example, that the character sound of drums recorded through one of the interfaces preamps and converters were mingled into the characteristics of another playback device. The " air" feature on the focurite would stacked on top of the UAD sound. What would be the purest ,unaltered way to conduct this test? You're assuming much, including that I argue for the sake of argument. Maybe you want be an intellectual hero

[@Tryggvasson]

@@seventhplace a mult splits the incoming signal - into separate parallel signals, not a single serially chained signal - so it's the same source going separately to each recording device, not going through all at once, and that's exactly as it shoud be. and playing back on separate devices would have also introduced some playback bias, in addition to the recording differences - not to mention it would have complicated matters uselessly. i didn't need to explain it because the point is, don't conclude before you know, and people trying to convince or explain, and chase your conclusion, don't solve this habit.

[@crissbmajor3990]

all device sound Awesome No Product Can Be The Same Because is not coming from On Company Mixing Is The Main Tag U can Own UAD Audio Device But Still Your Music Sound Bad If u Never Mix To Get Well Balances It Will Be Like U Waste Money Out There I Like Presonus Sounds For The Price Range It Looks Professional Pls Try Compare UAD Vrs Avid M Box pro

[@underworldent4817]

apollo for me. most natural with the best high end , but not hyped.

[@dwaynekendrick_]

The only major difference is the price. My opinion tho.

[@RK-pw2hu]

do it with -18dfs.

[@boulevardsound5137]

Im shocked that people thought c was good. i knew straight away that focusrite was A and UAD was E in the blind test because i already know they're the clearest and i was right!!

[@boulevardsound5137]

I will admit B sounded the best for acoustic guitar.

[@jackxavier3915]

To me the difference is night and day

[@MediaMusik777]

We all know the answer and the winner is .............................to the moon lol

[@AnggaSyailendra]

2:10 3:18

[@RahulSingh-wg2ic]

C

[@MonkeyBars1]

Disagree. D, the Presonus Studio 68C, sounded consistently bad. Thank you so much for a great shootout

[@pascalmerschaudio]

thats not true. Here is a Song who was only recordet with the Xmax Preamps, and mixed with Studio one. Give them a chance kzbin.info/www/bejne/pYbOmoublM6Vi7c&ab_channel=PreSonusAudioElectronics

[@yuROCK3D]

How to mix the tracks and let you listen for a few times and you won’t guess what kind of audio interface it is! The smells are 99% identical to those in a home studio.