SSL 2+ Versus MOTU M4 - A Side-By-Side Comparison

[@thetylersherman]

I was doing a hard comparison between the SSL 2 and 2+ and the MOTU M4 about 8 months ago, and settled on the MOTU. About a year later, I've been very satisfied. High sample rate performance has been excellent, and the preamps are crystal clear. On top of that, I found that it had one of the best headphone amps, and it drives my 250 ohm Beyerdynamics perfectly. My only complaint is the lack of the second headphone jack for dual monitoring. I did run into some stability issues when I first set it up... but I found that it was because of a 6ft extension USB I was running the device through.

[@eman0828]

Sorry to correct you but the MOTU M4 face plate as indeed aluminum metal. I littery took my M4 apart to confirm that. It's a metal diecast. There is no plastic. I also owned the SSL2 and the build quality to me felt like a toy. I also notice the drivers performed much better on the MOTU on Windows 10 because when I had a heavy processed session open in Studio One at 128 samples on both interfaces, the SSL2 crackled and popped like mad while the M4 didn't.

[@CDinkle]

Literry?

[@kolysion164]

RME doesn't crack, when SSL2+ and Motu M4 crack both

[@eman0828]

@@kolysion164 That's not a fair comparison because the SSL2 and M4 are Prosumer units geared towards a different market mostly home Recording. The MOTU Ultralite Mk5 and RME UCX are comparable professional half rack units.

[@kolysion164]

@@eman0828 I use the RME babyface pro fs, I dont record and I only play VST....with a latency at 3.0 ms...

[@eman0828]

@@kolysion164 Good for you nothing special. I own a higher end MOTU 828ES AVB interface which technically an AVB dual USB/Thunderbolt interface. I have zero issues with latency. I run projects that are over 200+ track counts along with my Hybrid mixing rig with Studio One Pro.

[@shoneljperera7237]

Being using my Motu M2, it's a bang for a buck!

[@thetylersherman]

Didn't realize that higher sample rates positively affected latency. Makes sense, now that I think about it. I've been struggling doing live monitoring at 48KHz on my old Focusrite 2i4. Great information, thank you.

[@jubilantyogurt]

What does sample rate affect? Higher resolution? Asking for a friend...

[@thetylersherman]

@@jubilantyogurt Simply put, your computer is sampling the audio coming in from your sound card at different rates. A pretty agreeable standard these days is 48000kHz, up from the previous standard of 44100kHz. The faster your sample rate, the less latency you will have to deal with in your DAW (both input latency and round trip, from my testing). Lower sample buffers also decrease latency but super low buffers run the risk of making your audio system less stable and can create artifacts or crash your device. For me, the practical application of upgrading to a card capable of 96000kHz was so that I could minimize latency while monitoring vocals from my DAW. Previously, I was lucky to get it down to 24ms (the delay is fairly audible at 24ms)... but now that I have a MOTU M4 I can easily get it down to 6ms while monitoring at 96000kHz... the delay is now almost completely inaudible.

[@jubilantyogurt]

@@thetylersherman So just to understand you right, there are 2 things that determine latency: Sample rate and sample buffer. Sample rate: It is always advantageous to run with as high a sample rate as possible. On the MOTU its: 96000 Hz Sample buffer: It is always advantagous to run with as small a sample buffer as possible. This is done at each change (addition/removal of inputs) by empirically trying out how low of a sample rate you can go. Adhering to the above will provide the lowest latency possible. (is this right?)

[@thetylersherman]

@@jubilantyogurt You're pretty much spot on, as based on my experience... it's kind of like overclocking. When I first set up my rig for tracking, I pushed the sample rate as high as I could, and then started with a conservative buffer of ~512 samples. Then I pushed it down to 256 samples, and then 128. When I took it to 64 samples, I noticed tons of crackles and pops in my audio so I pushed it back up to 128 and settled at 5ms roundtrip latency. I think the MOTU might even be able to push to 192000kHz, but it's overkill IMO and a huge CPU drain. One thing to note is that every time you double the sample rate, you also double CPU usage. Your computer will have to be able to keep up. That will usually go hand in hand with how low you can push your sample buffer. When I'm not tracking and am just doing audio playback, I turn my sample rate back down to 48000kHz and my sample buffer to 256 or 512, as I don't hear an audible difference from a mixing / mastering standpoint. There (probably) technically is a difference, but almost nobody is ever going to notice.

[@jonasebiebricher]

please just use 44.1 /48 /96 kHz. 96000kHz would be a bit much

[@robipell]

Very nice video! After tons of reviews analysis I got the final choice for my audio upgrade just between Motu M4 and SSL 2+. Today I ordered SSL 2+. In my country they have exactly the same price. Very good quality for both, and equivalent features. 4K on SSL is a nice to have. I like double headphone for SSL and meters on Motu. Decision has been pushed mainly by the fact that I found several complains for Motu crashes and disconnections under Windows.

[@kevc6115]

Great review. Thanks for taking the time out to do it. Something to bare in mind, you can always buy the plugins to ad to your arsenal but you cannot add ins & outs with these interfaces. An inclusion I would love to see with these interfaces would be a single ADAT in to allow expansion with a preamp strip. I would happily pay more for this feature as it gives you room to expand as your needs (or wants)dictate. The Audient ID14 MKII at the same price point has this feature but has sacrificed the 5-pin midi I/O. God damn it, decisions, decisions, decisions. Also loved the shout out to Julian Krause.....he's awesome! Would love to see a 3-way collab between you, Podcaststage & Julian. I think we would get the ultimate review as EVERYTHING would be covered.

[@rjb7569]

Very solid review/direct comparison between the two interfaces I am interested in at this price point. The Moto speaks to me a bit more. Also, good to tie in with Julian's reviews. He gives you the German Scientist exacting breakdown/measurements on a lot of specific calibrations that are handy in an evaluation. Between the two of you, one can get a very good idea of what to expect from this gear. Thanks for your work. Much appreciated! 👍

[@YHRS]

It's great to hear that this has been helpful to somebody! And yeah, Julian knows his stuff!

[@peterbigblock]

Excellent review! Like many others, I considered both the MOTU and SSL, deciding on the SSL for the dual headphone outs, back-loaded in/out jacks (I hate having cables and cords running all over my desktop), and the fact that it goes up to 11. The MOTU is a terrific unit, too -- as you said, you can't go wrong with either one so it comes down to what features one needs. The MOTU is impossible to get at the moment, so there's that...

[@carlosserrano3985]

Got the Motu M4 and sounds incredible also I test several headphones and all of them sounds great without cranking the volume. I connect a Soundcraft mixer to the line inputs on the back for more inputs and leave the front ones for microphones.

[@MakingMadBeats]

Planning on doing this, too with a Mackie VLZ4 1202. Can the M4 run without the computer, too if I plug the USB cable to a wallwart adapter?

[@carlosserrano3985]

@@MakingMadBeats Yes I think so but you can only used probably as a preamp. Check their website for exact info.

[@MakingMadBeats]

@@carlosserrano3985 I read a review meanwhile where it says that it can be used standalone. So, my chain is: All of my synths > mixer > MPC 1000 > audio interface > Monitor speakers. DAWLESS - And when i want to mix my stuff in Cubase I just turn on my computer.

[@carlosserrano3985]

@@MakingMadBeats Cool if it's works for you. Cheers!

[@schmoofadoop]

I found your individual videos of both these interfaces very helpful and ultimately I chose the SSL 2+ and am very happy with my choice. I would have probably bought both and did my own comparison but the M4 is nearly impossible to find while the SSL interfaces are readily available. I am using this with a circa 2012 PC that I built myself, running W10 20H2 using a i7 3770-K CPU with an SSD and I have no issues with latency with both my Neural DSP plug-in's or Analog Lab 4 with some midi-controller action. Given my older computer, I am at a 256 sample 48k setup for all those plug-in's and am seeing 5.3ms latency and it's imperceptible to my ears / hands. I never get hung up on what the latency says on the screen so much as the blind test... guitar straight into interface out to monitors and with my eyes closed I just pick a single string and if I can feel or hear any difference then the latency is too high. Even with my very old computer at 48k 256 I cannot feel or hear any latency. The SSL application that runs in the background has dynamically adjusted my latency settings between all those app's and the sound quality has been outstanding overall. Even with passive pickups I am not even at 1/2 gain on the SSL pre's which is a big relief as I saw in several reviews that when cranking the pre's to 100% the noise that's introduced was significantly higher than the Motu M2/M4 but I would never come anywhere near that level of gain... just straight clean guitar through the SSL into my Adam T5V's sounds just gorgeous. Using this setup with Neural plug-in's Cory Wong & Plini and the whole experience has been really great! I also prefer the SSL desktop style layout with all my cables out the back, but that's purely aesthetic. A few people have commented that the plastic outer shell of the SSL feels cheap, I do not agree. All of the pots / knobs feel terrific, are silky smooth and noiseless. I do agree that the push buttons don't feel amazing but I am not going to really fiddle with those much and they work well and don't introduce any noise to the signal that I've noticed anyway. I think overall, either of these interfaces are a great choice and at the top of the "budget" friendly options on the market. Thanks for another great video man, I really enjoy your approach and content. Your videos on these two interfaces were realistically the most helpful of all, where some like Julian show great stats and Bandrew did a great in depth as well, then Ola England did a great demo too for guitar specifically... but you actually used the product to produce music and that is why I bought this thing in the first place. Cheers!

[@englishguy9680]

The SSL looks so much cooler but the Motu seems better imo.

[@carlosmartinez324]

Great video! Thanks so much for this review!!! For some reason, I like the Motu's preamps better. But when I listen to the audio playback, I hear the SSL sounding more defined, the instruments better placed in the mix, a more solid, wider, bigger stereo field, while the Motu sounds smaller, somewhat blurry, and with a thinner sound.

[@DarkPa1adin]

Motu M2/M4 comes with loopback software which is important for Live-stream/video conferencing.

[@YHRS]

Ah yes, I totally forgot about the loopback!

[@ToddlerTN]

For anyone still reading these comments in 2023, SSL has just added loopback via the most recent firmware update. MOTU still looks like the better choice to me, though.

[@menshealth870]

​@@ToddlerTNsll hav3 no noise, ssl better?

[@GoreMelian]

Great review well done, I was between these 2 interfaces but I went with the ssl2+ you're absolutely right about the outputs they should have included 2 more... However the Motu m4 doesn't have 2 headphone outputs like the ssl2+ does... I ordered the behringer control2usb to solve all my input and output problems....

[@YHRS]

Oh man, I totally forgot to mention the 2 headphone outputs on the 2+! I'm collecting a list of stuff I forgot and I'll do a follow-up soon :)

[@julianmanjarres1998]

I connect an external headphone amp for an additional pair of headphones

[@JoshNecto21]

SSL preamps and Motu converters 🙂❤️

[@EricMooreGuitar]

Excellent review! I was trying to decide between the SSL and the MOTU. I liked the LCD display on the MOTU and there were so many positive reviews on the SSL. The M2 and M4 seemed to be sold out everywhere, so I chose the SSL. The MOTU seems to be the better value overall.

[@OfficialFatLip]

Beware that the SSL4k had the worse mic pres, everyone later wanted the SSL9k, infact its why Peter gabriel owns shared of thus company, the unit also has a faulty IC, search ifixit to fix this if you like, it causes the outs to be too low, some times signal may even cut out....and if you have a usb ios you still need a powered hub, most dont work and ssl has no recommendations..and ofcourse the lightning ios devices need not just a powered hub but the usb camera lighting kit...and most devices using the same class types of usb products dont have this problem and they are some with 4 mic pres !

[@eman0828]

@@OfficialFatLip Those interfaces have nothing to do with SSL large format console. It's a cheap Prosumer interface attached with a marketing gimmick to mimic an analog console when in reality it's a digital product. A real analog mic pre amp would be transformer based or tube based. Focusrite is just as guilty with trying push and market their lower end Prosumer products to supposedly have a connection to Rupert Neves legacy ISA pre amps. They share nothing in common. Analog gear is analog gear, interfaces are digital. I directly compared a Focusrite Clarett 8pre interface to my Focusrite ISA two outboard pre amp and they sounded nothing alike. One has transformers and the other doesn't.

[@RockmannMusic]

@@eman0828 The classic SSL desks from the 80s do not have transformer inputs. It's a solid state NE5532 & NE5534 op-amp fest. The mic-pres from the 4000 series desk were never considered as good sounding so outboard gear got rather used. The ssl was all about their line inputs as the door to the signal path, EQ section and summing etc

[@eman0828]

@@RockmannMusic Yes. SSL isn't really known for Mic Pres. It's the analog sound of the consoles. Focusrite, Neve and RND are pretty much the king of Micophone Pre amps. All three companies founded by Rupert Neve himself as his legacy lives on with in the companies products.

[@gibson2623]

Get the SSL dude!

[@petershaw6727]

Just purchased an M4 off the back of this review. Thanks!

[@jasonhe6947]

one of the best comparisons I've watched so far.

[@MikhailDaken]

This is an amazing and so comprehensive. Thank you for putting this together.

[@jlebreton]

For me, the SSL 2+ is the winner here and that’s what I purchased because what’s important to me is the complete package. The SSL sounds awesome, especially with that ANALOG 4K button, 2 headphone amps, nice smooth knobs, very stable, and the 4 x SSL plug-ins that comes with it. The plugins are freaking amazing! And it’s a SSL 😎.

[@usernameihavechosen289]

No physical dongle required since v6.5, according to the SSL website.

[@YHRS]

Great to know, thanks! I'll take a closer look...I'm a little confused by their verbiage on their website. I can't quite tell if an iLok account is still required, or if they're moving to a separate licensing method.

[@thestagerocks]

OMG. I've lived 15 years (of recording) without realizing sample rate effects latency. I mean I haven't had a latency problem but still.

[@YHRS]

I only became aware of it a couple of years ago, myself! It's amazing that we're still learning things all the time, all these years later.

[@deesoundrecordingstudio9739]

Great review, a big fan of testing how the knobs and buttons feel, gives a clue on how its going to stand up 12 months down the road

[@YHRS]

I agree, I'm a big fan of knobs/switches that feel great to tweak. Cheers, man!

[@jeffsancricca7041]

I have both interfaces, while the MOTU may sound a little cleaner, the gain knobs seem really loose.

[@Musical.Maze.1]

MOTU M4 has, 32 bits AKM AD converters, with 115 dB dynamic range.

[@WizardBallz]

It’s got Sabre I think

[@alexskour9457]

Very nice comparison. Now i m very very very very very very very very very VERY very very confused.

[@gibson2623]

You did not engage the 4K mode on the SSL, which would have made it louder, and the knobs having different gain at same position is quite irrelevant as they follow a logarythmic pattern and each manufacturer does it differently....Anyway the motu has more gain, yes, but it is noisier also. I d prefer a less noisy preamp ;) Thanks, take care mate ;)

[@richardyuen5786]

Also, you never mentioned about the 2 headphone outs on the 2+ ! Only one (correct ?) on the M4. The headphone out 2 of the SSL can monitor output 3-4, which is SO useful to send a slightly different mix to say, a musician recording. Very cool !

[@YHRS]

I meant to do a follow-up to address all of the things that didn't come to mind when I shot this video. I never got around to it though :( Yes, the dual headphone outputs and switchable output source are great features on the 2+!

[@iionas]

Thanks for your review mate, I apprciate it alot

[@jayplusp]

This video helps a lot, thanks man. Love your work!

[@johnsonfinancial6933]

Great review! Any idea which one might work better with an M1 chip Macbook Air as far as compatibility?

[@axelSixtySix]

Please note, as the SSL is an English brand and MOTU a US brand, the price gap is inverted in Europe.

[@TruenorthmtGod]

I have an 828es love it. I can here the difference

[@jgmopar]

I was using an old TASCAM interface that finally died. I wanted the MOTU but I cant find them anywhere. So I bought the SSL 2+. I figure anything i purchase would be better than my super old Tascam.

[@GL64]

Nice comparison review! Informative and well done.

[@YHRS]

Thanks man, much appreciated! It's amazing how good interfaces have gotten since we bought our first ones!

[@manuelsirotti9340]

Nice Video, Compared to RME, how does a voice or a guitar sound directly in the box? I don't know if you've ever tried it?

[@graciasalaconsciencia]

ssl2+ both input and output is much cleaner I feel that the motu colors and distorts a bit. Listening with Audio Tecnica m50x. But I think it is because ssl converters are better. I also noticed more noise with the motu. The motu only gains in power.

[@marcosrotllan]

Motu converters are better and specified

[@RumpelStiltskindarkone]

One of the MOTU's main selling points is the ESS Sabre DACs they have. I don't think it gets much better than that anywhere near that price range, otherwise SSL would've marketed it. Also the fact that you admitted to testing this with the lousy m50x, I don't even know what to say..

[@kitsonwks]

I second your opinion. I don't get why most people think the Motu sounds better, to my ears the SSL sounds smooth and tight while the Motu sounds honky in comparison. I listen with a pair of Genelec desktop monitors.

[@vikramjitbanerjeetuki]

Thanks, great review, digging the Motu 👍

[@dawoud8013]

in my gaming headphones, i ear your voice more "bassy" with the motu than the SSL. Difference was not so clear with my monitoring headphone lol.

[@davidbazomusic]

Hello, for those of you who have tried both, which one works more stable under Windows environment? Thanks and regards!

[@endlessnameless4369]

My feeling is you got feedback on the MOTU because you were getting some output on your monitors. Explains why the MOTU was significantly louder too.

[@guyb7005]

power switch on M4 vs mix dial & dual headphones on SSL2+ M4 is 12.5% more expensive in Canada, but you get 4 full inputs and nice meters

[@dawoud8013]

Hello, thank you for your video ! Considering the Inst in (for electric guitar) your advise is Motu M4 ou SSL2 + ? Maybe Audient iD14 ? :p Thank you !

[@BadHorsie2]

I love that first badlands CD!! Enjoyed it.

[@YHRS]

haha, good eye :) I had the tab songbook for that album back in high school, and I studied that thing every day. Every once in a while I try to play some of those songs, just to remind myself that I'm no Jake E. Lee 😁

[@BadHorsie2]

@@YHRS LOL, I had the songbook too!!

[@carlosp.1846]

No iLok Cloud for the plugs? Happy with my Motu M4

[@artysanmobile]

Your review focused strictly on usability issues and did it well. If you had the resources to test the preamps’ and converters’ performance you’d find the SSL to be far superior in both regards, as most would expect. Additionally, I recommend the SSL to solo recording artists specifically for the 4K emulation. It is THE feature that sets the SSL apart, and IMO, above all the rest. You should look into that. It’s a highly complex, all analog, process that responds to preamp gain in a way that has to be experienced. If this box were $500 it would be well worth it for those two very special preamps alone.

[@thepatzer]

Actually, the amazing Julian Krause has tested both and the MOTU comes out ahead (though the SSL is still very good).

[@stillpist]

Funny, most people that have one think of the 4k feature as a gimmick and never use it.

[@naegleriafowleri2230]

Does it make the speakers pop when computer turn on and off? motu 4 or ssl2?

[@RamtinDidab]

Did you find out? Let me know please! Motu has an On/Off button but not sure if that doesn't make pop sound when switched on.

[@raysissum]

You're good at this!

[@danzellisdeman1]

My ssl makes a hissing white noise when i turn up the gain on both channels what do i have to do to fix that. Please help me!

[@ejrebel6057]

Same as mine

[@jameswallace5967]

These were the two I was deciding between. Both great but I went with the MOTU M4.

[@inlovingmemoryofdouglasmul5216]

Ssl2 is better

[@TheEchelon]

@@inlovingmemoryofdouglasmul5216 For you perhaps. What a childish comment.

[@inlovingmemoryofdouglasmul5216]

@@TheEchelon lol ok...

[@inlovingmemoryofdouglasmul5216]

@@TheEchelon just my opinion, (and most peoples opinion if u do the research) didn't think I had to write that out because only someone as immature as a child would get offended and/or see it as a "childish comment"

[@mannymartin_ez]

@@inlovingmemoryofdouglasmul5216 What specs or attributes make the SSL2 better in your opinion?

[@martintabuyo4763]

Thank you for your videos, I appreciate them and they are useful. I am a windows user, would you recommend one over the other? I have known that motu and windows do not always work well together, thank you very much!

[@lolilollolilol7773]

Now THAT"s a good review.

[@Buragwit]

Preamps.. preamps noise.. i thinks thats what makes ssl more expensive..

[@TheLambLive]

4K switch should be renamed the sibilance switch,, yikes. lol... Great comparison, very thorough and very helpful in deciding. Thanks!

[@cold00n]

Nice comparison but i think that the latency difference in 1-2 ms even lower than difference of 1-2 steps moving from the speakers

[@uselessoldman7964]

what gets me about almost every review is actually using them and just how practical they are. What do I mean? Can one channel record an electric guitar and the other a mic with 48V? Many only give you on or off on both channels or you have to use the software. Clearly the SSL its manual choice its on the top so no questions but the Motu and for that matters most small interfaces? As for the Motu, you should have compared it to your RME not the SSL cos it would have been more of a challenge, the SSL is a toy but the Motu is a crazy little bit of kit for the money when it comes to quality

[@capwillard9156]

Hi, which one do you think is the best for guitar recording? I mean straight to the soundcard and using vsts

[@mcdan2696]

You convinced me! I got the M4! Thanks to you a d Sweetwater! It is exceptional! Period!

[@RsqSqr]

What are you using for recording your video. Its crystal clear. I am going to buy that one. So can you please tell.

[@YHRS]

Thanks! For a few years now, I've been using a Panasonic Lumix GH5 as my main camera (with a Vario G 12-35 lens). And I think that this was my first video using a Lumix G85 (with the kit lens) as my 2nd camera for close-ups on the interface.

[@engincaglarofficial]

For vocal recording which one would you recommend please??

[@mastersishal8616]

Ssl2+👍👍👍

[@ElCucuyMusic]

I noticed on the M4 you are only using the main outputs, 1& 2. Can you show how to simultaneously utilize channels 3 & 4 of the output as well? I'd like for all the outputs to be utilized. But I'm having trouble getting that signal out to my mixer.

[@alexv305]

On paper the SSL2 has more gain and lower noise, but the Motu M2 is better in your opinion?

[@tdkvevo]

Sir,do you experience too much of Bass (Low end) in your Yamaha HS7?

[@dffmusic1378]

Thanks friend for this great review, I ask you, how would the interface motu go with an akg c214 microphone? Would you recommend it even if the card is worth less than half of what the mic is worth? I have a semi-professional home studio, I am dedicated only to the recording of pop, rnb, dancehall and rap voices. I hope you can answer me, thank you.

[@frinsen]

Did you install the drivers for the MOTU correctly? The latency was a big plus in a lot of reviews ... which was

[@MrMoviePhoneEx]

I've been an m4 owner since the second round was made availabe from launch. not really a way to mess up the driver install, though I have got a lot better performance since Windows latest update. The Steinberg people said 2004 was horrible for the audio gear, I'm running 20H2 now and things have notably improved!

[@user-dv1jz5od6k]

@@MrMoviePhoneEx what's your Motu m2 latency for recording?

[@YuryMaro]

MOTU M6 Is it possible to control all 1-4 outputs using the main “monitor" knob? Because In ssl 12 No..

[@lllConlll]

Why do you turn the output lvl of the devices to max? Doesnt that add distortion to the signal?

[@tunairaiol]

Great video! Would love to see a direct comparison of the cheaper interfaces, if you still have them.

[@YHRS]

Thanks so much! I've either sold or given away the other interfaces that I had laying around, so I'm down to just the MOTU, SSL, and my trusty RME. It feels a little lonely around the studio now :D

[@tunairaiol]

@@YHRS Ha, I wish I could be lonely with that RME!

[@BurakCankaya]

For youtube content, live broadcasting and sometimes making a music which one you recommend? i would like clean and rich sound withouse noise. I am going to buy Rode-Nt1 probaby. I tried Steinberg UR22-c but it was noisy, i tried Evo4 but not enogh gain and scarlet was also noise. Thanks for your support !

[@YHRS]

While either would be a good choice, I might lean towards the M4 since it has a couple of extra inputs and a little extra input and output gain.

[@BurakCankaya]

i tried both now definately i will go with M4 thank youu@@YHRS

[@RogerWarszawa]

Very informative video. And now I have a question: the unbalanced RCA outputs on the SSL; can they be used to send audio from a DAW out into a re-amping box and through guitar pedals? (even if my re-amping box has a "Balanced Line Input"?). Can anyone help me with this, it would be most appreciated.

[@yeauld]

I cant believe how average the preamps sounded on the Motu compared to SSL2, Motu sounded cheap, generic with no caracter at all, when increasing the volume on SSL2 ( preamps and outs ) it sounded very linear with low noise like a real console, warm, on the other hand Motu sounded non linear with this 90s hisss noise type on the background and actually lower in volume, SSL2 actually is louder with more usable volume range, no wonder why SSL is legendary in the audio industry, thanks to this review I just got the SSL2, way better than Motu all around, no wonder why real audio professionals know that without good tone, manufacture specs means nothing, thanks for the video.

[@ToddlerTN]

This is one of the strangest comments I’ve read across many reviews of these two devices.

[@Audio-guy]

I have neither, but based on research the M4 is the winner. It may even be in the top 3 interfaces in existence at that price point. The SSL has a problem with headphone out distortion according to Julian Krause, and overall doesn't stand out as far as I can tell-- EXCEPT the preamps are great.

[@darkstar.runner6669]

aquestion to the SSL 2+ ... is it possible to use the output 3&4 with an cinch-to-xlr-adapter to bring the DAW (a mono or stereo signal) to some of my outboard gear like dynamics (especially for using with a "flock audio patch") and bring it back to the input 1&2 ??? thx a lot ...

[@RyokoYaksa]

How long was the particular USB-C cable you were using, and is it an active type cable? I'm curious since I also want to run the interface further from my computer.

[@YHRS]

My USB cable was either 6 or 10 feet (I can't remember which I used in the review videos). I didn't need any active repeater or anything for that length of cable, and they worked very well.

[@ADGreen-es6hm]

Your home recording ..are you running Mack? I’m waiting for my Motu M4 . I always use 32 ..by the way are you Kansas City Fan

[@YHRS]

I'm running on Windows 10. I've had pretty poor luck using buffer sizes below 64 samples. For a few audio tracks it's been fine, but as soon as my project grows beyond a certain point, I start getting pops/clicks until I enlarge the buffer size. So I usually go with 128 samples just so I don't have to keep changing it for every project. Oh and yes, I'm a KC fan. I lived there for about 20 years and became quite fond of the Chiefs :)

[@nethbt]

MOTU and AUDIENT are two of the best budget interfaces right now, bar none...the M2 and the EVO4 specifically

[@lemmykilmister1239]

What about driver stability on windows, especially older ones like 7? I keep seeing its an issue especially for the motu

[@prodigalus]

you got feedback because that sound came out of my house so loud that it was picked up by your mic.

[@SaintsPurgatory]

Why don't you test the "ample gain" claim without condenser mics using 48+ Volt phantom power?

[@biomechanism1]

RTL Utility shows my Motu M4 at 2 ms @ 192/64 and 3 ms @ 192/128 . I am right at 10 ms @ 44/128 - all in ASIO safemode, wondering if the SSL would scale to that.

[@MrRotor]

Measured my SSL 2 with RTL Utility. Result: 44.1kHz and 128 samples (ASIO safe) ended up at 11.1 ms. (Sent my M4 back for repair/refund. Only problems with that one unfortunately.)

[@laserjakk3629]

Assuming that most of people (specially pop, electronic, rap/trap) will work at 44.100/24bit or 48.000/24bit, around 256 buffer size, "producing/mixing on the flow". What are the best options of audio interfaces in terms of RTL (round trip latency) Aiming for less than 10ms on those values?

[@cyrax1266]

i use 96khz /24bit when recording 256 buffer size and mixdown the track in wav format at 192khz 32bit

[@laserjakk3629]

@@cyrax1266 Huge values. I almost don't record áudio, (electronic music producer here). On my projects I create, mix and Master everything in the same project without bouncing the VSTs to áudio tracks. My projects has around 50 channels. Been 20 VSTs and 30 audio tracks with samples. If I go to crazy in increasing the sample rate and decreasing the buffer size, I Endup getting system overload or pop and crackles with half of those 50 tracks. If I rase the buffer size I get better control but I totally lose the latency and became hard to record the keys and drum on the USB keyboard. I'm trying to balance the best gear to get best of my type of workflow, because direct monitoring doesn't affect VSTs synths on keyboard, only the áudio signal.

[@rocktonmusikschule]

The Motu is great 😍

[@Bluelagoonstudios]

Under the hood, Motu is great as well, for repairing. I just revised my 2 x 828mkIII FW (from 2005), and are connected with ADAT on my RME gear gives me 72 channels. And also a Reaper lover?

[@encode84]

In my country, M4 is 1.5X of the price of the SSL 2+

[@alexmarianoribeiro]

MOTU = Made in US, SSL = Manufactured in China around fusion. I used Audio Express since 2010. Sturdy and Stable. Which I Prefer to upgrade?

[@kolysion164]

RME and EUROPE.

[@alexmarianoribeiro]

@@kolysion164 Thanks

[@ToddlerTN]

MOTU M2 & M4 are now made in China as well since the 2021 revision - units with two screws on each front panel input and with blue PCBs also say “made in China” on the box and base of the unit - MOTU is still the better choice IMO.

[@menshealth870]

​​@@ToddlerTNbut sll2 noise better than motu m2, what better?

[@kanedmx]

I have akg k720 can i get louder sound on motu?thx

[@Narinjas]

Did you activate the low latency mode? on Motu M4?

[@YHRS]

For this comparison, I didn't have it enabled. I sat down and played with the "low latency safety offsets" a bit last night, and it didn't make a huge difference. It made more of a difference at lower sample rates (maybe 10% or so), and hardly any difference at higher sample rates. I think it's cool that they added a slightly higher-performance mode, although I'm curious why they didn't just make that the default behavior.

[@VeitLehmann]

@@YHRS I measured it on my Intel MacBook Pro 16" with Ardour using a buffer size of 128 samples at 96 kHz: RTL without MOTU drivers was 7.5ms, with MOTU drivers it dropped to 4.4ms. I also tested the UA Volt 2 (7.49ms) and the Arturia MiniFuse 2 (8.48ms).

[@ST-fl5fy]

Which handphone output was stronger? Thank you

[@VeitLehmann]

According to Julian Krause, MOTU's headphone out can drive high-impedance headphones louder. But they don't push lower-impedance headphones too loud. I'm using Beyerdynamic DT 880 600 Ohms on my M4 without any issues, even when using direct monitoring. I didn't test the SSL2, but the MiniFuse 2 (which should already be louder than the SSL2) couldn't get loud enough. I also tested the UA Volt 2, it also has a strong headphone out, on par with the M4. But no direct monitor mix blend knob, that's why I didn't keep it.

[@borisharold]

Hi there , is there any way to use the 4k button on the main output of your DAW ? or you would need to re-enter the output to get the effect ? many thanks

[@UniqueThaPoet]

Great review! The Motu M 2/4 have the same preamps as the the higher 828es and 8pre do they not?

[@YHRS]

Thanks! I'm not sure if they're using the same preamps or not...I'll have to look into that.

[@przemysawrajewski7357]

Are those HS5 or HS7 behind you ?

[@AlbertoDelacruz92]

Please do audient id14 comparison!

[@ulfb5467]

Great review. For me as a European, SSL 2+ is cheaper than Motu M4 (American product). Do you think the Motu M4 can deliver the audio frequencies to your Adam's speakers, or do I need a more expensive interface?

[@YHRS]

I don't see any reason that the M4 couldn't do a great job of sending signal to any pair of monitors. The DAC is just as good, if not better, than any of the other interfaces I've used in this price range. So it'll do a great job of running your powered monitors.

[@thepatzer]

Julian Krause’s testing shows the output of the MOTU to be incredibly flat and accurate.

[@Strife773]

man whats that song you played? i cant find it

[@yakirecording6878]

Which interface has the professional end sound (with mastering) for you. I think the SSL is too crisp and mono compared to Audient ID14 and I'll get the Motu M4 next week too. That's why I'm interested in your opinion. Sorry about the spelling mistake I'm not good at English 😊

[@lastcall9998]

Did you get the Motu?

[@shughy1]

SSL2+ is a more rounded sound, better for vocals, also has faster latency than the Audient id14

[@King45Moses]

@@shughy1 what do you mean it has a more rounded sound if you can explain

[@audiolego]

Thankuuuu i got my M4 today to replace UR22MK2. I jus wanted the second outputs

[@miguelzm]

A comparison with the Audient id14 MKII interface PLEASE!!!

[@King45Moses]

SSL 2 has a -130 EIN and the M4 -129 EIN, wondering which to get for the sm7b 🤔 I do like the LCD grain on the M4 so I can see more detail, SSL is nice because it’s desktop, but I think I’ll save the -1 EIN difference and go with the SSL 2 because I hate noise floor and then just boost it in post

[@ViolinistExtraordinaire]

My quest is to find out if either of these is compatible with 2019-21 iPad Pro tablets.

[@avoney3151]

Hey dude, great videos, could you check out the M-Audio Air 192? It's a controversial one in my opinion and I'm sure it'll make a great video! Loving the content

[@cheeher3212]

Does the MOTU have the stero button like the SSL2?

[@YHRS]

You can enable stereo direct monitoring by pressing and holding the monitor button on the front of the MOTU while direct monitoring is turned on.

[@savingreg]

Good evening! Tell me which OS X is compatible with this devices? Thank you...

[@motuTV]

You can use this device in USB class-compliant mode on macOS 10.11 El Capitan or above. For the optional driver, you need macOS 10.13 High Sierra or above

[@vipingkumar]

the ssls+ wil run on 10.9.5 mavericks. i have used.