• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

MOTU UltraLite-mk5 Review (Audio Interface)

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
intresting Gearspace topic (a shame DeltaWave page couldn't include all tests). Motus seams to be a very good value.
now if we make the loopback test balanced vs unbalanced aren't we testing how much diference the noise cancelation of the balanced conection makes? How do you know the output port is the culprid for the diference?
Hi,
I was just surprised that the PKmetric result in DeltaWave for the 828MK2 was a lot lower than the 2408MK3 and 24I/0, as they all share the same DAC/ADC chips (it's doing both conversions) and pretty much the same design.
So I did test on one I have, and got 108 so about the same than the other two MOTU interfaces. Searching why it was lower in the results page, I saw that the file is called "asym", so suspected it was done in asymetric mode. I check with another file on Gearspace from another user and got the same result than mine, which confirmed that the first file in Gearspace for this Motu was recorded in asymetric/unbalanced.
The script used for measuring the files from Gearpsace in DeltaWave picks the first file for each interface, and unfortunately, the first for the 828MK2 was done in asymetric.

Now, like you said, it would be interesting to find why the PKmetric change a lot while the RMS difference is the same.
I will redo the loopback test with both unbalanced/balanced and analyse it.

It would be also interesting to test the file of this loopback test with the MOTU Ultralite MK5, if any owner can do it, it would great

EDIT : just checked on GS results and two people had send the recorded file with a MOTU Ultralite MK5, one in not available anymore, the other is, so I will check it too
 
Last edited:

dasdoing

Major Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2020
Messages
4,209
Likes
2,674
Location
Salvador-Bahia-Brasil

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
1 can I ask where you get that info from? I would like to know which models share chips.

2 sorry. what does that mean?

3 cool
Hi,

1 I saw it by myself long time ago as I saw a lot of interfaces opened, but I think there are a few websites that had listed several interfaces in the past, I will see if I can find it.

2 It was how the file was named, I supposed the user has french as native language because "asymétrique" is how unbalanced is called in French.
In English, "asymmetric" is more used for uneven signal.

3 I checked the files for the Ultralite mk5

I've adjusted the files to start and end at the exact same sample, to check if it would give the same result than with the "Auto trim" feature of DeltaWave, and yes, it gives the exact same result, and even saw that DeltaWave can perfectly auto trim the source file if necessary (the third file recorded was shorter than the original).
Good work @pkane !

So here are the results :
- 1st and 2nd files (both are the same), with higher gain than the 3rd file :
Ultralite loop recorded (1) length adjusted.PNG


- 3rd file (lower gain) : better results, even with two peaks added near the end, so we can suppose that this interface is working a bit better with lower level.
[I've checked the 828mk2 with REW and MultiTone (the other software from @pkane )it has its lowest harmonic distorsion at -18dBFS input signal, and more distorsion with both higher and lower signals, but don't generalize anything on that result]

Ultralite loop recorded (3).PNG


Now, a question that I can't explain, maybe @pkane can help, again :):
how is it possible that the 828 mk2 has lower specs than the Ultralite mk5, certainly lower results in measurement like SINAD (I will see if I can make measurement of it with the Cosmos ADC), but higher result in difference and PK Metric with the same file?
(I said "with the same file" because I saw that the capture bellow I made weeks ago was cut, keeping only the graph/results part)

MOTU-828 MK2 USB.PNG


EDIT : @pkane , a quick check on MultiTone and it says the 828 mk2 has DC at -142dB, could its good results come from here?
 
Last edited:

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,631
Likes
10,205
Location
North-East
Hi,

1 I saw it by myself long time ago as I saw a lot of interfaces opened, but I think there are a few websites that had listed several interfaces in the past, I will see if I can find it.

2 It was how the file was named, I supposed the user has french as native language because "asymétrique" is how unbalanced is called in French.
In English, "asymmetric" is more used for uneven signal.

3 I checked the files for the Ultralite mk5

I've adjusted the files to start and end at the exact same sample, to check if it would give the same result than with the "Auto trim" feature of DeltaWave, and yes, it gives the exact same result, and even saw that DeltaWave can perfectly auto trim the source file if necessary (the third file recorded was shorter than the original).
Good work @pkane !

So here are the results :
- 1st and 2nd files (both are the same), with higher gain than the 3rd file :
View attachment 177787

- 3rd file (lower gain) : better results, even with two peaks added near the end, so we can suppose that this interface is working a bit better with lower level.
[I've checked the 828mk2 with REW and MultiTone (the other software from @pkane )it has its lowest harmonic distorsion at -18dBFS input signal, and more distorsion with both higher and lower signals, but don't generalize anything on that result]

View attachment 177788

Now, a question that I can't explain, maybe @pkane can help, again :):
how is it possible that the 828 mk2 has lower specs than the Ultralite mk5, certainly lower results in measurement like SINAD (I will see if I can make measurement of it with the Cosmos ADC), but higher result in difference and PK Metric with the same file?
(I said "with the same file" because I saw that the capture bellow I made weeks ago was cut, keeping only the graph/results part)

View attachment 177795

EDIT : @pkane , a quick check on MultiTone and it says the 828 mk2 has DC at -142dB, could its good results come from here?

DC offset shouldn't make a difference in PK Metric -- the metric applies equal loudness ISO curves to adjust the weight at various frequencies. By that measure, DC is pretty much inaudible and shouldn't contribute to the error metric.

One thing that you are doing is selecting non-linear phase and level EQ in DeltaWave. Those settings correct for systematic phase and frequency-related level errors, such as those that can be introduced by a low-pass/reconstruction filter. I would turn off those settings if you do want to know the contribution of all the errors that can contribute to audible differences, including filters. Here are the settings I recommend if you want to compare all sources of errors (with PK Metric):
1641769208349.png
1641769234002.png
 

BoredErica

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
629
Likes
899
Location
USA
For adc performance, wouldn't a condenser microphone's noise be a lot more than Motu Ultralite or M4's adc noise, making the spec not useful for condenser mics?

Trying to think what Ultralight Mk5 has over M4 for a 2.1 system using dsp. Few db higher sinad?
 

mdsimon2

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
2,477
Likes
3,315
Location
Detroit, MI
Can't really speak to the ADC differences but if you are doing a computer based 2.1 system MOTU M4 is hard to beat in terms of price / performance. Ultralite has a lot more functionality but it doesn't sound like you need it.

Reasons I can think of to choose the Ultralite over a M4.

1) More analog input/output channels
2) Digital input/output functionality (SPDIF, TOSLINK, ADAT)
3) Volume knob on front panel that controls all analog outputs (M4 knob only controls 2 out of 4 channels)
4) Hotter output (8.6 V vs 5.2 V on M4)
5) Ability to limit maximum output level

For a 2.1 system you might also look at the miniDSP Flex.

Michael
 

dasdoing

Major Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2020
Messages
4,209
Likes
2,674
Location
Salvador-Bahia-Brasil
Can't really speak to the ADC differences but if you are doing a computer based 2.1 system MOTU M4 is hard to beat in terms of price / performance. Ultralite has a lot more functionality but it doesn't sound like you need it.

Reasons I can think of to choose the Ultralite over a M4.

1) More analog input/output channels
2) Digital input/output functionality (SPDIF, TOSLINK, ADAT)
3) Volume knob on front panel that controls all analog outputs (M4 knob only controls 2 out of 4 channels)
4) Hotter output (8.6 V vs 5.2 V on M4)
5) Ability to limit maximum output level

For a 2.1 system you might also look at the miniDSP Flex.

Michael

It also has some DSP. might not be overly usefull for a 2.1 computer-DSP playback system, but you could at least "outsource" the crossover to the MOTU
 

Bamboszek

Active Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2018
Messages
181
Likes
306
It also has some DSP. might not be overly usefull for a 2.1 computer-DSP playback system, but you could at least "outsource" the crossover to the MOTU
While build-in DSP is nice, it can't be used for proper crossover without EqualizerAPO for example. Build-in EQ slopes are not suited for crossover or room EQ.
 

mdsimon2

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
2,477
Likes
3,315
Location
Detroit, MI
It also has some DSP. might not be overly usefull for a 2.1 computer-DSP playback system, but you could at least "outsource" the crossover to the MOTU

I guess but the functionality really isn't there. There is no low pass for example, I guess you could do something funky with peaking filters but in general that is just a bad idea.

Michael
 
Last edited:

dasdoing

Major Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2020
Messages
4,209
Likes
2,674
Location
Salvador-Bahia-Brasil
While build-in DSP is nice, it can't be used for proper crossover without EqualizerAPO for example. Build-in EQ slopes are not suited for crossover or room EQ.

I guess but the functionality really isn't there. There is no low pass for example, I guess you could do something funky with peaking filters but in general that is just a bad idea.

Michael

damn, they removed functions instead of adding. my old Motu Traveler MK3 has low and high pass filters
 

BoredErica

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
629
Likes
899
Location
USA
Reasons I can think of to choose the Ultralite over a M4.

2) Digital input/output functionality (SPDIF, TOSLINK, ADAT)
3) Volume knob on front panel that controls all analog outputs (M4 knob only controls 2 out of 4 channels)
4) Hotter output (8.6 V vs 5.2 V on M4)
5) Ability to limit maximum output level
2) I'd have to use USB for the PC right, so this is not useful to me.
3) This would be a convenience feature if the Motu was near me and I used the volume knob. But I could adjust in software and adjust volume digitally instead.
4) Definitely nice to have, though that wouldn't be useful unless I get the ahb2 one day (which might happen but will be many years down the line, potentially when UL6 comes out).
5) I assume you mean this as an extra safety precaution to prevent blowing my ears? Both M4 and UL5 can set exact voltage of output signal going to power amp, correct?
 
Last edited:

mdsimon2

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
2,477
Likes
3,315
Location
Detroit, MI
2) I'd have to use USB for the PC right, so this is not useful to me.
3) This would be a convenience feature if the Motu was near me and I used the volume knob. But I could adjust in software and adjust volume digitally instead.
4) Definitely nice to have, though that wouldn't be useful unless I get the ahb2 one day (which might happen but will be many years down the line, potentially when UL6 comes out).
5) I assume you mean this as an extra safety precaution to prevent blowing my ears? Both M4 and UL5 can set exact voltage of output signal going to power amp, correct?

On 5, yes to limit the output voltage from the DAC. With the Ultralite in Cuemix you can set attenuation on each channel that is independent of the volume knob or software volume control position. This stays in place after the unit is disconnected from the computer and stays in place after unit restarts. This probably matters more for the Ultralite as the output is so hot, for example on mine I have -10 dB of attenuation on each channel which limits the maximum output voltage to 2.7 V. The M4 really doesn't have any corresponding software like Cuemix and as far as I can tell does not have that ability. Although it is nice it is hardly worth choosing the Ultralite over the M4 for this reason alone.

Michael
 

stemfencer

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
97
Likes
71
Any owners out there, is this unit class compliant or require driver installation (manual is still not super clear to me, my understanding says class compliant but to get full software control need driver). Reason been I want to use on work computer as well, and unfortunately have unfriendly corporate policy so getting drivers installed is a no-no.
 

mdsimon2

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
2,477
Likes
3,315
Location
Detroit, MI
Any owners out there, is this unit class compliant or require driver installation (manual is still not super clear to me, my understanding says class compliant but to get full software control need driver). Reason been I want to use on work computer as well, and unfortunately have unfriendly corporate policy so getting drivers installed is a no-no.

MOTU advertises that it is class compliant on Mac and iOS, they specifically say you need to install software on Windows. I don't use Windows so I can't speak to that but on Mac and Linux (5.11 kernel or newer) it works without any driver. However there are certain functions that can only be accessed by installing the software / driver, for example my unit shipped with all channels at -20 dB and I had no way of seeing this until I installed the software. I use mine on Linux which has no MOTU software so there are things like channel routing, channel level and volume knob control that I set on my Mac and are retained within the unit when I move to my RPi.

Michael
 

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
Here are the settings I recommend if you want to compare all sources of errors (with PK Metric):
View attachment 177875 View attachment 177876

Thanks @pkane

I applied it and the 828 MK2 still gets better results than the Ultralite MK5 in this music loopback test... while I'm pretty sure the Ultralite MK5 gets better measurements in all tone tests possible (I will try to test the 828 with test tones).
We may need to keeping in mind that the loopback is testing the combination of both DAC-ADC, and a device may have great DAC and bad ADC, or the opposite

Ultralite MK5 :

Ultralite loop recorded (1) - basic settings.PNG


828 MK2 USB :

MOTU 828 MK2 USB - basic settings.PNG
 

dasdoing

Major Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2020
Messages
4,209
Likes
2,674
Location
Salvador-Bahia-Brasil
Thanks @pkane

I applied it and the 828 MK2 still gets better results than the Ultralite MK5 in this music loopback test... while I'm pretty sure the Ultralite MK5 gets better measurements in all tone tests possible (I will try to test the 828 with test tones).
We may need to keeping in mind that the loopback is testing the combination of both DAC-ADC, and a device may have great DAC and bad ADC, or the opposite

Ultralite MK5 :

View attachment 182153

828 MK2 USB :

View attachment 182154

the graphs seams to match quite good, other than the level. I think we have to keep in mind that even more modern, the Ultralite is a "downgrade" to the 828
 

trivenge

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2021
Messages
13
Likes
6
Are we all suggesting that this interface is actually bad then? should i not be upgrading from motu m4? outside of dac, the actual device has outstanding conversion for mics?
 

mdsimon2

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
2,477
Likes
3,315
Location
Detroit, MI
the graphs seams to match quite good, other than the level. I think we have to keep in mind that even more modern, the Ultralite is a "downgrade" to the 828

That is a pretty bold claim based on not a whole lot of data, I am very skeptical of it especially with respect to DACs. I've measured and listened to a few of the old MOTU interfaces (828mk2, 896, Ultralite Mk3) and from a DAC perspective they are nowhere close to the Ultralite Mk5. ADCs may be a different story. Definitely need some more investigation here as I am quite sure the Ultralite Mk5 will walk all over the 828mk2 in all of your typical measurements, so why the difference on the loopback?

Michael
 

dasdoing

Major Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2020
Messages
4,209
Likes
2,674
Location
Salvador-Bahia-Brasil
That is a pretty bold claim based on not a whole lot of data, I am very skeptical of it especially with respect to DACs. I've measured and listened to a few of the old MOTU interfaces (828mk2, 896, Ultralite Mk3) and from a DAC perspective they are nowhere close to the Ultralite Mk5. ADCs may be a different story. Definitely need some more investigation here as I am quite sure the Ultralite Mk5 will walk all over the 828mk2 in all of your typical measurements, so why the difference on the loopback?

Michael

I meant that in terms of Motu hierarchy. The DACs of one generation will probably all have the same chip (?), it's the inputs/gains that differ, right?
 
Top Bottom