MOTU M2 vs Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Gen): Comprehensive USB-C Audio Interface Comparison

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both top contenders in the audio interface market, catering to musicians, podcasters, and home studio enthusiasts. Each offers unique features that set them apart, making them suitable for different user preferences and needs.
The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Gen) continues the legacy of its predecessors with improved preamps, higher-resolution audio, and a sleek, user-friendly design. It provides two combo inputs (XLR/TRS) with Focusrite’s acclaimed preamps, delivering clear and pristine sound quality. The Air mode, an emulation of the classic Focusrite ISA preamp, adds brightness and presence to vocals and instruments. With 24-bit/192kHz converters, it ensures high-fidelity audio capture. The 4th generation also boasts ultra-low latency, making real-time monitoring seamless and efficient. The Scarlett 2i2 includes a comprehensive software bundle featuring Ableton Live Lite, Pro Tools First, and a collection of Focusrite’s plug-ins, providing users with a complete package to start their recording projects.
On the other hand, the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface stands out with its ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology, offering outstanding audio performance with a dynamic range of 120dB. This translates to exceptionally detailed and nuanced sound reproduction. The M2 also features a full-color LCD screen that displays input and output levels, a rare and valuable addition in this price range, allowing for precise monitoring. It includes two combo inputs with high-quality preamps and provides MIDI I/O, making it a versatile choice for users who need MIDI connectivity for their instruments or controllers. The M2 supports 24-bit/192kHz audio and boasts ultra-low latency performance, ensuring smooth and efficient recording sessions. The bundled software includes Performer Lite and Ableton Live Lite, along with a suite of virtual instruments and effects, giving users a robust starting point for music production.
In summary, both the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Gen) and MOTU M2 offer high-quality audio interfaces with professional-grade features. The Scarlett 2i2 is ideal for users seeking excellent preamps and a rich software bundle, while the MOTU M2 appeals to those who prioritize top-tier DAC performance, visual level monitoring, and MIDI connectivity. Your choice between the two will depend on your specific needs and preferences in an audio interface.

Specifications, Advantages, and Disadvantages of MOTU M2 and Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Gen)

Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation)

MOTU M2

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews
Purchase Value 85% of users expressed satisfaction with the purchase value of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They appreciated the balance between affordability and functionality, making it an excellent choice for both beginners and professionals. Users frequently mentioned the interface's reliable performance and the included software bundle as significant advantages, offering great value for the price. 15% of users were dissatisfied with the purchase value, citing that they expected more advanced features for the price. Some users felt that the interface could be more competitively priced considering the available alternatives in the market. 85% Quality of Materials 90% of users were satisfied with the quality of materials used in the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. The robust build and durable metal casing were frequently highlighted as key factors contributing to a sense of reliability and longevity. Users appreciated the premium feel of the dials and connectors, which enhanced their overall experience. 10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of materials, noting that some components felt slightly less durable over time. A few users reported issues with the plastic parts, which they felt did not match the rest of the product's build quality. 90% Ease of Use 88% of users found the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface easy to use. They praised its intuitive design and straightforward setup process, making it accessible to users of varying expertise levels. The clear labeling and simple control layout were appreciated as they allowed users to quickly adjust settings without confusion. 12% of users were dissatisfied with the ease of use, primarily due to difficulties encountered during initial setup. These users reported issues with drivers and software installation, which they felt were not adequately addressed in the provided documentation. 88% Sound Quality 92% of users were impressed with the sound quality of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, noting its clear and crisp audio output as a standout feature. Users appreciated the low noise floor and high dynamic range, which contributed to professional-grade recordings and playback. 8% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, mentioning occasional latency issues and minor distortion at high volumes. Some users felt these issues hindered their recording sessions, especially in more complex setups. 92% Compatibility 87% of users were satisfied with the compatibility of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, citing its seamless integration with various DAWs and operating systems as a major advantage. Users appreciated the interface's ability to work well with both Mac and Windows platforms. 13% of users experienced compatibility issues, particularly with older software and certain operating systems. These users felt the need for more comprehensive support and updates to ensure smooth operation across all systems. 87% Portability 85% of users praised the portability of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, highlighting its compact size and lightweight design. This made it easy to transport for mobile recording sessions or gigs, which was a significant plus for users frequently on the move. 15% of users found the portability lacking due to the need for additional equipment and cables, which added bulk to their setup. Some users also noted that the unit, despite being portable, could benefit from a more robust carrying case. 85% Durability 88% of users were satisfied with the durability of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, often commenting on its sturdy construction. Many users reported the interface surviving frequent use and transportation without any significant wear and tear. 12% of users expressed concerns about durability, particularly regarding the long-term reliability of the knobs and switches. Some users experienced wear on these components sooner than expected, which affected their perception of the product's overall durability. 88% Aesthetics 90% of users were pleased with the aesthetics of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, often mentioning its sleek and modern design. The red metallic finish was a particular highlight, giving it a professional and appealing look that fit well in any studio setup. 10% of users were less impressed with the aesthetics, feeling that the design, while functional, lacked uniqueness or distinction compared to other models on the market. Some users suggested more color options could enhance its visual appeal. 90% Customer Support 82% of users praised Focusrite's customer support, mentioning prompt responses and helpful assistance with technical inquiries. Users felt confident in reaching out for help, knowing they would receive knowledgeable guidance to resolve their issues. 18% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delayed responses and unhelpful troubleshooting advice. These users expressed frustration with the lack of immediate support, especially when dealing with urgent technical problems. 82% Latency 89% of users were satisfied with the low latency performance of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They found it capable of handling real-time monitoring and recording without noticeable delays, which was crucial for professional audio work. 11% of users experienced latency issues that affected their recording sessions. These users reported that the latency was more pronounced in complex audio setups, which hindered their ability to perform tasks efficiently. 89% Driver Stability 83% of users were satisfied with the driver stability of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. The majority of users reported consistent performance with minimal crashes or connectivity issues, which was essential for uninterrupted recording sessions. 17% of users experienced driver stability issues, including crashes and disconnections, which impacted their workflow. These users felt that more frequent driver updates could help mitigate such problems and improve overall reliability. 83% Preamp Quality 91% of users were highly satisfied with the preamp quality of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They noted the clean and transparent sound the preamps provided, which allowed for accurate capture of vocals and instruments without coloration. 9% of users found the preamp quality lacking, especially when compared to higher-end interfaces. These users felt that the preamps could offer more headroom and warmth for certain recording applications. 91% Software Bundle 86% of users appreciated the software bundle included with the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They found the DAW and plugin offerings to be a valuable addition that enhanced their recording and production capabilities right out of the box. 14% of users were dissatisfied with the software bundle, mentioning that the options were limited or not suitable for their specific needs. Some users expressed a desire for more advanced software inclusions to better complement the hardware. 86% Input/Output Options 84% of users were satisfied with the input/output options available on the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. The dual XLR/line inputs and headphone output met most users' requirements for basic recording setups. 16% of users felt limited by the input/output options, especially those needing more channels for larger recording sessions. These users suggested that additional input and output capabilities could significantly enhance the interface's versatility. 84% Phantom Power 87% of users appreciated the inclusion of phantom power on the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, enabling them to use condenser microphones effectively. This feature was deemed essential for achieving high-quality recordings with a variety of mic types. 13% of users encountered issues with phantom power, such as inconsistent delivery or compatibility problems with specific microphones. These users felt that improvements in this area could enhance the interface's performance with a wider range of equipment. 87% USB-C Connectivity 89% of users were pleased with the USB-C connectivity of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 Audio Interface, noting the faster data transfer and improved power efficiency. This feature was especially appreciated by users with modern computing setups, providing a seamless connection experience. 11% of users experienced connectivity issues related to USB-C, particularly with certain cables or ports not functioning as expected. These users suggested that clearer guidance on compatible cables and ports could alleviate such problems. 89% Overall Satisfaction 88% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, citing it as a reliable and high-performance tool for their audio needs. The combination of quality, ease of use, and value made it a favored choice among musicians and producers. 12% of users were not fully satisfied with the overall experience, often due to isolated issues or unmet expectations in specific areas such as advanced features or extended support. These users felt that addressing these minor grievances could elevate the product to an even higher standard. 88% Recording Quality 91% of users were highly satisfied with the recording quality provided by the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They noted its ability to capture detailed and accurate audio, making it suitable for various applications from podcasts to music production. 9% of users felt that the recording quality could be improved, particularly in terms of dynamic range and noise reduction. These users desired enhancements that would allow for even cleaner recordings in professional environments. 91% Monitor Control 86% of users appreciated the monitor control features of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, particularly the direct monitor switch and volume control. These features allowed for effective monitoring and adjustments during recording sessions, which users found extremely beneficial. 14% of users experienced issues with monitor control, such as limited control over headphone mix levels. These users suggested that more advanced monitoring options could improve the interface's usability in complex setups. 86% Updates and Support 80% of users were satisfied with the updates and support provided for the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They appreciated the ongoing driver updates and support resources available, which helped maintain the interface's performance over time. 20% of users were dissatisfied with the frequency and quality of updates and support. These users felt that the update process was not as streamlined or timely as needed, leading to occasional compatibility or performance issues. 80% Product Longevity 87% of users were satisfied with the product longevity of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, reporting that it remained functional and reliable over extended periods of use. This aspect contributed to users' confidence in their investment. 13% of users experienced issues with product longevity, noting that certain components like jacks or switches showed signs of wear sooner than expected. These users suggested that enhancements in component durability could further improve the product's lifespan. 87%	Purchase Value 85% of users expressed satisfaction with the purchase value of the MOTU M2 Audio Interface, highlighting its competitive pricing compared to other interfaces with similar features. Many users appreciated the combination of high-quality sound and functionality at a reasonable cost, making it an attractive choice for both amateur and professional musicians. 15% of users felt dissatisfied with the purchase value, citing instances where they expected more advanced features or additional accessories for the price. Some users compared it unfavorably to cheaper alternatives that offered similar performance, which led to disappointment with the perceived value. 85% Sound Quality 90% of users praised the sound quality of the MOTU M2, noting its clear and crisp audio output and excellent preamps. Users frequently mentioned the superior quality of both the input and output, which they felt enhanced their recording and listening experiences significantly. 10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, often due to specific technical issues or personal preferences for different audio signatures. Some users experienced noise interference or felt that the sound output did not meet their high expectations, particularly in professional settings. 90% Build Quality 88% of users were satisfied with the build quality of the MOTU M2, appreciating its sturdy construction and durable materials. Many users mentioned the robust design, which they felt was reliable for both studio and mobile use, instilling confidence in its longevity. 12% of users were dissatisfied with the build quality, citing issues such as loose knobs or connectors. Some users found the materials used to be less premium than expected, leading to concerns about potential wear and tear over time. 88% Ease of Use 83% of users found the MOTU M2 easy to use, highlighting its straightforward setup process and intuitive interface. Users appreciated the simple layout, which allowed even beginners to quickly understand and operate the device without extensive technical knowledge. 17% of users experienced difficulties with ease of use, often due to software compatibility issues or a lack of clear instructions. Some users reported a steep learning curve for specific functions, which affected their overall user experience. 83% Driver Stability 80% of users were satisfied with the stability of the MOTU M2 drivers, noting few crashes or disconnections during use. This reliability was particularly valued by users who required consistent performance for professional recording sessions. 20% of users encountered driver stability issues, including occasional crashes or lag, affecting their workflow. These users often experienced frustration when the interface did not perform consistently, particularly during critical recording tasks. 80% Customer Support 75% of users had positive experiences with MOTU's customer support, appreciating the responsiveness and helpfulness of the support team. Users who required assistance found the customer service to be knowledgeable and capable of resolving issues promptly. 25% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delays in response times or unhelpful interactions. Some users felt that their concerns were not adequately addressed, which led to frustration with the level of service provided. 75% Portability 85% of users praised the portability of the MOTU M2, mentioning its compact size and lightweight design as ideal for on-the-go recording. Users found it easy to transport and use in different environments, making it a versatile choice for mobile musicians. 15% of users found the portability lacking, often due to the need for additional accessories or concerns about durability during transport. Some users desired a more compact form factor or integrated protective features for easier travel. 85% Latency Performance 87% of users were satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M2, noting minimal delay during recording and playback. This low latency was particularly appreciated by musicians who required real-time monitoring without noticeable lag. 13% of users experienced latency issues, which affected their recording sessions. Some users found the latency to be higher than expected, especially when using specific software or settings, leading to dissatisfaction with the interface's performance. 87% Compatibility 82% of users highlighted the compatibility of the MOTU M2 with various operating systems and digital audio workstations, allowing seamless integration into existing setups. The device's versatility in working with Mac and Windows platforms was a significant advantage for many. 18% of users faced compatibility challenges, often related to specific software or hardware configurations. These users experienced difficulties in integrating the interface with their preferred setups, which led to dissatisfaction with the overall compatibility. 82% Input/Output Options 80% of users were satisfied with the input and output options offered by the MOTU M2, appreciating the variety and quality of connections available. Users valued the balanced input and output ports, which provided flexibility for different recording needs. 20% of users found the input/output options lacking, desiring more channels or specific types of connections. Some users required additional ports for complex setups, which the M2 did not accommodate, leading to disappointment. 80% Aesthetics 88% of users found the aesthetics of the MOTU M2 appealing, praising its sleek design and professional look. The interface's modern appearance was often noted as a positive feature that complemented their studio setups. 12% of users were dissatisfied with the aesthetics, often preferring a different style or color scheme. Some users felt the design was too simplistic or did not match their personal taste, which affected their overall impression of the device. 88% Installation Process 84% of users found the installation process for the MOTU M2 straightforward and hassle-free, with clear instructions and minimal setup time. This ease of installation was especially appreciated by users who wanted to start using the device quickly. 16% of users encountered challenges during the installation process, including difficulties with software installation or required updates. These issues led to frustration, particularly for users who expected a more seamless setup experience. 84% Software Features 78% of users were satisfied with the software features included with the MOTU M2, appreciating the basic tools and functionality provided for recording and editing. Users found the software adequate for most of their needs, especially when starting out. 22% of users found the software features lacking, desiring more advanced options or additional plug-ins. Some users felt the software was limited compared to other interfaces, which affected their ability to fully utilize the device's potential. 78% Durability 86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the MOTU M2, noting its solid construction and resistance to wear over time. Users appreciated the robust materials that provided confidence in the device's long-term reliability. 14% of users were concerned about the durability, often due to issues with specific components like knobs or buttons. Some users experienced wear and tear sooner than expected, which raised doubts about the interface's longevity. 86% Versatility 83% of users praised the versatility of the MOTU M2, citing its ability to handle various recording scenarios and environments. Users valued its adaptability for different music genres and recording setups, making it a flexible choice for many applications. 17% of users found the versatility limited, often due to specific requirements that the M2 could not meet. Some users needed more features or customization options for particular projects, which the device did not provide, leading to dissatisfaction. 83% Control Features 79% of users were satisfied with the control features of the MOTU M2, appreciating the accessible and functional design of the controls. Users found the controls intuitive and effective for managing their audio settings during use. 21% of users were dissatisfied with the control features, often finding them too basic or lacking in advanced options. Some users desired more precise or customizable controls to better suit their specific audio needs. 79% Power Options 82% of users appreciated the power options of the MOTU M2, noting the convenience of USB power for portability and ease of use. Users valued the ability to operate the device without the need for additional power sources, enhancing its mobility. 18% of users found the power options limiting, often preferring alternative power solutions for specific setups. Some users experienced issues with power stability, particularly when using the interface in environments with variable power availability. 82% Expandability 77% of users were satisfied with the expandability of the MOTU M2, finding it sufficient for basic studio setups and small-scale projects. Users appreciated the ability to connect additional devices as needed within its scope. 23% of users found the expandability insufficient, particularly for larger or more complex audio setups. Some users desired more connectivity options or the ability to chain multiple interfaces together, which the M2 did not support. 77% Pedal Integration 70% of users appreciated the basic pedal integration capabilities of the MOTU M2, finding it suitable for simple setups and straightforward use. Users valued the available connections for integrating pedals into their signal chain. 30% of users were dissatisfied with the pedal integration options, often requiring more advanced features or specific connections. Some users found the integration limited for complex pedal setups, which affected their ability to use the interface effectively. 70% Visual Display 89% of users were highly satisfied with the visual display of the MOTU M2, praising its clear and informative readouts. Users found the display helpful for monitoring levels and making quick adjustments during recording sessions. 11% of users found the visual display lacking, often desiring more detailed information or customizable display options. Some users felt the display could be improved for better visibility in different lighting conditions. 89% Overall Satisfaction 87% of users reported overall satisfaction with the MOTU M2, citing its combination of high-quality sound, build, and functionality as major strengths. Users appreciated its value for money and suitability for a wide range of applications, making it a popular choice among audio enthusiasts. 13% of users expressed overall dissatisfaction, often due to specific unmet expectations or technical issues. Some users encountered compatibility or performance problems that detracted from their experience, leading to disappointment with the interface. 87% Show More

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews

Purchase Value

85% of users expressed satisfaction with the purchase value of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They appreciated the balance between affordability and functionality, making it an excellent choice for both beginners and professionals. Users frequently mentioned the interface's reliable performance and the included software bundle as significant advantages, offering great value for the price.

15% of users were dissatisfied with the purchase value, citing that they expected more advanced features for the price. Some users felt that the interface could be more competitively priced considering the available alternatives in the market.

85%
Quality of Materials

90% of users were satisfied with the quality of materials used in the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. The robust build and durable metal casing were frequently highlighted as key factors contributing to a sense of reliability and longevity. Users appreciated the premium feel of the dials and connectors, which enhanced their overall experience.

10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of materials, noting that some components felt slightly less durable over time. A few users reported issues with the plastic parts, which they felt did not match the rest of the product's build quality.

90%
Ease of Use

88% of users found the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface easy to use. They praised its intuitive design and straightforward setup process, making it accessible to users of varying expertise levels. The clear labeling and simple control layout were appreciated as they allowed users to quickly adjust settings without confusion.

12% of users were dissatisfied with the ease of use, primarily due to difficulties encountered during initial setup. These users reported issues with drivers and software installation, which they felt were not adequately addressed in the provided documentation.

88%
Sound Quality

92% of users were impressed with the sound quality of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, noting its clear and crisp audio output as a standout feature. Users appreciated the low noise floor and high dynamic range, which contributed to professional-grade recordings and playback.

8% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, mentioning occasional latency issues and minor distortion at high volumes. Some users felt these issues hindered their recording sessions, especially in more complex setups.

92%
Compatibility

87% of users were satisfied with the compatibility of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, citing its seamless integration with various DAWs and operating systems as a major advantage. Users appreciated the interface's ability to work well with both Mac and Windows platforms.

13% of users experienced compatibility issues, particularly with older software and certain operating systems. These users felt the need for more comprehensive support and updates to ensure smooth operation across all systems.

87%
Portability

85% of users praised the portability of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, highlighting its compact size and lightweight design. This made it easy to transport for mobile recording sessions or gigs, which was a significant plus for users frequently on the move.

15% of users found the portability lacking due to the need for additional equipment and cables, which added bulk to their setup. Some users also noted that the unit, despite being portable, could benefit from a more robust carrying case.

85%
Durability

88% of users were satisfied with the durability of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, often commenting on its sturdy construction. Many users reported the interface surviving frequent use and transportation without any significant wear and tear.

12% of users expressed concerns about durability, particularly regarding the long-term reliability of the knobs and switches. Some users experienced wear on these components sooner than expected, which affected their perception of the product's overall durability.

88%
Aesthetics

90% of users were pleased with the aesthetics of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, often mentioning its sleek and modern design. The red metallic finish was a particular highlight, giving it a professional and appealing look that fit well in any studio setup.

10% of users were less impressed with the aesthetics, feeling that the design, while functional, lacked uniqueness or distinction compared to other models on the market. Some users suggested more color options could enhance its visual appeal.

90%
Customer Support

82% of users praised Focusrite's customer support, mentioning prompt responses and helpful assistance with technical inquiries. Users felt confident in reaching out for help, knowing they would receive knowledgeable guidance to resolve their issues.

18% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delayed responses and unhelpful troubleshooting advice. These users expressed frustration with the lack of immediate support, especially when dealing with urgent technical problems.

82%
Latency

89% of users were satisfied with the low latency performance of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They found it capable of handling real-time monitoring and recording without noticeable delays, which was crucial for professional audio work.

11% of users experienced latency issues that affected their recording sessions. These users reported that the latency was more pronounced in complex audio setups, which hindered their ability to perform tasks efficiently.

89%
Driver Stability

83% of users were satisfied with the driver stability of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. The majority of users reported consistent performance with minimal crashes or connectivity issues, which was essential for uninterrupted recording sessions.

17% of users experienced driver stability issues, including crashes and disconnections, which impacted their workflow. These users felt that more frequent driver updates could help mitigate such problems and improve overall reliability.

83%
Preamp Quality

91% of users were highly satisfied with the preamp quality of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They noted the clean and transparent sound the preamps provided, which allowed for accurate capture of vocals and instruments without coloration.

9% of users found the preamp quality lacking, especially when compared to higher-end interfaces. These users felt that the preamps could offer more headroom and warmth for certain recording applications.

91%
Software Bundle

86% of users appreciated the software bundle included with the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They found the DAW and plugin offerings to be a valuable addition that enhanced their recording and production capabilities right out of the box.

14% of users were dissatisfied with the software bundle, mentioning that the options were limited or not suitable for their specific needs. Some users expressed a desire for more advanced software inclusions to better complement the hardware.

86%
Input/Output Options

84% of users were satisfied with the input/output options available on the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. The dual XLR/line inputs and headphone output met most users' requirements for basic recording setups.

16% of users felt limited by the input/output options, especially those needing more channels for larger recording sessions. These users suggested that additional input and output capabilities could significantly enhance the interface's versatility.

84%
Phantom Power

87% of users appreciated the inclusion of phantom power on the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, enabling them to use condenser microphones effectively. This feature was deemed essential for achieving high-quality recordings with a variety of mic types.

13% of users encountered issues with phantom power, such as inconsistent delivery or compatibility problems with specific microphones. These users felt that improvements in this area could enhance the interface's performance with a wider range of equipment.

87%
USB-C Connectivity

89% of users were pleased with the USB-C connectivity of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 Audio Interface, noting the faster data transfer and improved power efficiency. This feature was especially appreciated by users with modern computing setups, providing a seamless connection experience.

11% of users experienced connectivity issues related to USB-C, particularly with certain cables or ports not functioning as expected. These users suggested that clearer guidance on compatible cables and ports could alleviate such problems.

89%
Overall Satisfaction

88% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, citing it as a reliable and high-performance tool for their audio needs. The combination of quality, ease of use, and value made it a favored choice among musicians and producers.

12% of users were not fully satisfied with the overall experience, often due to isolated issues or unmet expectations in specific areas such as advanced features or extended support. These users felt that addressing these minor grievances could elevate the product to an even higher standard.

88%
Recording Quality

91% of users were highly satisfied with the recording quality provided by the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They noted its ability to capture detailed and accurate audio, making it suitable for various applications from podcasts to music production.

9% of users felt that the recording quality could be improved, particularly in terms of dynamic range and noise reduction. These users desired enhancements that would allow for even cleaner recordings in professional environments.

91%
Monitor Control

86% of users appreciated the monitor control features of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, particularly the direct monitor switch and volume control. These features allowed for effective monitoring and adjustments during recording sessions, which users found extremely beneficial.

14% of users experienced issues with monitor control, such as limited control over headphone mix levels. These users suggested that more advanced monitoring options could improve the interface's usability in complex setups.

86%
Updates and Support

80% of users were satisfied with the updates and support provided for the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface. They appreciated the ongoing driver updates and support resources available, which helped maintain the interface's performance over time.

20% of users were dissatisfied with the frequency and quality of updates and support. These users felt that the update process was not as streamlined or timely as needed, leading to occasional compatibility or performance issues.

80%
Product Longevity

87% of users were satisfied with the product longevity of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface, reporting that it remained functional and reliable over extended periods of use. This aspect contributed to users' confidence in their investment.

13% of users experienced issues with product longevity, noting that certain components like jacks or switches showed signs of wear sooner than expected. These users suggested that enhancements in component durability could further improve the product's lifespan.

87%

Purchase Value

85% of users expressed satisfaction with the purchase value of the MOTU M2 Audio Interface, highlighting its competitive pricing compared to other interfaces with similar features. Many users appreciated the combination of high-quality sound and functionality at a reasonable cost, making it an attractive choice for both amateur and professional musicians.

15% of users felt dissatisfied with the purchase value, citing instances where they expected more advanced features or additional accessories for the price. Some users compared it unfavorably to cheaper alternatives that offered similar performance, which led to disappointment with the perceived value.

85%
Sound Quality

90% of users praised the sound quality of the MOTU M2, noting its clear and crisp audio output and excellent preamps. Users frequently mentioned the superior quality of both the input and output, which they felt enhanced their recording and listening experiences significantly.

10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, often due to specific technical issues or personal preferences for different audio signatures. Some users experienced noise interference or felt that the sound output did not meet their high expectations, particularly in professional settings.

90%
Build Quality

88% of users were satisfied with the build quality of the MOTU M2, appreciating its sturdy construction and durable materials. Many users mentioned the robust design, which they felt was reliable for both studio and mobile use, instilling confidence in its longevity.

12% of users were dissatisfied with the build quality, citing issues such as loose knobs or connectors. Some users found the materials used to be less premium than expected, leading to concerns about potential wear and tear over time.

88%
Ease of Use

83% of users found the MOTU M2 easy to use, highlighting its straightforward setup process and intuitive interface. Users appreciated the simple layout, which allowed even beginners to quickly understand and operate the device without extensive technical knowledge.

17% of users experienced difficulties with ease of use, often due to software compatibility issues or a lack of clear instructions. Some users reported a steep learning curve for specific functions, which affected their overall user experience.

83%
Driver Stability

80% of users were satisfied with the stability of the MOTU M2 drivers, noting few crashes or disconnections during use. This reliability was particularly valued by users who required consistent performance for professional recording sessions.

20% of users encountered driver stability issues, including occasional crashes or lag, affecting their workflow. These users often experienced frustration when the interface did not perform consistently, particularly during critical recording tasks.

80%
Customer Support

75% of users had positive experiences with MOTU's customer support, appreciating the responsiveness and helpfulness of the support team. Users who required assistance found the customer service to be knowledgeable and capable of resolving issues promptly.

25% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delays in response times or unhelpful interactions. Some users felt that their concerns were not adequately addressed, which led to frustration with the level of service provided.

75%
Portability

85% of users praised the portability of the MOTU M2, mentioning its compact size and lightweight design as ideal for on-the-go recording. Users found it easy to transport and use in different environments, making it a versatile choice for mobile musicians.

15% of users found the portability lacking, often due to the need for additional accessories or concerns about durability during transport. Some users desired a more compact form factor or integrated protective features for easier travel.

85%
Latency Performance

87% of users were satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M2, noting minimal delay during recording and playback. This low latency was particularly appreciated by musicians who required real-time monitoring without noticeable lag.

13% of users experienced latency issues, which affected their recording sessions. Some users found the latency to be higher than expected, especially when using specific software or settings, leading to dissatisfaction with the interface's performance.

87%
Compatibility

82% of users highlighted the compatibility of the MOTU M2 with various operating systems and digital audio workstations, allowing seamless integration into existing setups. The device's versatility in working with Mac and Windows platforms was a significant advantage for many.

18% of users faced compatibility challenges, often related to specific software or hardware configurations. These users experienced difficulties in integrating the interface with their preferred setups, which led to dissatisfaction with the overall compatibility.

82%
Input/Output Options

80% of users were satisfied with the input and output options offered by the MOTU M2, appreciating the variety and quality of connections available. Users valued the balanced input and output ports, which provided flexibility for different recording needs.

20% of users found the input/output options lacking, desiring more channels or specific types of connections. Some users required additional ports for complex setups, which the M2 did not accommodate, leading to disappointment.

80%
Aesthetics

88% of users found the aesthetics of the MOTU M2 appealing, praising its sleek design and professional look. The interface's modern appearance was often noted as a positive feature that complemented their studio setups.

12% of users were dissatisfied with the aesthetics, often preferring a different style or color scheme. Some users felt the design was too simplistic or did not match their personal taste, which affected their overall impression of the device.

88%
Installation Process

84% of users found the installation process for the MOTU M2 straightforward and hassle-free, with clear instructions and minimal setup time. This ease of installation was especially appreciated by users who wanted to start using the device quickly.

16% of users encountered challenges during the installation process, including difficulties with software installation or required updates. These issues led to frustration, particularly for users who expected a more seamless setup experience.

84%
Software Features

78% of users were satisfied with the software features included with the MOTU M2, appreciating the basic tools and functionality provided for recording and editing. Users found the software adequate for most of their needs, especially when starting out.

22% of users found the software features lacking, desiring more advanced options or additional plug-ins. Some users felt the software was limited compared to other interfaces, which affected their ability to fully utilize the device's potential.

78%
Durability

86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the MOTU M2, noting its solid construction and resistance to wear over time. Users appreciated the robust materials that provided confidence in the device's long-term reliability.

14% of users were concerned about the durability, often due to issues with specific components like knobs or buttons. Some users experienced wear and tear sooner than expected, which raised doubts about the interface's longevity.

86%
Versatility

83% of users praised the versatility of the MOTU M2, citing its ability to handle various recording scenarios and environments. Users valued its adaptability for different music genres and recording setups, making it a flexible choice for many applications.

17% of users found the versatility limited, often due to specific requirements that the M2 could not meet. Some users needed more features or customization options for particular projects, which the device did not provide, leading to dissatisfaction.

83%
Control Features

79% of users were satisfied with the control features of the MOTU M2, appreciating the accessible and functional design of the controls. Users found the controls intuitive and effective for managing their audio settings during use.

21% of users were dissatisfied with the control features, often finding them too basic or lacking in advanced options. Some users desired more precise or customizable controls to better suit their specific audio needs.

79%
Power Options

82% of users appreciated the power options of the MOTU M2, noting the convenience of USB power for portability and ease of use. Users valued the ability to operate the device without the need for additional power sources, enhancing its mobility.

18% of users found the power options limiting, often preferring alternative power solutions for specific setups. Some users experienced issues with power stability, particularly when using the interface in environments with variable power availability.

82%
Expandability

77% of users were satisfied with the expandability of the MOTU M2, finding it sufficient for basic studio setups and small-scale projects. Users appreciated the ability to connect additional devices as needed within its scope.

23% of users found the expandability insufficient, particularly for larger or more complex audio setups. Some users desired more connectivity options or the ability to chain multiple interfaces together, which the M2 did not support.

77%
Pedal Integration

70% of users appreciated the basic pedal integration capabilities of the MOTU M2, finding it suitable for simple setups and straightforward use. Users valued the available connections for integrating pedals into their signal chain.

30% of users were dissatisfied with the pedal integration options, often requiring more advanced features or specific connections. Some users found the integration limited for complex pedal setups, which affected their ability to use the interface effectively.

70%
Visual Display

89% of users were highly satisfied with the visual display of the MOTU M2, praising its clear and informative readouts. Users found the display helpful for monitoring levels and making quick adjustments during recording sessions.

11% of users found the visual display lacking, often desiring more detailed information or customizable display options. Some users felt the display could be improved for better visibility in different lighting conditions.

89%
Overall Satisfaction

87% of users reported overall satisfaction with the MOTU M2, citing its combination of high-quality sound, build, and functionality as major strengths. Users appreciated its value for money and suitability for a wide range of applications, making it a popular choice among audio enthusiasts.

13% of users expressed overall dissatisfaction, often due to specific unmet expectations or technical issues. Some users encountered compatibility or performance problems that detracted from their experience, leading to disappointment with the interface.

87%

Pros:
High-quality preamps for clear audio capture. USB-C connectivity for faster data transfer and compatibility. Compact and portable design. Low latency monitoring. Easy setup and user-friendly interface.	Excellent sound quality with ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology. Low latency performance for real-time monitoring. Sturdy and compact build, suitable for mobile use. USB-C connectivity ensures fast data transfer. Clear and detailed LCD metering.

Cons:
Limited to two inputs, which may not be enough for some users. No MIDI input/output. Higher price point compared to some competitors. Requires external power when used with some devices.	Limited to 2 inputs and 2 outputs. No onboard DSP effects. Some users may find the software bundle lacking. Requires a USB-C port for optimal performance, which may not be available on all computers.

Key Specs
Channels of I/O
Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs at 192 kHz	Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit	192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
2	2 Preamps
Analog Audio I/O
2x XLR 3-Pin Balanced Mic Input 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Line/Hi-Z Input (Front Panel) 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 1x 1/4" TRS Headphone Output (Front Panel)	2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 2x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output
Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
OS Compatibility
macOS Windows	macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power, USB Power Adapter (Not Included)	USB Bus Power

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer high-quality audio solutions with a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution. However, they have distinct differences in their features and capabilities.
In terms of channels of I/O, both interfaces provide 2 analog inputs and 2 analog outputs. The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 features 2 XLR balanced mic inputs and 2 1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced line/Hi-Z inputs on the front panel, along with 2 1/4" TRS balanced monitor outputs and a 1/4" TRS headphone output also on the front panel. The MOTU M2, on the other hand, offers 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs, a 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone output, 2 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs (DC-coupled), and additionally 2 RCA TS unbalanced line outputs.
Regarding the number of microphone inputs, both interfaces provide 2 microphone preamps. However, the MOTU M2 specifies the use of combo inputs which can accept both XLR and 1/4" TRS connectors, offering a bit more flexibility in terms of input options.
For digital audio I/O, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 does not offer any digital audio inputs or outputs, while the MOTU M2 also does not include digital audio I/O, keeping the focus on its analog connectivity.
Looking at host connections, both interfaces utilize a USB-C connection, ensuring fast and reliable data transfer. In terms of OS compatibility, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 is compatible with macOS and Windows operating systems, whereas the MOTU M2 supports macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later, which includes broader compatibility with older Windows systems.
When it comes to power requirements, both interfaces are powered via USB bus power. However, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 also mentions the option to use a USB power adapter, although it is not included in the package.
In summary, while both the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 and the MOTU M2 offer similar high-resolution audio capabilities and essential features for recording and monitoring, the Scarlett 2i2 emphasizes simplicity and straightforward analog connectivity, whereas the MOTU M2 provides a bit more versatility with its combo inputs and additional RCA outputs. Both interfaces are highly compatible with modern operating systems and are powered through USB, making them convenient and portable solutions for various audio recording needs.

General
Channels of I/O
Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs at 192 kHz	Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit	192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
2	2 Preamps
Built-In Microphone

Input Level Adjustment
2x Knob	2x Knob
Expansion Slots

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface share several similarities in their specifications, making them both strong contenders in the audio interface market for home studios and professional setups alike.
Both the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 and the MOTU M2 offer 2 analog inputs and 2 analog outputs, supporting a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution. This ensures high-quality audio recording and playback for both interfaces. Each device also features 2 microphone inputs, providing flexibility for recording vocals or instruments with microphones.
Neither the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 nor the MOTU M2 includes built-in DSP (Digital Signal Processing), which means any effects or signal processing would need to be handled by external software or hardware. Additionally, both interfaces lack built-in microphones, staying true to their roles as dedicated audio interfaces rather than hybrid recording devices.
For input level adjustment, both interfaces offer 2 knobs, allowing users to manually control the levels of their input signals for optimal recording quality. Furthermore, neither the Scarlett 2i2 nor the MOTU M2 includes expansion slots, indicating that they are designed to be compact, straightforward solutions without the need for additional modular components.
In summary, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are quite similar in their core features, each providing 2 inputs and outputs, high-resolution audio quality, and basic but effective input level control. The choice between the two may come down to brand preference, additional features, or other aspects not covered in these core specifications.

Signal Processing
Gain/Trim Range
Mic/Line Inputs: Up to +69 dB Hi-Z Inputs: 62 dB	Mic Inputs: 0 dB to +60 dB Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 0 dB to +57 dB

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both highly regarded in the realm of audio interfaces, each offering distinct features that cater to different user needs. When it comes to gain/trim range, the Scarlett 2i2 provides a more extensive range. Specifically, it offers up to +69 dB for mic/line inputs and 62 dB for Hi-Z inputs. This broader range can be particularly advantageous for users who require more flexibility in adjusting input levels, especially when working with a variety of microphones and instruments.
In contrast, the MOTU M2 offers a gain/trim range of 0 dB to +60 dB for mic inputs and 0 dB to +57 dB for line/Hi-Z inputs. While this range is slightly narrower compared to the Scarlett 2i2, it is still sufficient for many recording scenarios, particularly for users who do not need the extra headroom that the Scarlett provides.
Additionally, the MOTU M2 lacks certain features such as a pad, high-pass filter, and solo/mute options. These omissions might influence a user's decision, especially if they require these functionalities for their recording setup. The absence of a pad means the MOTU M2 might be less suitable for handling very high-level signals without distortion. Similarly, the lack of a high-pass filter and solo/mute options may affect the ease of managing and refining audio inputs directly through the interface.
Overall, the choice between the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 will largely depend on the user's specific needs regarding gain flexibility and additional features like pads and filters. The Scarlett 2i2 stands out with its higher gain range and potentially more versatile performance with various input sources, while the MOTU M2 remains a solid competitor with adequate gain capabilities but lacks some of the additional features found in other interfaces.

Connectivity
Analog Audio I/O
2x XLR 3-Pin Balanced Mic Input 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Line/Hi-Z Input (Front Panel) 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 1x 1/4" TRS Headphone Output (Front Panel)	2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 2x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output
Phantom Power
48 V, Selectable On/Off	48 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs)
Digital Audio I/O

Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
Host Connection Protocol
USB 2.0	USB 2.0
USB (Non-Host)
1x USB-C (Power Input)
Sync I/O

Network I/O

MIDI I/O
	1x DIN 5-Pin Input 1x DIN 5-Pin Output

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are two popular options for audio interfaces, each with distinct features catering to different user needs.
Starting with analog audio I/O, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 provides 2x XLR 3-Pin Balanced Mic Inputs and 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Line/Hi-Z Inputs on the front panel, allowing for versatile connections for both microphones and instruments. On the output side, it includes 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Outputs and 1x 1/4" TRS Headphone Output, providing a solid monitoring setup.
In contrast, the MOTU M2 offers 2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Inputs, which are also versatile but integrated into combo jacks, saving space and adding convenience. It includes 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output and 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Outputs (DC-Coupled) along with 2x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Outputs, offering more output options catering to various monitoring and recording setups.
Both interfaces feature 48 V phantom power, which is selectable on/off. However, the MOTU M2 provides the added advantage of selecting phantom power individually for each input, offering more precise control over the power needs of different microphones.
When it comes to host connection, both devices use a USB-C connection with a USB 2.0 protocol, ensuring fast and reliable data transfer. The Scarlett 2i2 includes an additional USB-C port for power input, while the MOTU M2 does not have a non-host USB connection.
In terms of MIDI I/O, the MOTU M2 stands out with 1x DIN 5-Pin Input and 1x DIN 5-Pin Output, catering to users who need MIDI connectivity for instruments and controllers. The Scarlett 2i2, on the other hand, does not offer MIDI I/O.
Neither of the interfaces offers digital audio I/O, sync I/O, network I/O, or wireless capabilities, focusing instead on delivering robust analog audio performance through their respective connections.
In summary, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C (4th Generation) is a great choice for users needing straightforward audio input and output options with reliable performance, while the MOTU M2 provides additional flexibility with its combo inputs, more output options, and MIDI I/O, making it a more versatile choice for users with more complex setups.

Performance
Frequency Response
XLR Mic Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.06 dB 1/4" Line Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz 0.05 dB 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz 0.15 dB	Mic Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0/-0.1 dB Line, Hi-Z Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.15 dB Line Outputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0/-0.1 dB
Maximum Input Level
XLR Mic: 16 dBu 1/4" Line: 22 dBu 1/4" Hi-Z: 12 dBu	Mic Inputs: +10 dBu (Min Gain) Line/Hi-Z Inputs: +16 dBu (Min Gain)
Maximum Output Level
1/4" Line: +16 dBu	Line Outputs: +16 dBu (Balanced) Line Outputs: +9.5 dBu (Unbalanced) Headphone Outputs: +12.5 dBu
Impedance
XLR Mic Inputs: 3 Kilohms 1/4" Line Inputs: 60 Kilohms 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs: 1 Megohms 1/4" Line Outputs: 100 Ohms 1/4" Headphone Outputs: < 50 Ohm	Mic Inputs: 2.65 Kilohms Line Inputs: 2 Megohms Hi-Z Inputs: 1 Megohm Line Outputs: 100 Ohms
Dynamic Range
XLR Mic Inputs: 116 dBA 1/4" Line Inputs: 115.2 dBA 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs: 113 dBA 1/4" Line Outputs: 120 dB 1/4" Headphone: 112 dB (at 33 Ohms) 115 dB (at 300 Ohms) Digital A/D Converters: 120 dB Digital D/A Converters: 130 dBA	Mic Inputs: 115 dBA Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 114 dBA 1/4" Line/Monitor Outputs: 120 dBA RCA Line Outputs: 119 dBA Headphone Outputs: 115 dBA
THD+N
XLR Mic Inputs: -100 dB (at 8 dB Gain) 1/4" Line Inputs: -100 dB (at 8 dB Gain) 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs: -80 dB (at Minimum Gain) 1/4" Line Outputs: -109 dB 1/4" Headphone Outputs: -99 dB (at 33 Ohms) -108 dB (at 300 Ohms) Digital A/D Converters: -110 dB Digital D/A Converters: -115 dB	Mic Inputs: < -97 dB / < 0.0014% Line/Hi-Z Inputs: < -100 dB / < 0.001% 1/4" Line/Monitor Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.00032% RCA Line Outputs: < -105 dB / < 0.00056% Headphone Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.0003%
EIN
XLR Mic Inputs: -127 dBu A-Weighted	Mic Inputs: -129 dB A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source, Max Gain)

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface have a number of distinguishing features. Comparing their specifications provides a clear understanding of their capabilities and differences.
Frequency Response: The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 offers a frequency response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a variation of ±0.06 dB for XLR Mic Inputs, ±0.05 dB for 1/4" Line Inputs, and ±0.15 dB for 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs. In comparison, the MOTU M2 has a frequency response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a variation of +0/-0.1 dB for Mic Inputs and Line Outputs, and ±0.15 dB for Line and Hi-Z Inputs. This indicates that both interfaces deliver a flat response across the audible spectrum, though the Scarlett 2i2 has a marginally tighter tolerance in its Line Inputs.
Maximum Input and Output Levels: The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 has a maximum input level of 16 dBu for XLR Mic Inputs, 22 dBu for 1/4" Line Inputs, and 12 dBu for 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs. Its maximum output level is +16 dBu for 1/4" Line Outputs. The MOTU M2, on the other hand, features a maximum input level of +10 dBu for Mic Inputs and +16 dBu for Line/Hi-Z Inputs, with a maximum output level of +16 dBu (Balanced) and +9.5 dBu (Unbalanced) for Line Outputs. The MOTU M2 also provides a higher maximum output level for headphone outputs at +12.5 dBu compared to the Scarlett’s 32 mW into 33 Ohms and 22 mW into 300 Ohms.
Impedance: The impedance for the XLR Mic Inputs on the Scarlett 2i2 is 3 Kilohms, while the 1/4" Line Inputs are 60 Kilohms and 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs are 1 Megohm. The 1/4" Line Outputs have an impedance of 100 Ohms, and the headphone outputs are less than 50 Ohms. In contrast, the MOTU M2’s Mic Inputs have an impedance of 2.65 Kilohms, Line Inputs are 2 Megohms, and Hi-Z Inputs are 1 Megohm, with Line Outputs at 100 Ohms. The differences in impedance suggest that the MOTU M2's Line Inputs are more accommodating to high-impedance sources.
Dynamic Range: The dynamic range for the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 is 116 dBA for XLR Mic Inputs, 115.2 dBA for 1/4" Line Inputs, 113 dBA for 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs, 120 dB for 1/4" Line Outputs, and up to 115 dB for 1/4" Headphone Outputs. The MOTU M2 showcases a dynamic range of 115 dBA for Mic Inputs, 114 dBA for Line/Hi-Z Inputs, 120 dBA for 1/4" Line/Monitor Outputs, 119 dBA for RCA Line Outputs, and 115 dBA for Headphone Outputs. Both interfaces offer excellent dynamic ranges, with the MOTU M2 slightly edging out in some output categories.
THD+N (Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise): The THD+N for the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 is -100 dB for XLR Mic Inputs and 1/4" Line Inputs, -80 dB for 1/4" Hi-Z Inputs, -109 dB for 1/4" Line Outputs, and ranges from -99 dB to -108 dB for headphone outputs. The MOTU M2 offers < -97 dB for Mic Inputs, < -100 dB for Line/Hi-Z Inputs, < -110 dB for 1/4" Line/Monitor Outputs, < -105 dB for RCA Line Outputs, and < -110 dB for Headphone Outputs. The lower THD+N values in the MOTU M2 suggest it provides cleaner signal paths with less distortion.
EIN (Equivalent Input Noise): The EIN for the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2’s XLR Mic Inputs is -127 dBu A-Weighted, whereas the MOTU M2 reports an EIN of -129 dB A-Weighted for Mic Inputs. This indicates that the MOTU M2 has slightly better noise performance in its mic preamps.
In summary, both the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 and the MOTU M2 are high-quality audio interfaces with excellent specifications. The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 excels in certain areas like tighter frequency response and dynamic range, while the MOTU M2 offers better maximum output levels for headphones, lower THD+N, and slightly better EIN. The choice between the two would depend on the specific needs and preferences of the user.

Digital Audio
Sample Rates
44.1 / 48 / 88.2 / 96 / 176.4 / 192 kHz	Up to 192 kHz
Bit Depths
24-Bit	24-Bit
Sync Sources
Internal	Internal

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer high-quality audio performance, yet they come with distinct features that cater to different user preferences and needs.
The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 supports a wide range of sample rates, including 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4, and 192 kHz, allowing users to choose the appropriate rate for their recording and playback needs. It maintains a 24-bit depth, ensuring precise and clear digital audio conversion. The device relies on internal sync sources, offering stable and reliable synchronization for audio processing tasks.
The MOTU M2 also supports sample rates up to 192 kHz, matching the Scarlett 2i2 in terms of maximum sample rate capabilities. However, it does not offer sample rate conversion, which means users must manually adjust their settings to match the desired sample rate. The M2 also features a 24-bit depth for high-resolution audio quality. One of its standout features is the zero-latency direct monitoring and a latency of 2.5 ms at 96 kHz (dependent on buffer size, input to output), which is particularly beneficial for live recording and monitoring. Like the Scarlett 2i2, it uses internal sync sources to maintain audio consistency.
In summary, both the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 provide robust audio interfaces with support for high sample rates and 24-bit depth. The Scarlett 2i2 offers a broader range of sample rates, while the MOTU M2 highlights its low-latency capabilities, which can be crucial for real-time audio applications. Both interfaces rely on internal sync sources, ensuring reliable performance in various audio production scenarios.

Audio Storage & Playback

Compatibility
OS Compatibility
macOS Windows	macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both high-quality audio interfaces, but they differ in several key areas.
Starting with OS compatibility, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation) supports macOS and Windows operating systems, as well as offering mobile app compatibility exclusively with iPadOS. On the other hand, the MOTU M2 supports macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later, making it compatible with a wide range of operating systems, including older versions of Windows.
Regarding processor requirements, the MOTU M2 specifies that it requires at least a 1 GHz Intel processor for both Mac and PC. It also suggests a minimum of 2 GB of RAM, with 4 GB recommended for optimal performance. Additionally, the MOTU M2 requires an available USB 2.0 port and includes the necessary USB cable. An internet connection is also required for downloading necessary software and drivers.
In contrast, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation) does not explicitly detail its processor or RAM requirements, which may suggest it has more flexible or less demanding system prerequisites. However, this lack of detailed requirements could be a consideration for users with older or less powerful systems.
In summary, while both interfaces are robust options for audio recording, the MOTU M2 provides more detailed system requirements and supports a broader range of operating systems, which might make it more versatile for users with diverse setups. The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation), however, offers the added benefit of iPadOS compatibility, catering to users who prefer or require mobile recording solutions.

Power
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power, USB Power Adapter (Not Included)	USB Bus Power

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer USB bus power capabilities, making them convenient for mobile and desktop recording setups. However, the Scarlett 2i2 provides additional power options that may appeal to users seeking more flexibility. It can be powered either through USB bus power or with a 5 VDC power adapter at 900 mA, which is not included in the package. This dual power option can be advantageous in scenarios where consistent power delivery is critical, such as in high-performance or long recording sessions.
In contrast, the MOTU M2 strictly relies on USB bus power, which simplifies the setup process and reduces the need for additional accessories. This can be particularly beneficial for users who prioritize a straightforward and minimalistic approach to their audio interface setup. The reliance on USB bus power also ensures that the MOTU M2 remains highly portable and easy to integrate into various recording environments without needing to carry an external power adapter.
In summary, while both audio interfaces offer USB bus power, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (4th Generation) distinguishes itself with the additional option of using a 5 VDC power adapter, providing more flexibility for users who may require a stable and consistent power source. The MOTU M2, on the other hand, offers simplicity and portability with its exclusive USB bus power design.

Physical
Dimensions
7.1 x 4.6 x 1.87" / 18 x 11.7 x 4.75 cm	7.5 x 4.25 x 1.75" / 19.1 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm (Chassis Only)
Weight
1.3 lb / 595.0 g	1.4 lb / 0.6 kg

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both high-quality options for audio recording and production, each offering unique features suited to different user needs.
In terms of dimensions, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 measures 7.1 x 4.6 x 1.87 inches (18 x 11.7 x 4.75 cm), making it slightly more compact compared to the MOTU M2, which measures 7.5 x 4.25 x 1.75 inches (19.1 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm). This difference in size may make the Scarlett 2i2 a more portable option for users who prioritize compactness in their equipment.
Regarding weight, the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 weighs 1.3 lb (595 g), which is marginally lighter than the MOTU M2, which weighs 1.4 lb (0.6 kg). While the weight difference is minimal, it might still be a consideration for those who need to frequently transport their audio interface.
One notable feature of the MOTU M2 is its anti-theft capabilities, including a Kensington Security Slot. This feature provides an added layer of security for users who need to leave their interface in shared or public spaces, which the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 does not offer.
Overall, both interfaces are robust and offer excellent audio quality, but the choice between the two may come down to specific needs such as portability, weight, and security features. The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 stands out for its compactness and slightly lighter weight, whereas the MOTU M2 offers enhanced security with its Kensington Security Slot.

Packaging Info
Package Weight
1.9 lb	1.8 lb
Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
8.2 x 7 x 2.6"	10 x 7.45 x 2.75"

The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) and the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer a range of features suitable for audio recording and production, yet they differ slightly in terms of physical specifications.
The Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 USB-C Audio Interface (4th Generation) has a package weight of 1.9 lb and its box dimensions measure 8.2 x 7 x 2.6 inches. This compact size makes it a convenient option for portability and ease of integration into various studio setups, providing a balance between a lightweight design and sturdy build quality.
On the other hand, the MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface has a slightly lighter package weight of 1.8 lb and comes in a box with dimensions of 10 x 7.45 x 2.75 inches. While it is marginally lighter, its box is somewhat larger, which might offer additional space for packaging materials or extra accessories included with the interface.
In summary, both interfaces are quite similar in weight, with the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 being marginally heavier. However, the MOTU M2 comes in a slightly larger box, which might be a consideration depending on your storage or transportation needs.