MOTU M6 vs Audient EVO 16: In-Depth Comparison and Review

MOTU M6 vs Audient EVO 16: In-Depth Comparison and Review

The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface are both high-quality devices designed to meet the needs of musicians, producers, and audio engineers, but they cater to slightly different requirements and workflows.
The MOTU M6 is a compact and versatile interface that features 6 inputs and 6 outputs, including four high-quality mic preamps with individual gain controls. It also provides MIDI I/O, making it ideal for integrating MIDI gear. The USB-C connectivity ensures fast and reliable data transfer, and it is also USB bus-powered, adding a layer of convenience for mobile recording setups. The M6 boasts a rugged build quality and includes an LCD screen for easy monitoring of input and output levels, offering a user-friendly experience. It supports high-resolution audio up to 192kHz, ensuring professional-grade sound quality.
On the other hand, the Audient EVO 16 is a more extensive interface, featuring 24 inputs and 24 outputs, making it suitable for larger recording setups or those needing a higher I/O count. It includes Audient’s renowned preamps, which deliver ultra-low noise and low distortion, along with Smartgain technology that automatically sets the levels for you. The EVO 16 also features an intuitive 'Motion UI' control system with a large touchscreen, providing easy access to all functions and settings. Its USB 2.0 connectivity ensures broad compatibility, and it supports high-resolution audio up to 96kHz.
In summary, the MOTU M6 is ideal for users needing a compact, mobile-friendly interface with excellent sound quality, MIDI capabilities, and straightforward controls. The Audient EVO 16, with its higher I/O count, advanced preamp technology, and user-friendly touchscreen interface, is better suited for those with more extensive recording needs or who prefer automated level setting and enhanced control over their recording environment. Both interfaces deliver professional audio performance, but their different features and capacities make them suitable for different types of users and recording scenarios.

Specifications, Advantages, and Disadvantages

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews
  • Overall Purchase Value

    85% of users felt that the Audient EVO 16 Audio Interface provides excellent value for money. They appreciated its high-quality preamps, versatile connectivity options, and reliable performance, considering it a worthwhile investment for both home and professional studios.

    15% of users found the price to be slightly higher than expected, especially when compared to other interfaces with similar features, leading to their dissatisfaction with the overall purchase value.

    85%
  • Sound Quality

    90% of users praised the sound quality of the Audient EVO 16, highlighting its clear and transparent audio reproduction. The preamps were especially noted for their ability to deliver clean recordings without noise, making it a preferred choice for audiophiles.

    10% of users mentioned that they experienced occasional issues with sound clarity, particularly at higher gain levels, which detracted from their overall satisfaction with the sound quality.

    90%
  • Build Quality

    88% of users were satisfied with the build quality of the Audient EVO 16, describing it as robust and durable. They appreciated the solid construction which gave them confidence in its longevity and reliability.

    12% of users expressed concerns over the build quality, citing instances of loose knobs or buttons that felt less sturdy, which led to a reduction in their trust in the product's durability.

    88%
  • Ease of Use

    84% of users found the Audient EVO 16 intuitive and user-friendly, with a straightforward setup process and easy-to-navigate controls, making it accessible for both beginners and seasoned recording professionals.

    16% of users found the interface to be less intuitive, particularly when configuring advanced settings, which resulted in a steeper learning curve than anticipated.

    84%
  • Software Compatibility

    80% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the Audient EVO 16, noting seamless integration with various DAWs and operating systems, which enhanced their overall recording experience.

    20% of users faced issues with software compatibility, particularly with less common DAWs, which led to frustration and additional troubleshooting efforts.

    80%
  • Latency Performance

    87% of users were pleased with the low latency performance of the Audient EVO 16, which allowed for real-time monitoring and smooth recording sessions, crucial for professional audio production.

    13% of users reported latency issues, particularly when using multiple inputs simultaneously, which impacted their ability to record efficiently.

    87%
  • Design Aesthetics

    82% of users appreciated the sleek and modern design of the Audient EVO 16, which not only looked professional but also complemented their studio setup aesthetically.

    18% of users were less impressed with the design, feeling that it lacked distinctive features or was too plain compared to other interfaces in the same price range.

    82%
  • Customer Support

    78% of users were satisfied with the customer support provided by Audient, citing prompt responses and helpful assistance in resolving their inquiries and technical issues.

    22% of users expressed dissatisfaction with customer support, mentioning delayed responses and less than helpful interactions that left their issues unresolved.

    78%
  • Portability

    75% of users found the Audient EVO 16 to be reasonably portable, with a compact design that made it easy to transport for mobile recording sessions.

    25% of users felt that the interface was bulkier than expected, making it less convenient to carry around frequently, especially for those needing a more travel-friendly solution.

    75%
  • Durability

    83% of users were confident in the durability of the Audient EVO 16, with many reporting that it withstood everyday use without showing signs of wear or malfunction.

    17% of users experienced issues with durability, noting that some components became worn or damaged quicker than anticipated, raising concerns about the product's long-term resilience.

    83%
  • Input/Output Options

    86% of users were satisfied with the input/output options available on the Audient EVO 16, appreciating its flexibility to accommodate various recording setups and equipment.

    14% of users felt that the I/O options were somewhat limited for their specific needs, particularly in environments requiring more extensive connectivity.

    86%
  • Driver Stability

    81% of users were happy with the driver stability of the Audient EVO 16, experiencing smooth operation without frequent crashes or disconnections during use.

    19% of users encountered stability issues with the drivers, including occasional crashes or the need for frequent updates to maintain functionality, causing interruptions in their workflow.

    81%
  • Expandability

    79% of users appreciated the expandability options of the Audient EVO 16, allowing them to grow their setup with additional gear as their recording needs evolved.

    21% of users found the expandability options to be somewhat constrained, particularly those seeking more extensive integration with other high-end equipment.

    79%
  • Headphone Amplifier Quality

    85% of users were impressed with the quality of the headphone amplifier in the Audient EVO 16, providing clear and loud monitoring essential for detailed audio work.

    15% of users found the headphone amplifier to be lacking in power or clarity, which impacted their ability to monitor recordings accurately.

    85%
  • Preamp Quality

    89% of users praised the preamp quality of the Audient EVO 16, noting its ability to deliver pristine audio with a low noise floor, making it ideal for capturing high-quality recordings.

    11% of users felt the preamps did not meet their expectations, citing issues with noise or coloration that affected their recording quality.

    89%
  • A/D Conversion

    88% of users were satisfied with the A/D conversion capabilities of the Audient EVO 16, highlighting its ability to convert analog signals to digital with high fidelity and precision.

    12% of users encountered issues with the A/D conversion, noting occasional artifacts or discrepancies in the digital output that affected their recordings.

    88%
  • D/A Conversion

    86% of users were pleased with the D/A conversion of the Audient EVO 16, which provided accurate and detailed playback for critical listening scenarios.

    14% of users were dissatisfied with the D/A conversion, experiencing occasional inconsistencies in playback quality that did not meet their professional standards.

    86%
  • Metering and Monitoring

    82% of users appreciated the metering and monitoring features of the Audient EVO 16, which offered clear visual feedback and control over their audio levels.

    18% of users found the metering and monitoring options somewhat lacking, particularly in more complex recording setups where more detailed level monitoring was needed.

    82%
  • Visual Display

    77% of users liked the visual display features of the Audient EVO 16, considering it helpful for quick adjustments and monitoring during sessions.

    23% of users felt the visual display was too basic or not intuitive enough, which made it harder to navigate and control their settings efficiently.

    77%
  • Power Supply

    80% of users were content with the power supply of the Audient EVO 16, finding it reliable and easy to integrate into their existing power setups without issues.

    20% of users encountered problems with the power supply, including incompatibility with certain setups or insufficient power for all functionalities, leading to operational interruptions.

    80%
  • Build quality

    92% of users appreciated the robust build quality of the MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface. The solid construction and premium materials used in the design were consistently praised, with many users noting that the device feels durable and well-constructed. This reassured users of its long-term reliability, especially those using it for professional purposes.

    Only 8% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the build quality. These users mentioned concerns about the weight of the device, feeling it was heavier than expected and thus less portable for mobile recording setups. A few users also noted minor issues with the durability of some knobs and switches.

    92%
  • Connectivity

    95% of users were highly satisfied with the connectivity options offered by the MOTU M6. The inclusion of USB-C compatibility was particularly praised for its modernity and ease of use, allowing seamless integration with current devices. The variety of inputs and outputs, including MIDI I/O, provided flexibility for diverse recording needs, which was a significant plus for both amateur and professional users.

    A small minority of 5% of users were dissatisfied with connectivity, primarily due to the absence of digital audio I/O options. Some users felt that the lack of advanced connectivity features limited the interface's usability in more complex studio setups.

    95%
  • Controls And User Interface

    88% of users found the controls and user interface of the MOTU M6 to be intuitive and user-friendly. The layout of the controls was described as logical and accessible, allowing users to quickly navigate and adjust settings. This was particularly appreciated by those new to audio interfaces, as it facilitated a smoother learning curve.

    12% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the controls and user interface, citing that some settings required more manual adjustments than expected. A few users also mentioned that the interface could benefit from additional visual indicators to better track adjustments in real-time.

    88%
  • D/A and A/D Conversion Quality

    94% of users were extremely satisfied with the D/A and A/D conversion quality of the MOTU M6, highlighting its capacity to deliver pristine audio quality. The high sampling rate and bit depth were frequently noted as key contributors to the superior sound fidelity, making it a preferred choice for professional recordings.

    6% of users were less impressed with the conversion quality, with some pointing out that while the quality is high, it still falls short of more expensive, high-end interfaces. A few users felt that the difference was noticeable in very subtle audio details.

    94%
  • Direct Monitoring Capability

    90% of users appreciated the direct monitoring capability of the MOTU M6, which allowed for zero-latency monitoring during recording sessions. This feature was particularly beneficial for musicians and producers who require real-time feedback, ensuring a seamless recording experience without audio lag.

    10% of users were dissatisfied with direct monitoring, citing occasional issues with the balance between input monitoring and playback. Some users suggested that more customizable monitoring options could enhance the user experience.

    90%
  • Durability

    91% of users commended the durability of the MOTU M6, noting its sturdy design and reliable performance over time. Many users felt confident that the device would withstand regular use in both studio and live environments, attributing this to the high-quality materials used in its construction.

    9% of users were less satisfied with the durability, mentioning concerns over potential wear and tear of certain components like the knobs and inputs. Some users reported that these parts felt less robust compared to the overall build.

    91%
  • Easy To Use

    89% of users found the MOTU M6 easy to use, especially appreciating the straightforward setup process and user-friendly interface. This ease of use made it a popular choice among beginners and those looking to quickly integrate the interface into their existing setup without extensive technical knowledge.

    11% of users faced challenges with ease of use, reporting that the initial software and driver installation was not as seamless as expected. Some users felt that additional guidance or a more detailed manual could improve the onboarding process.

    89%
  • Flexibility In Settings

    87% of users were satisfied with the flexibility in settings offered by the MOTU M6. The ability to adjust various parameters and tailor the interface to specific recording needs was highly valued, allowing users to achieve their desired sound output with ease.

    13% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the flexibility in settings, noting that some advanced settings were either too limited or difficult to access. A few users suggested that more detailed customization options could enhance the interface's versatility.

    87%
  • For Beginners

    85% of users felt that the MOTU M6 was well-suited for beginners, thanks to its intuitive design and straightforward controls. The informative user manual and online resources helped new users get up to speed quickly, making it an ideal entry-level interface for those starting their audio production journey.

    15% of users, however, felt that the interface could be overwhelming for complete novices, especially those without prior experience in audio engineering. Some users recommended additional beginner-friendly tutorials or simplified modes to ease the learning curve.

    85%
  • For Professionals

    92% of users believed the MOTU M6 met professional standards, praising its high-quality audio performance and robust feature set. Professional users appreciated its reliability and the quality of its preamps, which were critical for high-stakes recording sessions.

    8% of professional users felt the interface lacked certain high-end features found in more expensive models, such as additional digital outputs or advanced DSP capabilities. This limited its appeal for those requiring top-tier professional functionality.

    92%
  • Headphone Output Quality

    93% of users were impressed with the headphone output quality of the MOTU M6, noting the clarity and power of the output. Users who perform detailed audio monitoring found the headphone outputs to be exceptionally accurate, providing a true representation of the audio being produced.

    7% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the headphone output, mentioning that while the quality was high, the maximum volume could be insufficient for environments with high ambient noise. A few users suggested that a more powerful headphone amplifier could enhance the listening experience.

    93%
  • Heat Generation During Prolonged Use

    86% of users were satisfied with the heat management of the MOTU M6, noting that it remained cool even during extended recording sessions. This was particularly important for users working in home studios where prolonged use is common.

    14% of users noticed heat generation during prolonged use, expressing concerns that it might affect the device's performance or longevity. Some users recommended improvements in the device's ventilation design to better dissipate heat.

    86%
  • Input Noise

    90% of users praised the MOTU M6 for its low input noise, which allowed for clear and clean recordings. The high-quality preamps played a significant role in minimizing noise, making the interface suitable for both studio and live applications.

    10% of users reported experiencing input noise under certain conditions, particularly when using dynamic microphones or in less-than-ideal recording environments. These users suggested that additional noise reduction features could be beneficial.

    90%
  • Input Variety

    94% of users were highly satisfied with the variety of inputs available on the MOTU M6. The combination of XLR and TRS inputs, along with Hi-Z options, provided flexibility for different recording scenarios, which was a key factor for users working with a variety of instruments and microphones.

    6% of users felt limited by the input variety, particularly those who required more specialized inputs for niche recording setups. Some users expressed a desire for additional digital input options to further expand the device's connectivity.

    94%
  • Instrument Input Quality

    92% of users found the instrument input quality of the MOTU M6 to be excellent, highlighting the clarity and detail captured. The interface's ability to handle both line and Hi-Z inputs effectively was a major advantage for users recording guitars and other instruments.

    8% of users were less satisfied with the instrument input quality, mentioning that while generally good, it might not match the quality of dedicated instrument preamps. Some users suggested the inclusion of additional tone-shaping features.

    92%
  • Internal Noise Levels

    91% of users were satisfied with the low internal noise levels of the MOTU M6, which contributed to high-quality recordings free from unwanted background noise. This was particularly important for users in professional settings demanding clean audio.

    9% of users noticed internal noise levels in specific configurations or when using certain types of inputs. These users recommended improvements in the internal shielding to further reduce noise.

    91%
  • Latency

    96% of users were extremely satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M6, frequently noting its near-zero latency direct monitoring feature. This was especially beneficial for live recording and monitoring situations, providing a seamless audio experience without delay.

    4% of users reported experiencing latency issues, particularly when using certain software or plugins that increased the buffer size. Some users suggested driver updates or software optimizations to address these rare occurrences.

    96%
  • Line Input Quality

    90% of users found the line input quality of the MOTU M6 to be exceptional, praising the clarity and fidelity of the sound. This made it a popular choice for recording line-level instruments and equipment without loss of quality.

    10% of users expressed minor dissatisfaction with the line input quality, mentioning that while good, it could be further enhanced to match more premium interfaces in capturing the full dynamic range of the input signals.

    90%
  • Multi-Channel Recording Performance

    89% of users were pleased with the multi-channel recording performance of the MOTU M6, highlighting its ability to handle multiple inputs simultaneously without compromising audio quality. This was a significant factor for users engaged in complex recording setups.

    11% of users encountered challenges with multi-channel recording, particularly with complex DAW setups that required extensive configuration. Some users suggested that additional software support or presets could simplify the setup process for multi-channel recording.

    89%
  • Operating System Compatibility

    93% of users were satisfied with the operating system compatibility of the MOTU M6. The device's seamless integration with both macOS and Windows platforms was frequently praised, ensuring that users could easily incorporate it into their existing setups without compatibility issues.

    7% of users experienced compatibility issues, primarily related to driver updates or initial setup on certain operating system versions. These users recommended more frequent updates and comprehensive installation guides to address these issues.

    93%
  • Output Noise

    90% of users were satisfied with the output noise performance of the MOTU M6. They praised its ability to deliver clean and noise-free audio, which is critical for professional recording environments. The device's high performance in minimizing unwanted noise contributed significantly to their positive experience, allowing for clear and crisp sound output.

    10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the output noise level, noting occasional background hiss during high gain settings. This issue, although not prevalent, was concerning for those requiring pristine audio quality for specific professional applications.

    90%
  • Output Variety

    89% of users were pleased with the variety of outputs provided by the MOTU M6. They found the multiple line outputs and headphone jacks versatile for different audio setups, which enhanced their ability to manage various audio monitoring situations effectively.

    11% of users were not fully satisfied with the output variety, expressing a desire for additional digital outputs or enhanced connectivity options to better integrate with their complex studio setups.

    89%
  • Overall Device Performance

    94% of users were highly satisfied with the overall performance of the MOTU M6. They appreciated its reliability, speed, and low latency, which made it an efficient tool for both studio and live recording applications. The device's robust performance played a crucial role in meeting the professional standards required by many users.

    6% of users experienced issues with the overall device performance, citing occasional software glitches and firmware update problems that temporarily hindered their workflow, despite the strong hardware capabilities.

    94%
  • Overall User Experience

    92% of users reported a positive overall experience with the MOTU M6, highlighting its user-friendly interface and seamless integration with both Mac and Windows systems. The ease of setup and operation significantly enhanced their workflow and productivity.

    8% of users had a less satisfactory experience, facing challenges with initial setup and compatibility with certain DAWs, which required further technical adjustments beyond their expectations.

    92%
  • Performance In Professional Environments

    93% of users were satisfied with the MOTU M6's performance in professional environments. They noted its robust build and reliable audio quality, which are essential for demanding studio sessions and live performances. The device's ability to handle intensive audio tasks without faltering was highly appreciated.

    7% of users found the device's performance lacking in certain professional contexts, such as high-track count sessions, where they experienced occasional latency and resource management issues.

    93%
  • Physical Controls

    87% of users were pleased with the physical controls available on the MOTU M6, appreciating the intuitive layout and the tactile feedback of the knobs and buttons, which facilitated easy adjustments during recording and mixing.

    13% of users were dissatisfied with the physical controls, particularly the lack of more advanced control options or digital displays that could enhance precision and usability during complex audio setups.

    87%
  • Portability

    85% of users found the MOTU M6 to be adequately portable for their needs, valuing its compact design and lightweight structure, which made it easy to transport between different recording locations.

    15% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the portability, mentioning that while the device is relatively compact, the requirement for an external power adapter limited its convenience for truly mobile recording scenarios.

    85%
  • Power Consumption

    88% of users were satisfied with the power consumption of the MOTU M6, finding it efficient and economical, especially when used for extended recording sessions. The device's ability to operate without excessive power draw was a notable advantage.

    12% of users were not completely satisfied with the power consumption, commenting that the need for an external power adapter was less convenient than USB-powered alternatives, especially in mobile setups.

    88%
  • Preamp Performance

    91% of users praised the preamp performance of the MOTU M6, highlighting the clean and transparent sound it provided. The high gain range and low noise floor were particularly appreciated, making it suitable for capturing detailed audio recordings.

    9% of users were less satisfied with the preamp performance, noting that at maximum gain levels, there was a slight increase in noise, which could be problematic for very sensitive microphone recordings.

    91%
  • Quality Of Material

    90% of users were satisfied with the quality of materials used in the MOTU M6. They found the construction to be robust and durable, able to withstand regular use in various environments without showing signs of wear.

    10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the material quality, citing concerns over the durability of certain plastic components which they felt could have been made more rugged for long-term reliability.

    90%
  • Quick Setup And Installation

    93% of users were pleased with the quick setup and installation process of the MOTU M6. The straightforward driver installation and intuitive interface were highlighted as key factors that allowed them to get started with minimal hassle.

    7% of users encountered difficulties during setup, particularly with driver compatibility on certain operating systems, which required technical support to resolve, detracting from the otherwise smooth installation process.

    93%
  • Sampling Accuracy And Depth

    94% of users were extremely satisfied with the sampling accuracy and depth provided by the MOTU M6, complimenting its ability to capture high-fidelity audio with exceptional detail. The high sampling rate and bit depth were often noted as standout features.

    6% of users felt that while the sampling accuracy was generally good, there were occasional discrepancies at the highest sampling rates, which, though minor, were noticeable in critical listening environments.

    94%
  • Software Compatibility

    91% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the MOTU M6. They appreciated its seamless integration with major DAWs and operating systems, which facilitated a smooth workflow and reduced technical barriers.

    9% of users experienced software compatibility issues, particularly with older DAW versions or specific plugins, which required updates or workarounds to achieve full functionality.

    91%
  • Sound Quality

    95% of users lauded the sound quality of the MOTU M6, emphasizing its ability to produce clear, detailed, and dynamic audio. The device's high fidelity and neutral sonic characteristics were key factors in fulfilling the needs of professional sound engineers and musicians alike.

    5% of users had minor reservations about the sound quality, usually pointing to subtle coloration in the midrange frequencies that, while not overtly detrimental, was noticeable to those with highly discerning auditory standards.

    95%
  • Stability

    92% of users were satisfied with the stability of the MOTU M6, appreciating its consistent performance without crashes or glitches during extended use. The device's reliability was a significant factor in sustaining long recording sessions and live performances.

    8% of users reported occasional stability issues, such as unexplained disconnections or software freezes, which, although infrequent, were disruptive enough to be noted in professional settings.

    92%
  • Sturdiness

    89% of users were pleased with the sturdiness of the MOTU M6, noting its solid build and resistance to physical wear and tear, which made it reliable for both studio and on-the-road use.

    11% of users expressed concerns about the sturdiness, particularly regarding the durability of the control knobs and connectors, which they felt could be more robust to withstand heavy use.

    89%
  • Suitable For Mac

    94% of users found the MOTU M6 highly suitable for Mac systems, with seamless integration and driver support that maximized the device's efficiency and performance on macOS platforms.

    6% of users encountered minor compatibility issues on Mac, particularly with newer OS updates, which sometimes required waiting for official driver updates to restore full functionality.

    94%
  • Value For Money

    90% of users felt that the MOTU M6 offered great value for money, considering its high-quality audio performance, robust features, and professional-grade capabilities that justified the investment.

    10% of users believed that while the device was of high quality, there were competing products with similar features at a lower price point, leading them to question the overall value proposition.

    90%
  • Versatility

    88% of users appreciated the versatility of the MOTU M6, highlighting its ability to handle various recording and playback scenarios effectively, from home studios to live performance setups.

    12% of users felt that the device's versatility could be improved, particularly with the inclusion of more advanced routing options and additional connectivity features to accommodate diverse professional workflows.

    88%
Show More
Pros:
  • High-quality preamps with clean and transparent audio.
  • 24x24 I/O configuration provides ample connectivity options.
  • Smartgain feature for automatic gain adjustment.
  • Low-latency performance suitable for real-time recording and monitoring.
  • Durable and compact design, making it portable.
  • High-quality audio performance with 24-bit/192kHz resolution.
  • Low-latency monitoring with direct hardware monitoring.
  • Versatile connectivity including 4 mic/line inputs and 6 line outputs.
  • USB-C connectivity for fast data transfer and compatibility with modern devices.
  • Rugged and durable build quality.
Cons:
  • Relatively high price point compared to other interfaces with similar features.
  • Lack of onboard DSP effects.
  • Some users may find the software interface less intuitive.
  • Limited compatibility with older operating systems.
  • Higher price point compared to some competitors.
  • No built-in DSP effects for real-time processing.
  • Limited MIDI in/out capabilities with only one port each.
  • May be overkill for users with simple recording needs.
Key Specs
Channels of I/O
24 Inputs / 24 Outputs Analog:
6 Inputs / 4 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
96 kHz / 24-Bit 192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
8 Preamps 4 Preamps
Analog Audio I/O
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input (Front Panel)
6x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced Mic/Line Input
8x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output
2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output
4x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input
2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input
2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output
4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled)
Host Connection
1x USB-C 1x USB-C
OS Compatibility
macOS
Windows
macOS 10.11 or Later (64-Bit Only)
macOS 10.13 or Later (64-Bit Only)
Windows 10 or Later (64-Bit Only)
Power Requirements
AC Input AC/DC Power Adapter (Included)
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface offer distinct features tailored to different user needs.
The MOTU M6 provides 6 analog inputs and 4 analog outputs. It supports a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution, ensuring high-quality audio capture and playback. The interface includes 4 microphone preamps, which are integrated within the 4 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs. Additionally, the device offers 2x 1/4" TRS balanced line inputs, 2x 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs, and 4x 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs (DC-coupled). The M6 connects to the host system via a USB-C connection and is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later (64-bit only) and Windows 10 or later (64-bit only). The unit is powered by an included AC/DC power adapter.
On the other hand, the Audient EVO 16 boasts a more extensive I/O configuration with 24 inputs and 24 outputs. It supports a maximum sampling rate of 96 kHz at 24-bit resolution. The EVO 16 features 8 microphone preamps distributed across 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs on the front panel and 6 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced mic/line inputs. The analog audio outputs include 8x 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs and 2x 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs. Furthermore, the EVO 16 includes digital audio I/O with 2x TOSLINK optical ADAT/S/PDIF inputs and outputs. It also connects to the host system via USB-C and is compatible with both macOS and Windows operating systems. The unit requires an AC power input.
In summary, the MOTU M6 is designed for users needing high-resolution audio with a compact number of I/O, suitable for smaller recording setups. In contrast, the Audient EVO 16 offers a larger number of inputs and outputs, including digital I/O, making it ideal for more extensive and complex recording environments.
General
Channels of I/O
24 Inputs / 24 Outputs Analog:
6 Inputs / 4 Outputs
Built-In DSP
Maximum Sampling Rate
96 kHz / 24-Bit 192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
8 Preamps 4 Preamps
Built-In Microphone
Input Level Adjustment
Automatic
Knob
4x Knob
Expansion Slots
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface offer distinct features catering to different user needs.
The MOTU M6 provides 6 analog inputs and 4 outputs, offering a robust yet straightforward configuration for small to mid-sized recording setups. It supports a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution, ensuring high-quality audio capture. The interface includes 4 microphone preamps, each with individual knob-based input level adjustment, allowing for precise control over input levels. However, it does not feature built-in DSP, a built-in microphone, or expansion slots.
In contrast, the Audient EVO 16 provides a significantly higher number of I/O channels, with 24 inputs and 24 outputs, making it suitable for more complex and extensive recording environments. It supports a maximum sampling rate of 96 kHz at 24-bit resolution, which is sufficient for most professional audio applications. The EVO 16 includes 8 microphone preamps, offering greater flexibility for multi-microphone setups. Input level adjustment is managed by an automatic knob, which can simplify the setup process. Similar to the MOTU M6, the EVO 16 lacks built-in DSP, a built-in microphone, and expansion slots.
In summary, the MOTU M6 is ideal for users seeking a high-resolution, compact interface with manual control over input levels, while the Audient EVO 16 caters to those needing extensive I/O capabilities and greater preamp capacity with the convenience of automatic input adjustment.
Signal Processing
Pad
Line:
-10 dB
Gain/Trim Range
58 dB (Mic/Line/DI Inputs) Mic Inputs:
0 dB to +60 dB
Line/Hi-Z Inputs:
0 dB to +57 dB
Solo/Mute
Solo, Mute per Input Channel
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface present distinct features that cater to different user needs and preferences.
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface does not offer a pad function, whereas the Audient EVO 16 provides a pad feature for line inputs with a -10 dB attenuation. This makes the Audient EVO 16 more versatile for handling higher input levels without distortion.
When it comes to gain/trim range, the MOTU M6 offers a range of 0 dB to +60 dB for mic inputs and 0 dB to +57 dB for line/Hi-Z inputs. The Audient EVO 16, on the other hand, provides a slightly narrower but comprehensive range of 58 dB across its mic, line, and DI inputs.
The MOTU M6 lacks a high-pass filter feature, which may be a consideration for users looking to manage low-frequency noise directly at the interface level. The Audient EVO 16 does not specify a high-pass filter either in this comparison, so further detail might be necessary to conclude this aspect definitively.
In terms of solo and mute functions, the MOTU M6 does not offer these features. Conversely, the Audient EVO 16 includes both solo and mute options per input channel, providing greater flexibility and control during recording and mixing sessions.
In summary, the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface offers more advanced features such as a pad function, consistent gain/trim range across all inputs, and solo/mute capabilities per channel, making it a more flexible option for professional audio applications. The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface, while robust in its gain/trim range, lacks these additional controls, which may be a deciding factor for users based on their specific needs.
Connectivity
Analog Audio I/O
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input (Front Panel)
6x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced Mic/Line Input
8x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output
2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output
4x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input
2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input
2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output
4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled)
Phantom Power
48 V ± 4 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs) 48 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs)
Digital Audio I/O
2x TOSLINK Optical ADAT / S/PDIF Input
2x TOSLINK Optical ADAT / S/PDIF Output
Host Connection
1x USB-C 1x USB-C
Host Connection Protocol
USB 2.0 USB 2.0
USB (Non-Host)
Sync I/O
1x BNC Word Clock Output
Network I/O
MIDI I/O
1x DIN 5-Pin Input
1x DIN 5-Pin Output
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface both offer robust audio interfacing capabilities, but they differ significantly in their specifications and target applications.
The MOTU M6 features a total of six analog audio inputs, including four combo XLR-1/4" TRS inputs that support mic, line, and Hi-Z signals, and two additional 1/4" TRS balanced line inputs. For outputs, it provides two 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs and four 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs, which are DC-coupled. It also supports MIDI I/O with one DIN 5-pin input and one DIN 5-pin output. However, the MOTU M6 does not include any digital audio I/O, sync I/O, or network I/O capabilities. It connects to the host via a USB-C port using the USB 2.0 protocol and offers 48V phantom power that is selectable on individual inputs.
The Audient EVO 16, on the other hand, boasts a more extensive array of analog audio I/O. It includes two front-panel combo XLR-1/4" TRS inputs for mic, line, and Hi-Z signals, plus six additional combo XLR-1/4" TRS inputs for mic and line signals, totaling eight analog inputs. For outputs, the EVO 16 provides eight 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs and two 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs. The EVO 16 also features four TOSLINK optical ADAT/S/PDIF ports (two inputs and two outputs) for digital audio I/O, and it includes a BNC word clock output for sync I/O, which is absent in the MOTU M6. Like the MOTU M6, it connects to the host via a USB-C port with USB 2.0 protocol and offers 48V phantom power, individually selectable on each input, with a phantom power current of 10 mA per channel. However, the EVO 16 does not support MIDI I/O.
In summary, the MOTU M6 is more compact with essential analog and MIDI I/O features, making it a solid choice for users who need MIDI functionality along with their audio interface. The Audient EVO 16, with its higher input and output count, additional digital I/O, and sync capabilities, is more suited for larger, more complex audio setups that require extensive connectivity options.
Performance
Frequency Response
Mic, Line:
10 Hz to 40 kHz ±0.5 dB
Hi-Z:
10 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.5 dB
Headphone:
10 Hz to fs/2 ±0.5 dB
Digital A/D Converters:
10 Hz to fs/2 ±0.5 dB
Digital D/A Converters:
10 Hz to fs/2 ±0.5 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 Inputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.07 dB
Line Outputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz +0/-0.1 dB
Maximum Input Level
Mic/Line:
+16 dBu
Hi-Z:
+10 dBu
Mic Inputs:
+10 dBu (Max Level In)
Line Inputs:
+16 dBu (Max Level In)
Maximum Output Level
Headphone:
+11.25 dBu
Line:
+12 dBu
Line Outputs:
+18 dBu (Balanced)
Line Outputs:
+16 dBu (Unbalanced)
Headphone Outputs:
+12.5 dBu
Impedance
Mic Inputs:
> 3 Kilohms (Balanced)
Line Inputs:
> 10 Kilohms (Balanced)
Hi-Z Inputs:
500 Kilohms
Line Outputs:
< 50 Ohms
Headphone Outputs:
< 50 Ohms
Mic Inputs:
2.65 Kilohms
Line Inputs:
2 Megohms
Hi-Z Inputs:
1 Megohm
Line Outputs:
100 Ohms
Dynamic Range
Digital A/D Converters:
112.5 dBA (A-Weighted)
Digital D/A Converters:
121 dBA (A-Weighted)
Mic Inputs:
115 dBA
Line Inputs:
114 dBA
Line/Monitor Outputs:
120 dBA
Headphone Outputs:
115 dBA
THD+N
Mic/Line Inputs:
< 0.0015%
Hi-Z Inputs:
< 0.1%
Digital A/D Converters:
< 0.001%
Digital D/A Converters:
< 0.001%
Headphone Outputs:
< 0.001%
Mic Inputs:
-97 dB
Line Inputs:
< -100 dB / < 0.001% (@ 14 dBu)
Line/Monitor Outputs:
< -110 dB / < 0.00032% (@ -1 dBFS, Unweighted, 1 kHz)
Headphone Outputs:
< -110 dB
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface offer distinct specifications that cater to different audio engineering needs. Here is a comparison based on the specified features:
Frequency Response: - The MOTU M6 provides a frequency response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz for mic inputs, line, and Hi-Z inputs with minimal variance: +0/-0.1 dB for mic and line outputs, and ±0.07 dB for line inputs. - The Audient EVO 16 offers a broader frequency response range for mic and line inputs (10 Hz to 40 kHz ±0.5 dB), Hi-Z inputs (10 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.5 dB), and extends to digital converters and headphone outputs (10 Hz to fs/2 ±0.5 dB).
Maximum Input Level: - The MOTU M6 has a maximum input level of +10 dBu for mic inputs and +16 dBu for line inputs. - The Audient EVO 16 supports up to +16 dBu for mic/line inputs and +10 dBu for Hi-Z inputs.
Maximum Output Level: - The MOTU M6 offers a maximum output level of +18 dBu (balanced) and +16 dBu (unbalanced) for line outputs, with headphone outputs peaking at +12.5 dBu. - The Audient EVO 16 provides a maximum output level of +12 dBu for line outputs and +11.25 dBu for headphone outputs.
Impedance: - The MOTU M6 features mic input impedance at 2.65 Kilohms, line inputs at 2 Megohms, Hi-Z inputs at 1 Megohm, and line outputs at 100 Ohms. - The Audient EVO 16 has higher mic input impedance (>3 Kilohms), line inputs (>10 Kilohms), Hi-Z inputs (500 Kilohms), with line and headphone outputs at <50 Ohms.
Dynamic Range: - The MOTU M6 boasts a dynamic range of 115 dBA for mic inputs, 114 dBA for line inputs, 120 dBA for line/monitor outputs, and 115 dBA for headphone outputs. - The Audient EVO 16 offers a dynamic range of 112.5 dBA for digital A/D converters and 121 dBA for digital D/A converters.
THD+N: - The MOTU M6 exhibits very low Total Harmonic Distortion plus Noise (THD+N) with mic inputs at -97 dB, line inputs at < -100 dB (< 0.001% @ 14 dBu), line/monitor outputs at < -110 dB (< 0.00032% @ -1 dBFS, unweighted, 1 kHz), and headphone outputs at < -110 dB. - The Audient EVO 16 provides THD+N for mic/line inputs at < 0.0015%, Hi-Z inputs at < 0.1%, and both digital A/D and D/A converters as well as headphone outputs at < 0.001%.
EIN (Equivalent Input Noise): - The MOTU M6 lists an EIN of -129 dBu A-weighted (@ max gain, 150 Ohms). - The Audient EVO 16 does not provide a direct EIN value but offers a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of 100 dB for mic/line/Hi-Z inputs.
CMRR (Common Mode Rejection Ratio): - The MOTU M6 does not specify a CMRR value. - The Audient EVO 16 specifies a CMRR for mic inputs at > 80 dB (1 kHz).
These specifications highlight the strengths of each interface, with the MOTU M6 emphasizing low THD+N values and robust dynamic range, while the Audient EVO 16 provides a broader frequency response and higher impedance values for inputs. Each interface offers unique benefits depending on the specific requirements of the audio production environment.
Digital Audio
Sample Rates
44.1 / 48 / 88.2 / 96 kHz Up to 192 kHz
Bit Depths
24-Bit 24-Bit
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface each offer unique features tailored to different user needs.
The MOTU M6 supports sample rates up to 192 kHz, while the Audient EVO 16 supports sample rates of 44.1, 48, 88.2, and 96 kHz. Both interfaces maintain a 24-bit depth, ensuring high-resolution audio capture. The MOTU M6 provides zero-latency direct monitoring, boasting a latency of 2.5 ms at 96 kHz, which is dependent on buffer size from input to output. This feature is particularly advantageous for real-time tracking and overdubbing. In contrast, the Audient EVO 16 does not specify latency figures but emphasizes a dBFS reference level of +10.5 dBu for inputs and +12 dBu for outputs, indicating strong signal handling and headroom.
The MOTU M6 utilizes an internal sync source, simplifying the setup and ensuring stable clocking for audio production. The Audient EVO 16's specifications do not detail sync sources, focusing instead on its robust dBFS reference levels and versatile sample rates.
In summary, the MOTU M6 excels with higher sample rate capabilities and zero-latency monitoring, ideal for users needing high-fidelity audio and real-time processing. On the other hand, the Audient EVO 16 prioritizes signal integrity with its detailed dBFS reference levels, making it suitable for environments where strong signal handling is crucial.
Audio Storage & Playback
Memory Card Slot
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface both lack a memory card slot, which means neither device offers the capability to directly record or transfer audio data to an external memory card. This absence indicates that users will need to rely on their connected computer systems for data storage and management.
Both interfaces focus on delivering high-quality audio performance without incorporating direct on-device storage solutions. The MOTU M6 emphasizes its USB-C connectivity, which ensures fast data transfer rates, making it suitable for modern recording workflows. It is designed with multiple inputs and outputs, catering to musicians and producers who need a versatile and reliable interface for various recording and mixing tasks.
Similarly, the Audient EVO 16 offers a robust 24x24 I/O configuration, providing extensive connectivity options for professional studio environments. It features advanced preamps and ADCs, ensuring superior audio fidelity. The EVO 16 is also geared towards users who prioritize high-quality audio capture and playback but do not require the additional functionality of a memory card slot.
In summary, both the MOTU M6 and Audient EVO 16 are designed to serve users who need high-quality audio interfaces without the need for built-in memory card slots. They cater to different aspects of professional audio production while relying on external computer systems for data storage and management.
Compatibility
OS Compatibility
macOS
Windows
macOS 10.11 or Later (64-Bit Only)
macOS 10.13 or Later (64-Bit Only)
Windows 10 or Later (64-Bit Only)
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface each offer distinct features tailored to different user needs. Below is a comparison of the two products focusing on their specified features:
MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface: - OS Compatibility: The MOTU M6 is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later (64-bit only) and Windows 10 or later (64-bit only). It has specific compatibility requirements for different macOS versions, namely 10.11 and later or 10.13 and later. - Included Plug-Ins: The MOTU M6 does not come with any included plug-ins. - Processor Requirement: For macOS, it requires at least a 1 GHz Intel Core i3 processor (64-bit), and for Windows, it needs at least a 1 GHz Intel Pentium processor. - RAM Requirements: The minimum RAM requirement is 2 GB, though 4 GB is recommended for optimal performance. - Storage Requirements: It requires 500 GB of storage space. - Required Hardware: An available USB 2.0 port is necessary, and a USB cable is included with the interface. - Internet Connection: An internet connection is required for software and driver downloads.
Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface: - OS Compatibility: The Audient EVO 16 is compatible with both macOS and Windows operating systems. However, the specific versions are not detailed in the provided information. - Mobile App Compatible: The Audient EVO 16 does not have compatibility with any mobile apps.
In summary, the MOTU M6 offers specific OS compatibility requirements, particularly for macOS users, and includes necessary hardware and internet connection needs for drivers and software. In contrast, the Audient EVO 16 boasts broader OS compatibility without detailing specific versions but lacks mobile app compatibility. The MOTU M6 does not come with any plug-ins, while the Audient EVO 16's specifications regarding plug-ins are not mentioned.
Power
Power Requirements
AC Input AC/DC Power Adapter (Included)
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface differ significantly in their power requirements. The MOTU M6 necessitates an AC/DC power adapter, which is included with the unit. This implies that the device uses an external adapter to convert AC power from a wall outlet into the DC power needed to operate the interface. This can be beneficial for scenarios where consistent power delivery is crucial, ensuring that the device receives the proper voltage and current.
On the other hand, the Audient EVO 16 has a more versatile power requirement setup. It accepts an AC input ranging from 90 to 250 VAC at a frequency of 50/60 Hz, making it compatible with a wide variety of international power standards. This flexibility can be particularly advantageous for users who travel frequently or operate in different countries. The power consumption of the Audient EVO 16 is 20 watts, which provides a clear understanding of its energy usage and efficiency. This information is vital for users who are mindful of their power consumption or need to plan for specific power requirements in their setup.
In summary, while the MOTU M6 uses a dedicated AC/DC power adapter included with the device, the Audient EVO 16 offers more flexibility with its wide range AC input capability and specific power consumption details. These differences can influence the choice of interface based on a user's specific power needs and operating environments.
Physical
Dimensions
16.1 x 14.5 x 3.5" / 40.9 x 36.8 x 8.9 cm 9.21 x 4.75 x 1.8" / 23.39 x 12.06 x 4.6 cm (Chassis Only)
Weight
8.8 lb / 4.0 kg 2.2 lb / 1.0 kg
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface features a Kensington Security Slot, which is an anti-theft measure not found on the Audient EVO 16. In terms of dimensions, the MOTU M6 is significantly more compact, measuring 9.21 x 4.75 x 1.8 inches (23.39 x 12.06 x 4.6 cm) and weighing 2.2 lb (1.0 kg). On the other hand, the Audient EVO 16 is designed for rackmount use, occupying 1 RU of rack space and has larger dimensions of 16.1 x 14.5 x 3.5 inches (40.9 x 36.8 x 8.9 cm), with a weight of 8.8 lb (4.0 kg).
These differences highlight the portability and compactness of the MOTU M6, making it suitable for mobile and desktop setups, while the Audient EVO 16's larger size and rackmount design are ideal for fixed studio installations where more extensive connectivity and functionality are required.
Packaging Info
Package Weight
8.82 lb 3.21 lb
Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
17.6 x 15.4 x 3.5" 13.9 x 7.8 x 3.2"
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface boasts a package weight of 3.21 lb and box dimensions of 13.9 x 7.8 x 3.2 inches. In contrast, the Audient EVO 16 24x24 USB Audio Interface is significantly heavier, with a package weight of 8.82 lb and larger box dimensions measuring 17.6 x 15.4 x 3.5 inches.
These differences highlight the more compact and lighter build of the MOTU M6, making it potentially more portable and easier to handle. On the other hand, the larger and heavier Audient EVO 16 might offer a more robust build, potentially providing more physical space for additional features and controls.
The packaging and weight specifications suggest that the MOTU M6 could be more suitable for mobile recording setups or users with limited space, while the Audient EVO 16 may cater to studio environments where space and portability are less of a concern.
Customer Images
Videos