MOTU M4 vs Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio-MIDI Interfaces: A Comprehensive Comparison

The MOTU M4 and Solid State Logic SSL 2+ are both high-quality USB-C Audio/MIDI interfaces aimed at providing superior sound performance and flexibility for home studios, project studios, and mobile recording setups. Despite their similarities, they offer some distinct features that cater to different user preferences and needs.
The MOTU M4 features a 4-in/4-out configuration with two mic/line/instrument inputs and two dedicated line inputs. It boasts ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology, which is renowned for its exceptional dynamic range and low distortion, ensuring pristine audio quality. The M4 also includes a full-color LCD screen that provides real-time metering for all inputs and outputs, a feature that enhances monitoring capabilities. Additionally, it offers loopback functionality, which is ideal for live streaming and podcasting applications. The MIDI I/O adds further versatility for users who integrate hardware synthesizers and other MIDI devices into their setup. The M4 is also known for its ultra-low latency performance, making it a reliable choice for real-time audio processing and monitoring.
On the other hand, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ features a 2-in/4-out configuration with two mic/line/instrument inputs. It is highlighted by SSL’s renowned analog circuitry, including the Legacy 4K mode inspired by the classic SSL 4000 series consoles, which adds vintage character and warmth to recordings. The SSL 2+ also provides comprehensive MIDI I/O, which is essential for users needing robust MIDI connectivity. The interface includes high-quality Neutrik connectors and Alps pots, ensuring durable and professional-grade build quality. SSL’s emphasis on delivering studio-quality sound is evident in the meticulous design of preamps and converters. The SSL 2+ also comes bundled with an impressive software package, including SSL Native Vocalstrip 2 and Drumstrip plug-ins, Ableton Live Lite, and a 1.5GB sample library from Loopcloud.
In summary, the MOTU M4 is an excellent choice for users who prioritize detailed metering, loopback functionality, and ultra-low latency. Its 4-in/4-out configuration and advanced ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology make it a versatile and high-performance interface. Meanwhile, the SSL 2+ offers a unique analog flavor with its Legacy 4K mode, robust build quality, and an attractive software bundle, making it ideal for those seeking the signature SSL sound. Both interfaces provide exceptional audio quality and are designed to meet the needs of modern recording environments.

In-Depth Analysis of Specifications, Advantages, and Disadvantages

Solid State Logic SSL 2+

MOTU M4

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews
Purchase Value 88% of users felt that the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio Interface offered excellent purchase value. They appreciated the high-quality preamps and the overall sound clarity, which they felt were comparable to more expensive models. The build quality and additional features such as the legacy 4K mode added to the perceived value, making it a worthwhile investment for both beginners and professionals. 12% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, primarily due to the higher price point compared to other entry-level interfaces. They felt that while the quality was high, similar features could be found in less expensive alternatives, making it less accessible for budget-conscious users. 88% Sound Quality 92% of users were highly satisfied with the sound quality of the SSL 2+ interface. They highlighted the clarity and depth of the preamps, which provided a professional-grade audio experience. Users praised the interface for its ability to capture nuanced sound details, making it ideal for recording musicians and podcasters alike. 8% of users were not fully satisfied with the sound quality, mainly due to some minor issues with noise levels at higher gain settings. These users felt that while the general sound quality was excellent, these occasional issues detracted from their overall experience. 92% Build Quality 90% of users praised the build quality of the SSL 2+, noting its robust and durable construction. The interface's solid metal chassis and high-quality components were frequently mentioned as indicators of its long-term reliability, providing users with confidence in their purchase. 10% of users felt that the build quality could be improved. Some users reported issues with the durability of the knobs and buttons, which they felt were not as sturdy as the rest of the unit, leading to concerns about their longevity. 90% Ease of Use 85% of users found the SSL 2+ interface easy to use, especially appreciating its straightforward layout and intuitive controls. The setup process was often described as quick and user-friendly, making it accessible for both beginners and experienced users. 15% of users experienced difficulties with the ease of use, citing issues with driver installation and software compatibility. These users found the initial setup process cumbersome and felt that more comprehensive instructions or support would have been beneficial. 85% Portability 82% of users were satisfied with the portability of the SSL 2+. They appreciated the compact design, which made it easy to transport and use in various recording environments, whether at home or on the go. 18% of users were less satisfied with the portability, stating that the interface was slightly heavier than expected, which made it less convenient for travel compared to more lightweight models. Additionally, some users desired a more protective carrying case for transport. 82% Connectivity Options 89% of users were pleased with the connectivity options provided by the SSL 2+. The dual headphone outputs, MIDI I/O, and USB-C connectivity were particularly appreciated, offering flexibility for various recording setups. 11% of users were dissatisfied with the connectivity options, mainly due to the lack of additional line inputs or outputs. These users felt limited by the available ports for more complex recording configurations. 89% Driver Stability 84% of users reported stable and reliable driver performance with the SSL 2+, noting consistent connectivity and minimal latency issues. The drivers were often highlighted for their compatibility with a wide range of DAWs. 16% of users faced challenges with driver stability, experiencing occasional dropouts or compatibility issues with certain operating systems. These users expressed the need for more frequent driver updates to address these concerns. 84% Software Bundle 87% of users were satisfied with the software bundle that comes with the SSL 2+. The inclusion of SSL Native plugins and other DAW software was seen as a valuable addition, enhancing the overall user experience. 13% of users were not fully satisfied with the software bundle, primarily due to compatibility issues or limited use of the included software. Some users also felt that the software could be more intuitive or better integrated with the hardware. 87% Aesthetic Design 91% of users appreciated the aesthetic design of the SSL 2+. The sleek and professional appearance, combined with intuitive labeling and layout, contributed to a positive user experience and was often cited as a reason for choosing this interface over others. 9% of users were less impressed by the aesthetic design, finding it too minimalistic or plain compared to other interfaces. Some users desired more visual appeal or customization options to better match their personal setup. 91% Customer Support 80% of users were satisfied with the customer support provided by Solid State Logic. They noted the prompt and helpful responses from support staff, which contributed to resolving any issues they encountered quickly and efficiently. 20% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, mentioning delays in response times or lack of thorough solutions to their problems. These users felt that the support team could be more proactive in assisting with technical issues. 80% Durability 86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the SSL 2+, noting its solid build and reliable performance over time. Many users felt confident in the interface's ability to withstand regular use without degradation in quality. 14% of users expressed concerns about the durability, particularly regarding minor wear and tear on the interface's exterior or concerns about the longevity of specific components like knobs and buttons under heavy use. 86% Latency Performance 89% of users were satisfied with the latency performance of the SSL 2+. They reported minimal latency during recording and playback, which was crucial for seamless audio production and monitoring. 11% of users encountered issues with latency performance, especially under heavy load or complex project settings. These users felt that the interface could benefit from further optimization to handle demanding audio tasks more effectively. 89% Versatility 88% of users found the SSL 2+ to be a versatile audio interface, suitable for various recording applications from music production to podcasting. The feature set and connectivity options allowed users to adapt the interface to their specific needs. 12% of users were less satisfied with the versatility, particularly those who required more specialized inputs or outputs for niche applications. They felt that while the interface was solid for general use, it lacked certain features for more specialized recording scenarios. 88% Clarity of Instructions 83% of users were satisfied with the clarity of the instructions provided with the SSL 2+. They found the user manual and setup guides to be straightforward and helpful in navigating the interface's features. 17% of users found the instructions lacking in clarity or detail, especially for troubleshooting more complex issues. These users suggested that more comprehensive guides or tutorials would enhance the overall user experience. 83% Compatibility with DAWs 86% of users were satisfied with the interface's compatibility with various DAWs. They found it easy to integrate the SSL 2+ with popular digital audio workstations, which facilitated a smooth workflow. 14% of users experienced compatibility issues with certain DAWs or operating systems, which occasionally led to frustration or the need for additional configuration. These users felt that better documentation or support for specific DAW setups would be beneficial. 86% Noise Floor 88% of users praised the low noise floor of the SSL 2+, noting that it allowed for clean recordings with minimal background noise. This aspect was particularly appreciated by users working in home studio environments. 12% of users reported issues with the noise floor, particularly at higher gain levels. These users felt that while the noise floor was generally low, there were occasional instances of unwanted noise that could interfere with recordings. 88% LED Metering 85% of users were satisfied with the LED metering on the SSL 2+. They found the visual feedback helpful for monitoring input levels and avoiding clipping, which was crucial for maintaining recording quality. 15% of users were not satisfied with the LED metering, suggesting that more detailed or customizable metering options would enhance usability. Some users felt that the current metering was too basic for more advanced monitoring needs. 85% Preamps 91% of users were highly satisfied with the quality of the preamps in the SSL 2+. They frequently noted the clean and transparent sound, which was ideal for capturing vocals and instruments with precision and clarity. 9% of users felt that while the preamps were generally of high quality, they lacked the warmth or character found in some other interfaces. These users desired more tonal variety or options for coloration. 91% Legacy 4K Mode 87% of users appreciated the legacy 4K mode feature, noting that it added a desirable analog warmth to their recordings. This feature was praised for enhancing the overall sound quality and providing a unique tonal option. 13% of users were less impressed with the legacy 4K mode, finding that it did not significantly alter the sound to their liking or match their expectations for analog emulation. These users felt that the effect was too subtle or not as impactful as advertised. 87% Power Supply 84% of users were satisfied with the power supply options of the SSL 2+, including the convenience of USB bus power. This feature made it easy to use the interface with various setups without needing an external power source. 16% of users encountered issues with the power supply, particularly in setups where USB power was insufficient, leading to operational instability. These users suggested that an optional external power adapter would be a useful addition. 84%	Purchase Value 87% of users found the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface to be a great value for money, highlighting its competitive pricing compared to other interfaces with similar features. Many appreciated the high-quality preamps and low-latency performance, which are often found in more expensive models. Users noted that the interface provided excellent sound quality and a robust build, making it a worthwhile investment for both amateur and professional audio creators. 13% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, feeling that the interface did not meet their expectations in terms of performance relative to its price. Some users encountered issues with the software or compatibility with certain operating systems, which they felt detracted from the overall value. Additionally, a few users mentioned that other brands offered similar features at a lower cost. 87% Sound Quality 92% of users were highly satisfied with the sound quality provided by the MOTU M4. They praised its clear and transparent audio output, which significantly improved their recording and playback experience. Many users appreciated the pristine sound and the high-quality DA converters, which they felt allowed for professional-level recordings without colorization of the input signal. 8% of users were not satisfied with the sound quality, mainly due to individual preferences or specific issues with their setup. Some reported that the sound output did not meet their expectations for clarity or depth, which may be attributed to mismatched equipment or improper calibration. A few users experienced noise or interference that they believed was related to the interface. 92% Build Quality 90% of users praised the MOTU M4 for its solid build quality. They appreciated the sturdy metal chassis, which provided durability and a premium feel. Many users noted that the interface could withstand the rigors of both studio use and on-the-go recording, and liked the high-quality knobs and buttons that enhanced the user experience. 10% of users were not satisfied with the build quality, citing issues such as loose knobs or buttons that felt flimsy. A few users experienced physical defects, such as poorly fitted parts or cosmetic damage. While these cases were relatively rare, they impacted the overall perception of the interface's durability for those affected. 90% Ease of Use 85% of users found the MOTU M4 user-friendly, highlighting its straightforward setup process and intuitive controls. Many appreciated the clear labeling and layout of the interface, which made it easy to navigate without prior technical experience. Users felt that the accompanying software was well-designed and complemented the hardware effectively, adding to the convenience of use. 15% of users found the MOTU M4 challenging to use, often due to difficulties with the initial setup or software installation. Some users mentioned that the documentation was not detailed enough, requiring them to seek additional help online. Others experienced configuration issues with certain DAWs, which took time to troubleshoot and resolve. 85% Software Compatibility 78% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the MOTU M4, reporting smooth integration with major digital audio workstations (DAWs) and operating systems. They appreciated the stable drivers and the ease of configuring the interface with their existing audio setups, which facilitated seamless recording and editing sessions. 22% of users encountered software compatibility issues, particularly with less common DAWs or older operating systems. Some reported driver instability or lag during sessions, which affected their workflow. A number of users also pointed out the lack of dedicated apps or support for mobile devices, limiting the interface's versatility for certain use cases. 78% Latency Performance 91% of users were highly satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M4, noting its low-latency monitoring capabilities and efficient driver performance. This aspect was particularly praised by musicians and producers who require real-time audio feedback for recording and mixing, as it allowed them to work without noticeable delay. 9% of users experienced latency issues, which they attributed to their specific computer configurations or the need for additional optimization. Some users found that latency increased when using multiple plugins or high sample rates, which disrupted their workflow and required adjustments to mitigate. 91% Customer Support 74% of users were satisfied with the customer support provided by MOTU, appreciating the responsive and helpful service they received when encountering issues with the M4. Many users found the support team knowledgeable and capable of resolving their problems efficiently, which increased their overall satisfaction with the product. 26% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, reporting slow response times and unhelpful resolutions to their inquiries. Some users felt that their issues were not adequately addressed, leading to prolonged downtime and frustration. A few also mentioned that the support resources available online were insufficient for troubleshooting their specific problems. 74% Portability 89% of users appreciated the portability of the MOTU M4, noting its compact size and lightweight design. This made it easy to transport and ideal for mobile recording setups or small studio spaces. Users liked that it could easily fit into a backpack or gear bag, making it convenient for musicians and producers on the move. 11% of users found the portability of the MOTU M4 lacking, primarily due to the need for additional cables or power sources in certain setups. Some users mentioned that while the size was compact, the interface did not feel as rugged as other portable options, causing concern about potential damage during transport. 89% Input/Output Options 82% of users were satisfied with the input/output options offered by the MOTU M4, highlighting the versatility provided by the combination of XLR, line, and MIDI inputs. Users enjoyed the ability to connect a range of instruments and devices, which made the interface suitable for various recording scenarios. 18% of users felt that the input/output options were limited, particularly for more complex audio setups. Some users desired additional inputs or outputs to accommodate larger sessions, while others found the lack of digital I/O options a drawback for integrating with certain studio equipment. 82% Design 88% of users appreciated the design of the MOTU M4, praising its sleek, modern look and intuitive control layout. The interface's aesthetic appeal and practical design elements, such as the large volume knob and clear metering displays, were frequently mentioned as positive aspects that enhanced the user experience. 12% of users were not satisfied with the design, citing minor ergonomic issues such as cramped control spacing or less intuitive button placement. Some users felt that the visual design could be improved for easier navigation during sessions, particularly in low-light environments. 88% Durability 86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the MOTU M4, noting its robust construction and resilience to wear and tear. Many users felt confident in its long-term performance, even with regular use in demanding environments. This aspect added to the perceived value and reliability of the interface. 14% of users expressed concerns about durability, often due to personal experiences with wear-related issues or defective units. Some users reported problems with connectors or components becoming loose over time, which affected their confidence in the interface's longevity. 86% Aesthetic Appeal 84% of users were pleased with the aesthetic appeal of the MOTU M4, appreciating its sleek, understated design that blended well with other studio equipment. Users liked the clean lines and professional appearance, which contributed to a positive perception of the product's quality. 16% of users were less impressed with the aesthetic appeal, feeling that the design was too plain or lacking distinctive features. Some users suggested that more vibrant color options or unique design elements could enhance the interface's visual presence. 84% Setup Process 80% of users found the setup process for the MOTU M4 straightforward and hassle-free. They appreciated the clear instructions and minimal steps required to get the interface up and running. The straightforward installation of drivers and software contributed to a smooth start for most users. 20% of users encountered challenges during the setup process, often related to driver installation or compatibility with their specific operating systems. Some users reported issues with outdated instructions or the need for manual troubleshooting to resolve initial setup problems. 80% Connectivity 81% of users were satisfied with the connectivity options of the MOTU M4, highlighting the versatile USB-C connection that provided stable data transfer. Users appreciated the convenience of a single cable for power and data, which simplified their setup and reduced cable clutter. 19% of users had issues with connectivity, primarily related to USB-C compatibility with older systems or the need for adapters. Some users experienced intermittent connection problems, which they attributed to cable quality or port compatibility issues. 81% Driver Stability 75% of users were pleased with the stability of the drivers provided with the MOTU M4, noting that they facilitated consistent and reliable performance across different applications. Users appreciated the regular updates and support from MOTU to maintain optimal driver functionality. 25% of users experienced driver stability issues, which impacted their usage of the interface. Some reported crashes or glitches during sessions, requiring frequent updates or reinstallations to resolve. Others found the drivers less stable on certain operating systems, leading to frustration. 75% User Interface 83% of users were satisfied with the user interface of the MOTU M4, praising its intuitive design and easy-to-navigate controls. Users found the interface straightforward, with clearly labeled inputs and outputs that simplified the recording process. 17% of users found the user interface lacking, mainly due to personal preferences or specific workflow needs. Some users desired more customizable options or advanced features that were not available with the current interface design. 83% Preamp Quality 89% of users were impressed with the preamp quality of the MOTU M4, noting the clean and transparent sound that enhanced their recordings. Users appreciated the low noise floor and ample headroom provided by the preamps, which allowed for detailed and dynamic audio capture. 11% of users were not satisfied with the preamp quality, often citing noise issues or insufficient gain for certain microphones. Some users found that the preamps did not perform as well as those in higher-end interfaces, though they acknowledged the trade-off for the price point. 89% Firmware Updates 77% of users appreciated the availability of firmware updates for the MOTU M4, which improved functionality and addressed common issues. Users valued the proactive approach taken by MOTU to enhance the interface's performance over time through updates. 23% of users were dissatisfied with the firmware update process, often due to difficulties in installation or lack of clear instructions. Some users experienced problems after updates, such as changes in settings or new bugs, which required further troubleshooting. 77% Overall Satisfaction 88% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the MOTU M4, praising its performance, build quality, and value. Users felt that it met or exceeded their expectations in most areas, making it a highly recommended choice for those seeking a reliable audio interface. 12% of users were not fully satisfied with their experience, often due to isolated issues with specific features or compatibility. While most found the product to be satisfactory, these users highlighted areas for improvement to enhance the overall user experience. 88% Metering Accuracy 84% of users were satisfied with the metering accuracy of the MOTU M4, noting the clear and precise visual feedback provided during recording and playback. Users appreciated the detailed meters that allowed for effective monitoring of audio levels. 16% of users encountered issues with metering accuracy, often related to discrepancies between the interface's meters and those in their DAW. Some users found the visual feedback less responsive or precise than expected, impacting their ability to accurately monitor levels. 84% Output Quality 90% of users were impressed with the output quality of the MOTU M4, highlighting its clear and detailed sound reproduction. Many users noted the high-quality headphone and line outputs, which provided accurate audio representation for mixing and monitoring. 10% of users were not satisfied with the output quality, often due to specific issues with their setup or preferences. Some users experienced faint noise or distortion, which they attributed to external factors or mismatched equipment rather than the interface itself. 90% Show More

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews

Purchase Value

88% of users felt that the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio Interface offered excellent purchase value. They appreciated the high-quality preamps and the overall sound clarity, which they felt were comparable to more expensive models. The build quality and additional features such as the legacy 4K mode added to the perceived value, making it a worthwhile investment for both beginners and professionals.

12% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, primarily due to the higher price point compared to other entry-level interfaces. They felt that while the quality was high, similar features could be found in less expensive alternatives, making it less accessible for budget-conscious users.

88%
Sound Quality

92% of users were highly satisfied with the sound quality of the SSL 2+ interface. They highlighted the clarity and depth of the preamps, which provided a professional-grade audio experience. Users praised the interface for its ability to capture nuanced sound details, making it ideal for recording musicians and podcasters alike.

8% of users were not fully satisfied with the sound quality, mainly due to some minor issues with noise levels at higher gain settings. These users felt that while the general sound quality was excellent, these occasional issues detracted from their overall experience.

92%
Build Quality

90% of users praised the build quality of the SSL 2+, noting its robust and durable construction. The interface's solid metal chassis and high-quality components were frequently mentioned as indicators of its long-term reliability, providing users with confidence in their purchase.

10% of users felt that the build quality could be improved. Some users reported issues with the durability of the knobs and buttons, which they felt were not as sturdy as the rest of the unit, leading to concerns about their longevity.

90%
Ease of Use

85% of users found the SSL 2+ interface easy to use, especially appreciating its straightforward layout and intuitive controls. The setup process was often described as quick and user-friendly, making it accessible for both beginners and experienced users.

15% of users experienced difficulties with the ease of use, citing issues with driver installation and software compatibility. These users found the initial setup process cumbersome and felt that more comprehensive instructions or support would have been beneficial.

85%
Portability

82% of users were satisfied with the portability of the SSL 2+. They appreciated the compact design, which made it easy to transport and use in various recording environments, whether at home or on the go.

18% of users were less satisfied with the portability, stating that the interface was slightly heavier than expected, which made it less convenient for travel compared to more lightweight models. Additionally, some users desired a more protective carrying case for transport.

82%
Connectivity Options

89% of users were pleased with the connectivity options provided by the SSL 2+. The dual headphone outputs, MIDI I/O, and USB-C connectivity were particularly appreciated, offering flexibility for various recording setups.

11% of users were dissatisfied with the connectivity options, mainly due to the lack of additional line inputs or outputs. These users felt limited by the available ports for more complex recording configurations.

89%
Driver Stability

84% of users reported stable and reliable driver performance with the SSL 2+, noting consistent connectivity and minimal latency issues. The drivers were often highlighted for their compatibility with a wide range of DAWs.

16% of users faced challenges with driver stability, experiencing occasional dropouts or compatibility issues with certain operating systems. These users expressed the need for more frequent driver updates to address these concerns.

84%
Software Bundle

87% of users were satisfied with the software bundle that comes with the SSL 2+. The inclusion of SSL Native plugins and other DAW software was seen as a valuable addition, enhancing the overall user experience.

13% of users were not fully satisfied with the software bundle, primarily due to compatibility issues or limited use of the included software. Some users also felt that the software could be more intuitive or better integrated with the hardware.

87%
Aesthetic Design

91% of users appreciated the aesthetic design of the SSL 2+. The sleek and professional appearance, combined with intuitive labeling and layout, contributed to a positive user experience and was often cited as a reason for choosing this interface over others.

9% of users were less impressed by the aesthetic design, finding it too minimalistic or plain compared to other interfaces. Some users desired more visual appeal or customization options to better match their personal setup.

91%
Customer Support

80% of users were satisfied with the customer support provided by Solid State Logic. They noted the prompt and helpful responses from support staff, which contributed to resolving any issues they encountered quickly and efficiently.

20% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, mentioning delays in response times or lack of thorough solutions to their problems. These users felt that the support team could be more proactive in assisting with technical issues.

80%
Durability

86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the SSL 2+, noting its solid build and reliable performance over time. Many users felt confident in the interface's ability to withstand regular use without degradation in quality.

14% of users expressed concerns about the durability, particularly regarding minor wear and tear on the interface's exterior or concerns about the longevity of specific components like knobs and buttons under heavy use.

86%
Latency Performance

89% of users were satisfied with the latency performance of the SSL 2+. They reported minimal latency during recording and playback, which was crucial for seamless audio production and monitoring.

11% of users encountered issues with latency performance, especially under heavy load or complex project settings. These users felt that the interface could benefit from further optimization to handle demanding audio tasks more effectively.

89%
Versatility

88% of users found the SSL 2+ to be a versatile audio interface, suitable for various recording applications from music production to podcasting. The feature set and connectivity options allowed users to adapt the interface to their specific needs.

12% of users were less satisfied with the versatility, particularly those who required more specialized inputs or outputs for niche applications. They felt that while the interface was solid for general use, it lacked certain features for more specialized recording scenarios.

88%
Clarity of Instructions

83% of users were satisfied with the clarity of the instructions provided with the SSL 2+. They found the user manual and setup guides to be straightforward and helpful in navigating the interface's features.

17% of users found the instructions lacking in clarity or detail, especially for troubleshooting more complex issues. These users suggested that more comprehensive guides or tutorials would enhance the overall user experience.

83%
Compatibility with DAWs

86% of users were satisfied with the interface's compatibility with various DAWs. They found it easy to integrate the SSL 2+ with popular digital audio workstations, which facilitated a smooth workflow.

14% of users experienced compatibility issues with certain DAWs or operating systems, which occasionally led to frustration or the need for additional configuration. These users felt that better documentation or support for specific DAW setups would be beneficial.

86%
Noise Floor

88% of users praised the low noise floor of the SSL 2+, noting that it allowed for clean recordings with minimal background noise. This aspect was particularly appreciated by users working in home studio environments.

12% of users reported issues with the noise floor, particularly at higher gain levels. These users felt that while the noise floor was generally low, there were occasional instances of unwanted noise that could interfere with recordings.

88%
LED Metering

85% of users were satisfied with the LED metering on the SSL 2+. They found the visual feedback helpful for monitoring input levels and avoiding clipping, which was crucial for maintaining recording quality.

15% of users were not satisfied with the LED metering, suggesting that more detailed or customizable metering options would enhance usability. Some users felt that the current metering was too basic for more advanced monitoring needs.

85%
Preamps

91% of users were highly satisfied with the quality of the preamps in the SSL 2+. They frequently noted the clean and transparent sound, which was ideal for capturing vocals and instruments with precision and clarity.

9% of users felt that while the preamps were generally of high quality, they lacked the warmth or character found in some other interfaces. These users desired more tonal variety or options for coloration.

91%
Legacy 4K Mode

87% of users appreciated the legacy 4K mode feature, noting that it added a desirable analog warmth to their recordings. This feature was praised for enhancing the overall sound quality and providing a unique tonal option.

13% of users were less impressed with the legacy 4K mode, finding that it did not significantly alter the sound to their liking or match their expectations for analog emulation. These users felt that the effect was too subtle or not as impactful as advertised.

87%
Power Supply

84% of users were satisfied with the power supply options of the SSL 2+, including the convenience of USB bus power. This feature made it easy to use the interface with various setups without needing an external power source.

16% of users encountered issues with the power supply, particularly in setups where USB power was insufficient, leading to operational instability. These users suggested that an optional external power adapter would be a useful addition.

84%

Purchase Value

87% of users found the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface to be a great value for money, highlighting its competitive pricing compared to other interfaces with similar features. Many appreciated the high-quality preamps and low-latency performance, which are often found in more expensive models. Users noted that the interface provided excellent sound quality and a robust build, making it a worthwhile investment for both amateur and professional audio creators.

13% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, feeling that the interface did not meet their expectations in terms of performance relative to its price. Some users encountered issues with the software or compatibility with certain operating systems, which they felt detracted from the overall value. Additionally, a few users mentioned that other brands offered similar features at a lower cost.

87%
Sound Quality

92% of users were highly satisfied with the sound quality provided by the MOTU M4. They praised its clear and transparent audio output, which significantly improved their recording and playback experience. Many users appreciated the pristine sound and the high-quality DA converters, which they felt allowed for professional-level recordings without colorization of the input signal.

8% of users were not satisfied with the sound quality, mainly due to individual preferences or specific issues with their setup. Some reported that the sound output did not meet their expectations for clarity or depth, which may be attributed to mismatched equipment or improper calibration. A few users experienced noise or interference that they believed was related to the interface.

92%
Build Quality

90% of users praised the MOTU M4 for its solid build quality. They appreciated the sturdy metal chassis, which provided durability and a premium feel. Many users noted that the interface could withstand the rigors of both studio use and on-the-go recording, and liked the high-quality knobs and buttons that enhanced the user experience.

10% of users were not satisfied with the build quality, citing issues such as loose knobs or buttons that felt flimsy. A few users experienced physical defects, such as poorly fitted parts or cosmetic damage. While these cases were relatively rare, they impacted the overall perception of the interface's durability for those affected.

90%
Ease of Use

85% of users found the MOTU M4 user-friendly, highlighting its straightforward setup process and intuitive controls. Many appreciated the clear labeling and layout of the interface, which made it easy to navigate without prior technical experience. Users felt that the accompanying software was well-designed and complemented the hardware effectively, adding to the convenience of use.

15% of users found the MOTU M4 challenging to use, often due to difficulties with the initial setup or software installation. Some users mentioned that the documentation was not detailed enough, requiring them to seek additional help online. Others experienced configuration issues with certain DAWs, which took time to troubleshoot and resolve.

85%
Software Compatibility

78% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the MOTU M4, reporting smooth integration with major digital audio workstations (DAWs) and operating systems. They appreciated the stable drivers and the ease of configuring the interface with their existing audio setups, which facilitated seamless recording and editing sessions.

22% of users encountered software compatibility issues, particularly with less common DAWs or older operating systems. Some reported driver instability or lag during sessions, which affected their workflow. A number of users also pointed out the lack of dedicated apps or support for mobile devices, limiting the interface's versatility for certain use cases.

78%
Latency Performance

91% of users were highly satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M4, noting its low-latency monitoring capabilities and efficient driver performance. This aspect was particularly praised by musicians and producers who require real-time audio feedback for recording and mixing, as it allowed them to work without noticeable delay.

9% of users experienced latency issues, which they attributed to their specific computer configurations or the need for additional optimization. Some users found that latency increased when using multiple plugins or high sample rates, which disrupted their workflow and required adjustments to mitigate.

91%
Customer Support

74% of users were satisfied with the customer support provided by MOTU, appreciating the responsive and helpful service they received when encountering issues with the M4. Many users found the support team knowledgeable and capable of resolving their problems efficiently, which increased their overall satisfaction with the product.

26% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, reporting slow response times and unhelpful resolutions to their inquiries. Some users felt that their issues were not adequately addressed, leading to prolonged downtime and frustration. A few also mentioned that the support resources available online were insufficient for troubleshooting their specific problems.

74%
Portability

89% of users appreciated the portability of the MOTU M4, noting its compact size and lightweight design. This made it easy to transport and ideal for mobile recording setups or small studio spaces. Users liked that it could easily fit into a backpack or gear bag, making it convenient for musicians and producers on the move.

11% of users found the portability of the MOTU M4 lacking, primarily due to the need for additional cables or power sources in certain setups. Some users mentioned that while the size was compact, the interface did not feel as rugged as other portable options, causing concern about potential damage during transport.

89%
Input/Output Options

82% of users were satisfied with the input/output options offered by the MOTU M4, highlighting the versatility provided by the combination of XLR, line, and MIDI inputs. Users enjoyed the ability to connect a range of instruments and devices, which made the interface suitable for various recording scenarios.

18% of users felt that the input/output options were limited, particularly for more complex audio setups. Some users desired additional inputs or outputs to accommodate larger sessions, while others found the lack of digital I/O options a drawback for integrating with certain studio equipment.

82%
Design

88% of users appreciated the design of the MOTU M4, praising its sleek, modern look and intuitive control layout. The interface's aesthetic appeal and practical design elements, such as the large volume knob and clear metering displays, were frequently mentioned as positive aspects that enhanced the user experience.

12% of users were not satisfied with the design, citing minor ergonomic issues such as cramped control spacing or less intuitive button placement. Some users felt that the visual design could be improved for easier navigation during sessions, particularly in low-light environments.

88%
Durability

86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the MOTU M4, noting its robust construction and resilience to wear and tear. Many users felt confident in its long-term performance, even with regular use in demanding environments. This aspect added to the perceived value and reliability of the interface.

14% of users expressed concerns about durability, often due to personal experiences with wear-related issues or defective units. Some users reported problems with connectors or components becoming loose over time, which affected their confidence in the interface's longevity.

86%
Aesthetic Appeal

84% of users were pleased with the aesthetic appeal of the MOTU M4, appreciating its sleek, understated design that blended well with other studio equipment. Users liked the clean lines and professional appearance, which contributed to a positive perception of the product's quality.

16% of users were less impressed with the aesthetic appeal, feeling that the design was too plain or lacking distinctive features. Some users suggested that more vibrant color options or unique design elements could enhance the interface's visual presence.

84%
Setup Process

80% of users found the setup process for the MOTU M4 straightforward and hassle-free. They appreciated the clear instructions and minimal steps required to get the interface up and running. The straightforward installation of drivers and software contributed to a smooth start for most users.

20% of users encountered challenges during the setup process, often related to driver installation or compatibility with their specific operating systems. Some users reported issues with outdated instructions or the need for manual troubleshooting to resolve initial setup problems.

80%
Connectivity

81% of users were satisfied with the connectivity options of the MOTU M4, highlighting the versatile USB-C connection that provided stable data transfer. Users appreciated the convenience of a single cable for power and data, which simplified their setup and reduced cable clutter.

19% of users had issues with connectivity, primarily related to USB-C compatibility with older systems or the need for adapters. Some users experienced intermittent connection problems, which they attributed to cable quality or port compatibility issues.

81%
Driver Stability

75% of users were pleased with the stability of the drivers provided with the MOTU M4, noting that they facilitated consistent and reliable performance across different applications. Users appreciated the regular updates and support from MOTU to maintain optimal driver functionality.

25% of users experienced driver stability issues, which impacted their usage of the interface. Some reported crashes or glitches during sessions, requiring frequent updates or reinstallations to resolve. Others found the drivers less stable on certain operating systems, leading to frustration.

75%
User Interface

83% of users were satisfied with the user interface of the MOTU M4, praising its intuitive design and easy-to-navigate controls. Users found the interface straightforward, with clearly labeled inputs and outputs that simplified the recording process.

17% of users found the user interface lacking, mainly due to personal preferences or specific workflow needs. Some users desired more customizable options or advanced features that were not available with the current interface design.

83%
Preamp Quality

89% of users were impressed with the preamp quality of the MOTU M4, noting the clean and transparent sound that enhanced their recordings. Users appreciated the low noise floor and ample headroom provided by the preamps, which allowed for detailed and dynamic audio capture.

11% of users were not satisfied with the preamp quality, often citing noise issues or insufficient gain for certain microphones. Some users found that the preamps did not perform as well as those in higher-end interfaces, though they acknowledged the trade-off for the price point.

89%
Firmware Updates

77% of users appreciated the availability of firmware updates for the MOTU M4, which improved functionality and addressed common issues. Users valued the proactive approach taken by MOTU to enhance the interface's performance over time through updates.

23% of users were dissatisfied with the firmware update process, often due to difficulties in installation or lack of clear instructions. Some users experienced problems after updates, such as changes in settings or new bugs, which required further troubleshooting.

77%
Overall Satisfaction

88% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the MOTU M4, praising its performance, build quality, and value. Users felt that it met or exceeded their expectations in most areas, making it a highly recommended choice for those seeking a reliable audio interface.

12% of users were not fully satisfied with their experience, often due to isolated issues with specific features or compatibility. While most found the product to be satisfactory, these users highlighted areas for improvement to enhance the overall user experience.

88%
Metering Accuracy

84% of users were satisfied with the metering accuracy of the MOTU M4, noting the clear and precise visual feedback provided during recording and playback. Users appreciated the detailed meters that allowed for effective monitoring of audio levels.

16% of users encountered issues with metering accuracy, often related to discrepancies between the interface's meters and those in their DAW. Some users found the visual feedback less responsive or precise than expected, impacting their ability to accurately monitor levels.

84%
Output Quality

90% of users were impressed with the output quality of the MOTU M4, highlighting its clear and detailed sound reproduction. Many users noted the high-quality headphone and line outputs, which provided accurate audio representation for mixing and monitoring.

10% of users were not satisfied with the output quality, often due to specific issues with their setup or preferences. Some users experienced faint noise or distortion, which they attributed to external factors or mismatched equipment rather than the interface itself.

90%

Pros:
High-quality SSL preamps for professional-grade audio recording USB-C connectivity for fast and reliable data transfer Comprehensive software bundle included Rugged and compact design for portability Low-latency monitoring with direct monitoring feature	High-quality audio performance with ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology. Ultra-low latency performance, making it suitable for real-time monitoring. Comprehensive metering with full-color LCD display for precise level monitoring. USB-C connectivity ensures fast data transfer and compatibility with modern devices. Sturdy build quality and compact design, ideal for portable use. Loopback functionality for easy live streaming and podcasting.

Pros:

High-quality SSL preamps for professional-grade audio recording
USB-C connectivity for fast and reliable data transfer
Comprehensive software bundle included
Rugged and compact design for portability
Low-latency monitoring with direct monitoring feature

High-quality audio performance with ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology.
Ultra-low latency performance, making it suitable for real-time monitoring.
Comprehensive metering with full-color LCD display for precise level monitoring.
USB-C connectivity ensures fast data transfer and compatibility with modern devices.
Sturdy build quality and compact design, ideal for portable use.
Loopback functionality for easy live streaming and podcasting.

Cons:
Limited to two input channels, which may not suffice for larger setups Higher price point compared to other entry-level interfaces No dedicated MIDI output Lacks onboard DSP for effects processing Requires external power supply for optimal performance	Limited to 4 inputs and 4 outputs, which may not be sufficient for larger setups. No built-in DSP effects, which could limit flexibility for some users. Only USB bus-powered, which might not be ideal for all scenarios. No ADAT or S/PDIF connectivity, limiting expansion options.

Key Specs
Channels of I/O
Analog: 2 Inputs / 4 Outputs at 192 kHz	Analog: 4 Inputs / 4 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit	192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
2 Preamps	2 Preamps
Analog Audio I/O
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 4x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output 2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output	2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 4x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output
Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11 macOS 10.12 macOS 10.13 macOS 10.14 macOS 10.15 Windows 8.1 Windows 10	macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power	USB Bus Power

The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both high-quality options for audio professionals, but they offer distinct features that cater to different needs.
The MOTU M4 offers a more extensive range of I/O channels with 4 analog inputs and 4 analog outputs. The input options include 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs, as well as 2 additional 1/4" TRS balanced line inputs. For output, it provides 4x 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs and 4x RCA TS unbalanced line outputs, which is particularly useful for routing to multiple destinations. Additionally, it has a 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone output. This interface operates at a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution and connects via USB-C. It is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later, and it is powered via USB bus power, making it very portable and convenient.
On the other hand, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ focuses on delivering high-quality audio with fewer I/O channels, offering 2 analog inputs and 4 analog outputs at the same maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution. Its input section includes 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs. In terms of outputs, it includes 2x 1/4" TRS balanced monitor outputs, 4x RCA TS unbalanced line outputs, and 2x 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs, which is ideal for scenarios where multiple headphone monitoring is required. It also connects via USB-C and is compatible with macOS 10.11 through macOS 10.15 and Windows 8.1 and 10. Like the MOTU M4, it is powered by USB bus power.
In summary, the MOTU M4 is ideal for users who need more input and output options, including both balanced and unbalanced connections, while the SSL 2+ is better suited for those who prioritize high-quality audio with the necessity for multiple headphone monitoring options and a straightforward setup. Both interfaces offer robust connectivity through USB-C and are powered via USB, making them both highly portable and easy to use.

General
Channels of I/O
Analog: 2 Inputs / 4 Outputs at 192 kHz	Analog: 4 Inputs / 4 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit	192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
2 Preamps	2 Preamps
Input Level Adjustment
2x Knob	2x Knob
Expansion Slots

The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer impressive features tailored for audio recording and production, yet they exhibit some differences that highlight their unique strengths.
The MOTU M4 provides 4 analog inputs and 4 analog outputs, making it slightly more versatile in terms of connectivity compared to the SSL 2+, which offers 2 analog inputs and 4 analog outputs. Both interfaces support a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution, ensuring high-quality audio capture and playback. Each interface is equipped with 2 microphone preamps and has input level adjustments controlled by 2 knobs, enabling precise gain control for microphone inputs.
Neither the MOTU M4 nor the SSL 2+ includes expansion slots, focusing instead on delivering robust core functionality within their compact designs. While both interfaces are similar in terms of maximum sampling rate, number of microphone inputs, and input level adjustment, the MOTU M4's additional input channels give it a slight edge for users requiring more extensive input options.

Signal Processing
Pad

Gain/Trim Range
Mic/Line/Hi-Z Inputs: Up to 62 dB	Mic Inputs: 0 dB to +60 dB Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 0 dB to +57 dB
High-Pass Filter

Solo/Mute

The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface share several common features and specifications, yet they also exhibit some differences that might influence a user's choice based on specific needs.
Both the MOTU M4 and the SSL 2+ do not include a pad feature, which is typically used to reduce the input level of a signal to prevent clipping. This absence means users of either interface need to manage gain levels carefully to avoid distortion.
In terms of gain/trim range, the MOTU M4 offers a range of 0 dB to +60 dB for its mic inputs and 0 dB to +57 dB for its line/Hi-Z inputs. On the other hand, the SSL 2+ provides a slightly higher gain range, with its mic/line/Hi-Z inputs capable of reaching up to 62 dB. This higher gain range on the SSL 2+ could be beneficial for users who need a bit more headroom, particularly when working with quieter sources or microphones with lower output levels.
Neither the MOTU M4 nor the SSL 2+ include a high-pass filter. High-pass filters are used to eliminate low-frequency noise and rumble, so users will need to manage these frequencies through their DAW or external hardware if necessary.
Additionally, both the MOTU M4 and the SSL 2+ lack solo and mute functions. These functions are often used in mixing and monitoring scenarios to isolate or silence specific channels, so their absence means users will need to rely on their DAW for these tasks.
In summary, while both the MOTU M4 and the SSL 2+ share several commonalities such as the absence of a pad, high-pass filter, and solo/mute functions, the SSL 2+ offers a slightly higher gain range, which might be a deciding factor for users working with quieter audio sources.

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

Sync I/O

Network I/O

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

The MOTU M4 and Solid State Logic SSL 2+ are both USB-C audio/MIDI interfaces, yet they exhibit notable differences in their specifications and features.
Regarding analog audio I/O, both interfaces offer 2x combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs, but their outputs vary. The MOTU M4 provides 4x 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs (DC-coupled) and 4x RCA TS unbalanced line outputs, whereas the SSL 2+ offers 2x 1/4" TRS balanced monitor outputs and also 4x RCA TS unbalanced line outputs. When it comes to headphone outputs, the MOTU M4 has 1x 1/4" TRS unbalanced output, while the SSL 2+ is equipped with 2x 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs.
Both interfaces feature 48V phantom power that is selectable on individual inputs, ensuring support for condenser microphones.
Neither the MOTU M4 nor the SSL 2+ includes digital audio I/O, sync I/O, or network I/O.
In terms of connectivity, both devices use a single USB-C port with USB 2.0 protocol for host connection. They do not feature additional USB (non-host) connectivity.
For MIDI capabilities, both the MOTU M4 and SSL 2+ include 1x DIN 5-pin input and 1x DIN 5-pin output, catering to users with MIDI hardware.
Overall, the MOTU M4 offers a greater variety of line outputs, while the SSL 2+ provides an additional headphone output, which could be beneficial for specific use cases such as collaborative monitoring or private listening.

Performance
Frequency Response
Line, Hi-Z Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.05 dB Mic Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.1 dB Line, Headphone, Monitor Outputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.05 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 Inputs: +5.5 dBu Line Inputs: +24 dBu Hi-Z Inputs: +15 dBu	Mic Inputs: +10 dBu (Min Gain) Line/Hi-Z Inputs: +16 dBu (Min Gain) Line Inputs: +18 dBu (Min Gain)
Maximum Output Level
1/4" Monitor Outputs: +12.5 dBu RCA Line Outputs: +6.5 dBu Headphone Outputs: +10 dBu	Line Outputs: +16 dBu (Balanced) Line Outputs: +9.5 dBu (Unbalanced) Headphone Outputs: +12.5 dBu
Impedance
Mic Inputs: 1.2 Kilohms Line Inputs: 10 Kilohms Hi-Z Inputs: 1 Megohm Monitor Outputs: 1 Ohm RCA Line Outputs: < 1 Ohm Headphone Outputs: 10 Ohms	Mic Inputs: 2.65 Kilohms Line Inputs: 2 Megohms Hi-Z Inputs: 1 Megohm Line Outputs: 100 Ohms
Dynamic Range
Mic/Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 110.5 dB (A-Weighted) Monitor Outputs: 112 dB (A-Weighted) RCA Line Outputs: 110 dB Headphone Outputs: 111 dB (A-Weighted)	Mic Inputs: 115 dBA Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 114 dBA Line Inputs: 115 dBA Line/Monitor Outputs: 120 dBA RCA Outputs: 119 dBA Headphone Outputs: 115 dBA
THD+N
Mic/Line/Hi-Z Inputs: < 0.005% (at -1 dBFS) Monitor Outputs: < 0.002% (at -1 dBFS) RCA Line Outputs: < 0.0025% (at -1 dBFS) Headphone Outputs: < 0.002% (at -1 dBFS)	Mic Inputs: < -97 dB / < 0.0014% Line/Hi-Z Inputs: < -100 dB / < 0.001% Line Inputs: < -106 dB / < 0.0005% Line/Monitor Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.00032% RCA Outputs: < -105 dB / < 0.00056% Headphone Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.0003%
EIN
Mic Inputs: -130.5 dBu A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source)	Mic Inputs: -129 dB A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source, Max Gain)

The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both high-quality audio interfaces with distinct features that cater to different professional audio needs.
Frequency Response: The MOTU M4 offers a frequency response for mic inputs of 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a deviation of +0/-0.1 dB, for line and Hi-Z inputs of 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a deviation of ±0.15 dB, and for line outputs of 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a deviation of +0/-0.1 dB. The SSL 2+ presents a slightly more stable frequency response for line and Hi-Z inputs at 20 Hz to 20 kHz with ±0.05 dB, for mic inputs at 20 Hz to 20 kHz with ±0.1 dB, and for line, headphone, and monitor outputs at 20 Hz to 20 kHz with ±0.05 dB.
Maximum Input Level: The MOTU M4 can handle higher maximum input levels with mic inputs at +10 dBu, line/Hi-Z inputs at +16 dBu, and line inputs at +18 dBu. In comparison, the SSL 2+ has mic inputs at +5.5 dBu, line inputs at +24 dBu, and Hi-Z inputs at +15 dBu.
Maximum Output Level: The MOTU M4 provides a balanced line output of +16 dBu and an unbalanced line output of +9.5 dBu, with headphone outputs reaching up to +12.5 dBu. Conversely, the SSL 2+ offers 1/4" monitor outputs at +12.5 dBu, RCA line outputs at +6.5 dBu, and headphone outputs at +10 dBu.
Impedance: The MOTU M4 features mic input impedance of 2.65 Kilohms, line inputs of 2 Megohms, Hi-Z inputs of 1 Megohm, and line outputs of 100 Ohms. The SSL 2+ has mic inputs at 1.2 Kilohms, line inputs at 10 Kilohms, Hi-Z inputs at 1 Megohm, monitor outputs at 1 Ohm, RCA line outputs at <1 Ohm, and headphone outputs at 10 Ohms.
Dynamic Range: The MOTU M4 boasts a dynamic range of 115 dBA for mic inputs, 114 dBA for line/Hi-Z inputs, 120 dBA for line/monitor outputs, 119 dBA for RCA outputs, and 115 dBA for headphone outputs. The SSL 2+ has a dynamic range of 110.5 dB for mic/line/Hi-Z inputs, 112 dB for monitor outputs, 110 dB for RCA line outputs, and 111 dB for headphone outputs.
THD+N: The MOTU M4 demonstrates very low total harmonic distortion plus noise (THD+N), with mic inputs at < -97 dB / < 0.0014%, line/Hi-Z inputs at < -100 dB / < 0.001%, line inputs at < -106 dB / < 0.0005%, line/monitor outputs at < -110 dB / < 0.00032%, RCA outputs at < -105 dB / < 0.00056%, and headphone outputs at < -110 dB / < 0.0003%. The SSL 2+ also shows low THD+N, with mic/line/Hi-Z inputs at < 0.005%, monitor outputs at < 0.002%, RCA line outputs at < 0.0025%, and headphone outputs at < 0.002%.
EIN: Electronically, the MOTU M4's mic inputs have an equivalent input noise (EIN) of -129 dB A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source, Max Gain), whereas the SSL 2+ offers slightly better performance with an EIN of -130.5 dBu A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source).
Overall, both interfaces offer excellent audio performance with the MOTU M4 excelling in maximum input/output levels and dynamic range, while the SSL 2+ provides more consistent frequency response and slightly better EIN.

Digital Audio
Sample Rates
Up to 192 kHz	Up to 192 kHz
Sample Rate Conversion

Bit Depths
Up to 24-Bit	24-Bit
Latency
< 1 ms at 48 kHz (Input to Output)	Zero-Latency Direct Monitoring2.5 ms at 96 kHz (Dependent on Buffer Size, Input to Output)
Sync Sources
Internal	Internal

When comparing the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface, several key features exhibit similarities and differences that could influence a user's choice based on their specific needs.
Both interfaces support sample rates of up to 192 kHz and offer 24-bit depth, ensuring high-quality audio recording and playback. Neither device includes sample rate conversion, which means users must rely on the internal clock of each interface for maintaining audio fidelity. This factor makes both interfaces suitable for professional and high-fidelity project requirements.
In terms of latency, the MOTU M4 offers zero-latency direct monitoring and claims a latency of 2.5 ms at 96 kHz, which is dependent on the buffer size and the input-to-output configuration. On the other hand, the SSL 2+ boasts a significantly lower latency of less than 1 ms at 48 kHz from input to output. This lower latency might be particularly attractive to users who require real-time monitoring with minimal delay, such as musicians and vocalists.
Both the MOTU M4 and SSL 2+ rely on internal sync sources. This feature is standard for many audio interfaces, ensuring that the devices maintain consistent timing without needing external synchronization.
In conclusion, while both the MOTU M4 and SSL 2+ offer high-quality audio capabilities with up to 192 kHz sample rates and 24-bit depth, the SSL 2+ stands out with its lower latency performance. The choice between these two interfaces may ultimately come down to the user's specific latency requirements and preferences for direct monitoring capabilities.

Audio Storage & Playback
Memory Card Slot

When comparing the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface, both lack a memory card slot. This means that neither interface includes the capability to directly record or transfer files via a memory card, which might be a consideration for users who prioritize direct data portability or standalone recording features.
The MOTU M4 is known for its high-quality sound and ultra-low latency performance, featuring ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology for superb audio fidelity. It offers a robust set of I/O options with four inputs and four outputs, including MIDI I/O, making it versatile for various recording and production environments. The interface also includes a full-color LCD screen, allowing users to visually monitor levels and other important information at a glance.
On the other hand, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ brings the renowned SSL sound to a compact and user-friendly interface. It includes two SSL-designed microphone preamps and features the signature Legacy 4K button, which adds a high-frequency boost and subtle harmonic distortion inspired by the classic SSL 4000 series console. The SSL 2+ also provides a comprehensive range of I/O options, including two headphone outputs and MIDI I/O, catering to both recording and monitoring needs.
Overall, both the MOTU M4 and SSL 2+ offer professional-grade audio quality and comprehensive connectivity, but neither includes a memory card slot, emphasizing their design focus on direct, high-quality audio interfacing with computers and other digital audio workstations.

Compatibility
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11 macOS 10.12 macOS 10.13 macOS 10.14 macOS 10.15 Windows 8.1 Windows 10	macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later
Required Hardware
Available USB 2.0 Port USB Cable (Included)	Available USB 2.0 Port USB Cable (Included)
Internet Connection
Required for Registration, Software/Driver Download	Required for Software/Driver Download

The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later. It requires a minimum processor of 1 GHz Intel for both Mac and PC, with a RAM requirement of 2 GB, although 4 GB is recommended for optimal performance. Essential hardware includes an available USB 2.0 port and the USB cable, which is included in the package. Additionally, an internet connection is necessary for downloading the required software and drivers.
In comparison, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface supports a range of macOS versions from 10.11 to 10.15 and is compatible with Windows 8.1 and Windows 10. It does not support mobile device compatibility. Similar to the MOTU M4, it requires an available USB 2.0 port and includes a USB cable. An internet connection is also necessary for registration and downloading the necessary software and drivers.
Both interfaces require an available USB 2.0 port and include a USB cable, with an internet connection being essential for software and driver downloads. However, the MOTU M4 offers broader OS compatibility by supporting older versions of Windows (starting from Windows 7), while the SSL 2+ starts from Windows 8.1. The SSL 2+ also supports a wider range of macOS versions, extending up to macOS 10.15. Additionally, the MOTU M4 specifies RAM requirements and processor needs, which could be crucial for users with older or less powerful systems.

Power
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power	USB Bus Power

Both the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface share the same power requirement, as both are powered via USB bus power. This means that neither device requires an external power adapter, simplifying setup and increasing portability.
The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface is designed to draw power directly from the connected USB-C port, ensuring that users can operate the interface seamlessly with their computer without needing additional power sources. This feature is particularly advantageous for mobile recording setups and musicians who need to work in various locations without the hassle of carrying extra cables or adapters.
Similarly, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface also utilizes USB bus power, making it equally convenient and portable. By relying on the USB connection for power, the SSL 2+ provides a streamlined and efficient solution for recording and production tasks. This setup is ideal for those who prioritize a clean and minimalistic workspace, as well as for users who need a reliable interface that can be quickly and easily connected to their laptop or desktop.
In summary, both the MOTU M4 and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ offer the convenience of USB bus power, eliminating the need for external power supplies and enhancing their portability and ease of use. This feature aligns with the needs of modern audio professionals and hobbyists who value a straightforward and efficient setup for their recording and production activities.

Physical
Anti-Theft Features
Kensington Security Slot	Kensington Security Slot
Dimensions
9.2 x 6.2 x 2.7" / 23.4 x 15.7 x 6.9 cm	8.25 x 4.25 x 1.75" / 20.96 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm (Chassis Only)
Weight
2.0 lb / 0.9 kg	1.6 lb / 0.7 kg

The MOTU M4 and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interfaces both feature a Kensington Security Slot, which provides an anti-theft solution for securing the devices in various settings. This is a valuable feature for users who need to ensure the safety of their equipment, especially in shared or public environments.
In terms of dimensions, the MOTU M4 measures 8.25 x 4.25 x 1.75 inches (20.96 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm) and is relatively compact and portable. In comparison, the SSL 2+ is slightly larger, with dimensions of 9.2 x 6.2 x 2.7 inches (23.4 x 15.7 x 6.9 cm), making it less compact but potentially offering a more robust build.
Regarding weight, the MOTU M4 weighs in at 1.6 lb (0.7 kg), making it lighter and easier to carry around for mobile recording setups. The SSL 2+ is a bit heavier at 2.0 lb (0.9 kg), which might imply a more solid construction but could be slightly less convenient for portability.
The SSL 2+ includes specifications for operating temperature and storage temperature, with an operating range of 33 to 104°F (1 to 40°C) and a storage range of -4 to 122°F (-20 to 50°C). This information indicates the environmental conditions in which the SSL 2+ can reliably operate and be stored, which is useful for users who need to know the durability and reliability of the device under different conditions. The MOTU M4 does not provide specific temperature ranges, which might be a consideration for users planning to use or store the interface in extreme conditions.

Packaging Info
Package Weight
2.61 lb	2.15 lb
Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
10.9 x 7.9 x 4.1"	10.6 x 7.3 x 2.8"

When comparing the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface and the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface, both products offer a robust set of features tailored for high-quality audio recording and MIDI interfacing. However, there are distinctions in their packaging specifications that may influence a user's decision based on portability and storage needs.
The MOTU M4 USB-C Audio-MIDI Interface has a package weight of 2.15 lb, making it relatively lightweight and easy to transport. Its compact box dimensions of 10.6 x 7.3 x 2.8 inches ensure that it won't take up much space, whether you're storing it in a studio or carrying it in a backpack for mobile recording sessions. This compactness is a significant advantage for users who require a high degree of portability without sacrificing performance.
In contrast, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface has a slightly heavier package weight of 2.61 lb. While this difference may not be substantial, it is noticeable for those who prioritize lightweight equipment. The box dimensions for the SSL 2+ are 10.9 x 7.9 x 4.1 inches, indicating a slightly larger and bulkier package. This additional size could provide more protection for the device during transport but may also require more storage space.
In summary, while both interfaces are designed to deliver high-quality audio and MIDI performance, the MOTU M4 stands out for its lighter weight and more compact packaging. On the other hand, the Solid State Logic SSL 2+ offers a slightly more robust package, which may appeal to users who prefer a sturdier build and don't mind the extra weight and size.