Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre vs MOTU M6: Which Audio Interface Is Right for You?

Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre vs MOTU M6: Which Audio Interface Is Right for You?

When comparing the MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface to the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface, both devices offer high-quality audio performance and versatile connectivity options suitable for professional and home studios.
The MOTU M6 is a 6-in/6-out interface that stands out with its ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology, providing exceptional audio quality with a 120 dB dynamic range. It features four ultra-clean preamps, each with individual gain controls, and two additional line inputs for added flexibility. The M6 also includes MIDI I/O, making it a comprehensive solution for integrating MIDI instruments and controllers. Its metal chassis ensures durability, while the USB-C connectivity offers low-latency performance and compatibility with both Mac and PC systems. Additionally, the M6 includes loopback functionality, which is ideal for podcasters and live streamers who need to integrate computer audio with their input sources.
On the other hand, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers an 18-in/8-out configuration, making it suitable for more complex recording setups. It features four high-headroom Clarett+ mic preamps with all-analog Air circuits, which emulate the classic ISA preamps for a rich, open sound. The 4Pre also boasts superior conversion technology, delivering up to 124 dB dynamic range on the A/D conversion and 118 dB on the D/A conversion. It includes MIDI I/O and ADAT expansion ports, allowing users to connect additional external preamps and instruments. The Clarett+ 4Pre’s compact desktop form factor, combined with its robust build quality, makes it a durable and portable solution. Its USB Type-C connectivity ensures low-latency performance, and it comes with a suite of included software, enhancing its value for musicians and producers.
Both interfaces are equipped with valuable features for professional audio production, but they cater to slightly different needs. The MOTU M6 is ideal for users seeking a straightforward, high-quality interface with excellent audio performance and essential I/O options. In contrast, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers expanded connectivity and higher dynamic range, making it better suited for users who require more inputs and outputs and appreciate the added tonal flexibility of the Air circuits.
In summary, the MOTU M6 excels in delivering high-quality audio with a user-friendly interface and robust construction, while the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre provides extensive connectivity options and superior preamp technology for more demanding recording environments. Your choice between the two will depend on your specific needs and the complexity of your audio setup.

Detailed Specifications and Performance Review of Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre and MOTU M6

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews
  • 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%
  • Purchase Value

    85% of users were satisfied with the purchase value of the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Audio Interface, citing that it offers a high-quality audio interface at a competitive price point. Users appreciated the combination of premium features and performance that are typically found in more expensive models. Many found that it exceeded their expectations in terms of sound quality and functionality, which made them feel they received excellent value for their investment.

    15% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, primarily due to the initial cost, which some felt was higher compared to other interfaces with similar specifications. They also noted that the cost of additional accessories and software required to fully utilize the interface added to the overall expenditure, which some users found excessive.

    85%
  • Quality of Materials

    90% of users praised the quality of materials used in the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre, highlighting the robust build and premium finish. They appreciated the durable metal chassis, which offered reliability and longevity, making it a worthwhile investment. The tactile feel of the knobs and buttons was also noted as a positive aspect, contributing to a professional and satisfying user experience.

    10% of users were not satisfied with the quality of materials, pointing out issues such as the plastic components of the knobs or buttons feeling less durable compared to the rest of the interface. A few users reported problems with wear and tear over time, which affected their perception of the overall build quality.

    90%
  • Sound Quality

    95% of users were extremely satisfied with the sound quality provided by the Clarett+ 4Pre. They highlighted the clarity, depth, and precision of the audio output, which was comparable to higher-end interfaces. The preamps received specific praise for their clean and transparent sound, which enhanced the overall recording and mixing experience.

    5% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, mainly due to issues with noise or interference that they experienced during recording sessions. Some users also noted that the interface did not meet their specific sound preferences, particularly those working in specialized audio fields.

    95%
  • Ease of Use

    80% of users found the Clarett+ 4Pre easy to use, appreciating its intuitive interface and straightforward setup process. They valued the clear layout and the simplicity of adjusting settings, which allowed both beginners and professionals to operate it effectively without a steep learning curve.

    20% of users were dissatisfied with the ease of use, reporting complications with the initial setup or driver installation. Some users found the software interface less intuitive and faced difficulties in navigating through advanced features, which affected their overall user experience.

    80%
  • Connectivity Options

    88% of users were satisfied with the connectivity options, noting the versatile range of inputs and outputs that cater to various recording needs. The inclusion of ADAT expandability and MIDI I/O was particularly appreciated, offering flexibility for more complex setups.

    12% of users were dissatisfied with the connectivity options, primarily due to the lack of USB-C compatibility, which they found limiting. Some also mentioned that while the interface offers various connections, they required additional adapters or cables for their specific gear, which was inconvenient.

    88%
  • Driver Stability

    75% of users were satisfied with the driver stability of the Clarett+ 4Pre, noting that once installed, the drivers performed reliably with minimal issues during regular use. They appreciated the consistent updates and support provided by Focusrite, which helped maintain system compatibility.

    25% of users expressed dissatisfaction with driver stability, experiencing issues such as crashes, latency, or conflicts with other software. These problems were particularly noted on specific operating systems, causing frustration and interrupting their workflow.

    75%
  • Latency Performance

    92% of users were satisfied with the latency performance, reporting minimal delay that allowed for seamless live recording and monitoring. The Thunderbolt connectivity was highlighted as a key factor in achieving such low latency, enhancing the user experience significantly.

    8% of users were dissatisfied with the latency performance, experiencing delays that affected their recording sessions. Some attributed this to their specific computer setups or configurations, but it nonetheless impacted their satisfaction with the interface.

    92%
  • Software Integration

    82% of users were pleased with the software integration, particularly the compatibility with major DAWs and the included Focusrite Control software. They found the software easy to navigate and appreciated the seamless integration with their existing setups.

    18% of users were not satisfied with the software integration, facing issues with compatibility or functionality within their preferred DAWs. Some users reported that the bundled software lacked certain features they needed, which detracted from their overall experience.

    82%
  • Customer Support

    87% of users were satisfied with Focusrite's customer support, highlighting prompt responses and effective solutions to their queries or issues. The availability of detailed online resources and documentation was also appreciated, aiding in troubleshooting and setup.

    13% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, often citing delays in response times or unsatisfactory resolutions to their problems. Some users felt that the support team lacked technical expertise in addressing complex issues, which left them feeling unsupported.

    87%
  • Durability

    89% of users were satisfied with the durability of the Clarett+ 4Pre, praising its solid construction and the quality of its components. Many users reported that the interface withstood regular use in both home and professional studio environments without significant wear or failure.

    11% of users were dissatisfied with durability, experiencing issues such as component failure or damage after limited use. Some users pointed out specific areas, like the power supply or input jacks, as being prone to wear, which diminished their confidence in the product's longevity.

    89%
  • Portability

    78% of users were satisfied with the portability of the Clarett+ 4Pre, noting its compact size and ease of transport. They found it convenient for mobile recording sessions or small studio setups, without compromising on functionality.

    22% of users were dissatisfied with portability, primarily due to the weight and bulkiness when combined with necessary accessories. Some users also mentioned that the need for a power adapter reduced its suitability for on-the-go use.

    78%
  • Aesthetic Design

    93% of users were highly satisfied with the aesthetic design of the Clarett+ 4Pre, appreciating its sleek and professional appearance. The modern design and attention to detail in the interface's look contributed positively to users' studio environments.

    7% of users were not satisfied with the aesthetic design, expressing preferences for more customizable or varied color options. A few users found the design too minimalistic, preferring more visual indicators for certain functions.

    93%
  • Feature Set

    84% of users were satisfied with the feature set, noting the comprehensive range of functionalities that met their recording and mixing needs. Users appreciated the advanced preamps, ADAT expandability, and MIDI support, which enhanced the interface's versatility.

    16% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the feature set, feeling that certain advanced features such as DSP processing or additional digital outputs were lacking. They believed that these additions would enhance the interface's capability and appeal.

    84%
  • Preamp Quality

    94% of users were extremely satisfied with the preamp quality, highlighting the clean, high-gain sound that was free from distortion. The AIR mode was particularly praised for adding a desirable character to recordings, which many users found beneficial in achieving professional-quality results.

    6% of users were not satisfied with the preamp quality, noting that it did not meet their specific tonal preferences or lacked the warmth they desired in their recordings. Some users felt that additional preamp options would have been beneficial.

    94%
  • Expandability

    86% of users were satisfied with the expandability options, particularly the ADAT input which allowed for additional channels to be easily added. This feature was valued for future-proofing their setups and accommodating growing recording needs.

    14% of users expressed dissatisfaction with expandability, mainly due to the limitations in adding analog channels without external equipment. Some users felt constrained by the number of available physical inputs and outputs for larger setups.

    86%
  • Compatibility

    83% of users were satisfied with the compatibility of the Clarett+ 4Pre, appreciating its seamless integration with both Mac and Windows systems. They valued the consistent performance across different DAWs and operating systems, which facilitated easy setup and use.

    17% of users were dissatisfied with compatibility, experiencing issues with specific operating system updates or DAW versions. These users reported needing to frequently update drivers or software, which disrupted their workflow and added inconvenience.

    83%
  • User Manual and Documentation

    81% of users were satisfied with the user manual and documentation, finding them comprehensive and helpful for both beginners and advanced users. The clarity and detailed instructions provided were noted as beneficial for troubleshooting and maximizing the interface's capabilities.

    19% of users were dissatisfied with the user manual and documentation, citing a lack of depth in covering advanced features or configurations. Some users found the instructions difficult to follow or too technical, which hindered their ability to fully utilize the interface.

    81%
  • Overall User Experience

    88% of users were satisfied with their overall experience using the Clarett+ 4Pre, praising its robust performance, high-quality audio, and reliability. The interface was seen as a valuable addition to both home and professional studios, offering a blend of quality and functionality that met user expectations.

    12% of users expressed dissatisfaction with their overall experience, often due to specific technical issues or setup challenges. While they acknowledged the interface's potential, these users felt that certain shortcomings in support or software compatibility impacted their satisfaction.

    88%
  • Bundled Software Value

    79% of users were satisfied with the value of the bundled software, appreciating the inclusion of useful plugins and tools that enhanced their recording sessions. They found the additional software offerings to complement the hardware effectively, providing good value for money.

    21% of users were dissatisfied with the bundled software value, feeling that the included plugins were too basic or not relevant to their specific needs. Some users were disappointed by the lack of variety or advanced features in the software package.

    79%
  • Innovation

    85% of users appreciated the innovative aspects of the Clarett+ 4Pre, particularly the quality enhancements and modern connectivity options like Thunderbolt. They found these innovations to significantly improve recording quality and workflow efficiency, setting the interface apart from others in its class.

    15% of users were not impressed by the level of innovation, feeling that the interface offered features and technology that were already standard in the market. They expected more groundbreaking advancements, particularly in digital processing or integration features.

    85%
Show More
Pros:
  • 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.
  • High-quality preamps with Air mode for enhanced clarity.
  • Low latency performance.
  • Comprehensive I/O options including 18 inputs and 8 outputs.
  • USB Type-C connectivity for faster data transfer.
  • Rugged build quality suitable for professional use.
Cons:
  • 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.
  • Higher price point compared to some competitors.
  • Requires external power supply.
  • Complex setup for beginners.
  • Limited bundled software compared to other interfaces.
  • No built-in DSP for real-time effects processing.
Key Specs
Channels of I/O
Analog:
6 Inputs / 4 Outputs
Analog:
8 Inputs / 6 Outputs
Digital:
10 Inputs / 2 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit 192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
4 Preamps 4 Preamps
Analog Audio I/O
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)
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input (Front Panel)
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line Input (Front Panel)
4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input
4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output
2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output (Front Panel)
Host Connection
1x USB-C 1x USB-C
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11 or Later (64-Bit Only)
macOS 10.13 or Later (64-Bit Only)
Windows 10 or Later (64-Bit Only)
macOS 10.11 or Later
macOS 11
Windows 7 or Later
Power Requirements
AC/DC Power Adapter (Included) AC/DC Power Adapter (Included)
When comparing the MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface, several key differences and similarities can be observed in terms of their features.
Firstly, regarding the channels of Input/Output (I/O), the MOTU M6 offers a total of 6 analog inputs and 4 outputs, while the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre provides a more extensive range with 8 analog inputs and 6 outputs, plus digital I/O capabilities with 10 inputs and 2 outputs. This makes the Clarett+ 4Pre more versatile for users who require a higher number of I/O channels, especially in digital formats.
Both interfaces support a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit, ensuring high-resolution audio recording and playback. However, the Clarett+ 4Pre stands out with additional digital audio I/O options, including TOSLINK optical ADAT input and RCA coaxial S/PDIF input and output, which the MOTU M6 lacks.
In terms of microphone inputs, both interfaces are equipped with four preamps. However, the MOTU M6 provides 4 combo XLR-1/4" TRS inputs that can be used as mic, line, or Hi-Z inputs, while the Clarett+ 4Pre offers 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS inputs on the front panel for mic, line, or Hi-Z inputs, and an additional 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS inputs for mic and line on the front panel. Furthermore, the Clarett+ 4Pre includes 4 balanced line inputs, compared to the MOTU M6's 2 balanced line inputs.
Both interfaces feature 4 balanced line outputs and 2 unbalanced headphone outputs, providing flexible monitoring options. On the front panel, the Clarett+ 4Pre has its headphone outputs, while the MOTU M6 does not specify the exact placement.
The host connection for both devices is via USB-C, ensuring fast and reliable data transfer. In terms of OS compatibility, the MOTU M6 supports macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 10 or later, while the Clarett+ 4Pre is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later, macOS 11, and Windows 7 or later, offering broader OS support.
Lastly, both interfaces come with an included AC/DC power adapter, ensuring they are powered adequately for all their functionalities.
Overall, while both interfaces provide high-quality audio performance, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre stands out with more extensive I/O options, additional digital connectivity, and broader OS compatibility, making it a more versatile choice for users with more complex recording needs. The MOTU M6, on the other hand, offers a robust set of features suitable for users who prioritize a straightforward and reliable setup.
General
Channels of I/O
Analog:
6 Inputs / 4 Outputs
Analog:
8 Inputs / 6 Outputs
Digital:
10 Inputs / 2 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit 192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
4 Preamps 4 Preamps
Input Level Adjustment
4x Knob 4x Knob
Expansion Slots
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface both cater to professional audio recording and MIDI interfacing, but they offer different features that may cater to varying needs.
The MOTU M6 features 6 analog inputs and 4 analog outputs, providing a good amount of connectivity for recording instruments and vocals. It boasts a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit resolution, ensuring high-quality audio recording and playback. The interface includes 4 microphone preamps, making it suitable for multi-microphone recording setups. Input level adjustments are facilitated through 4 dedicated knobs, allowing for straightforward control over input levels. However, it lacks built-in DSP and built-in microphones, and there are no expansion slots for future upgrades.
On the other hand, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers a more extensive range of I/O options, with 8 analog inputs, 6 analog outputs, and additional digital I/O with 10 inputs and 2 outputs. Like the MOTU M6, it also supports a maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit, ensuring top-notch audio fidelity. It matches the MOTU M6 with 4 microphone preamps and 4 knobs for input level adjustment. Similar to the MOTU M6, it does not feature built-in DSP or built-in microphones, and there are no expansion slots available.
In summary, while both interfaces share similarities in sampling rates, microphone preamps, and input adjustment knobs, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers superior connectivity options with additional digital I/O. This makes it a more versatile choice for users who require a higher number of input and output channels. The MOTU M6, however, remains a solid option for those who need a straightforward interface with a good number of analog inputs and outputs.
Signal Processing
Pad
Gain/Trim Range
Mic Inputs:
0 dB to +60 dB
Line/Hi-Z Inputs:
0 dB to +57 dB
Mic/Line/Hi-Z Inputs:
+57 dB
High-Pass Filter
Solo/Mute
When comparing the MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface based on specific features, there are a few key points to consider:
Pad: Both the MOTU M6 and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre do not include a pad function. This means neither interface provides an attenuation option for reducing the input level of particularly loud signals before they reach the preamp.
Gain/Trim Range: The MOTU M6 offers a gain/trim range of 0 dB to +60 dB for mic inputs and 0 dB to +57 dB for line/Hi-Z inputs. In comparison, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre provides a uniform gain/trim range of up to +57 dB across its mic, line, and Hi-Z inputs. This suggests that the MOTU M6 provides a slightly higher maximum gain for mic inputs, potentially offering more flexibility for capturing quieter sources.
High-Pass Filter: Neither the MOTU M6 nor the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre includes a high-pass filter function. Users seeking to eliminate low-frequency noise or rumble would need to manage this aspect through external processing or software.
Solo/Mute: Both interfaces lack solo and mute functions. This means that users cannot isolate or mute individual channels directly on the hardware, and would need to rely on their recording software or an external mixer for these features.
In summary, while both the MOTU M6 and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre share some common limitations, such as the absence of pad, high-pass filter, and solo/mute functions, the MOTU M6 distinguishes itself with a slightly higher gain range for mic inputs. This could be a deciding factor for users who need that extra bit of gain flexibility.
Connectivity
Analog Audio I/O
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)
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input (Front Panel)
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line Input (Front Panel)
4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input
4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output
2x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output (Front Panel)
Phantom Power
48 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs) 48 V, Selectable On/Off (on 4 Channels)
Digital Audio I/O
1x TOSLINK Optical ADAT Input (S/MUX Support)
1x RCA Coaxial S/PDIF Input
1x RCA Coaxial 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
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 M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer robust features catering to various audio production needs, but they differ in several key areas.
The MOTU M6 comes equipped with 4 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs, 2 additional 1/4" TRS balanced line inputs, and 2 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs. It also provides 4 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs that are DC-coupled. Phantom power is selectable on individual inputs with a 48V feature. For connectivity, it includes 1 USB-C port using USB 2.0 protocol, and MIDI I/O with one DIN 5-pin input and one DIN 5-pin output. However, it lacks digital audio I/O, sync I/O, network I/O, and USB non-host functionality.
In contrast, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs and 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line inputs on the front panel. It also has 4 1/4" TRS balanced line inputs and 4 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs, along with 2 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone outputs on the front panel. It supports 48V phantom power selectable on all 4 channels. In terms of digital audio I/O, it includes 1 TOSLINK optical ADAT input with S/MUX support, and RCA coaxial S/PDIF input and output. It connects via a single USB-C port using USB 2.0 protocol and also includes MIDI I/O with one DIN 5-pin input and one DIN 5-pin output. Similar to the MOTU M6, it lacks sync I/O, network I/O, and USB non-host functionality.
In summary, while both interfaces share similarities in USB-C connectivity, MIDI I/O, and phantom power capabilities, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers additional digital audio I/O options with ADAT and S/PDIF, providing more flexibility for complex setups. The MOTU M6, on the other hand, offers DC-coupled outputs, which can be advantageous for certain types of signal routing and control voltage applications.
Performance
Frequency Response
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
Mic Inputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.03 dB
20 Hz to 35 kHz ±0.15 dB
Line Inputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.05 dB
20 Hz to 35 kHz ±0.15 dB
Hi-Z Inputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.04 dB
20 Hz to 35 kHz ±0.15 dB
Line, Monitor Outputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.02 dB
20 Hz to 35 kHz ±0.02 dB
Headphone Outputs:
20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.06 dB
20 Hz to 35 kHz ±0.07 dB
Maximum Input Level
Mic Inputs:
+10 dBu (Max Level In)
Line Inputs:
+16 dBu (Max Level In)
Mic Inputs:
+18 dBu
Line Inputs:
+26 dBu
Hi-Z Inputs:
+15 dBu
Maximum Output Level
Line Outputs:
+18 dBu (Balanced)
Line Outputs:
+16 dBu (Unbalanced)
Headphone Outputs:
+12.5 dBu
Line/Monitor Outputs:
+18 dBu
Headphone Outputs:
+16 dBu
Impedance
Mic Inputs:
2.65 Kilohms
Line Inputs:
2 Megohms
Hi-Z Inputs:
1 Megohm
Line Outputs:
100 Ohms
Inputs:
2.2 Kilohms
Dynamic Range
Mic Inputs:
115 dBA
Line Inputs:
114 dBA
Line/Monitor Outputs:
120 dBA
Headphone Outputs:
115 dBA
Mic Inputs:
118 dB (Min Gain)
Line Inputs:
118 dB (Min Gain)
Hi-Z Inputs:
116 dB
Line/Monitor Outputs:
124 dB
Headphone Outputs:
> 118 dB
THD+N
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
Mic Inputs:
-110 dB (+20 dB Input, at -1 dBFS)
Line Inputs:
-100 dB (Min Gain, at -1 dBFS)
Hi-Z Inputs:
-96.5 dB (Min Gain, at -1 dBFS)
Line/Monitor Outputs:
-106 dB
Headphone Outputs:
-104 dB
EIN
Mic Inputs:
-129 dBu A-Weighted (@ Max Gain, 150 Ohms)
Mic Inputs:
< -129 dBu
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both high-quality options for audio recording and production, but they differ in several key specifications.
In terms of frequency response, the MOTU M6 offers precise control with a response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz, varying slightly between +0/-0.1 dB for mic inputs, ±0.15 dB for line and Hi-Z inputs, and ±0.07 dB for line outputs. In comparison, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre provides a broader frequency response range, extending up to 35 kHz, with a response of ±0.03 dB for mic inputs and ±0.02 dB for line/monitor outputs within the 20 Hz to 20 kHz range, indicating a slightly more extensive and consistent frequency handling.
On maximum input levels, the MOTU M6 supports up to +10 dBu for mic inputs, +16 dBu for line inputs, and +12.5 dBu for headphone outputs. The Clarett+ 4Pre, on the other hand, supports higher maximum input levels with +18 dBu for mic inputs, +26 dBu for line inputs, and +16 dBu for headphone outputs, offering more headroom for capturing louder sources without distortion.
Regarding maximum output levels, both interfaces provide a line output level of +18 dBu for balanced connections. However, the Clarett+ 4Pre offers a higher headphone output level of +16 dBu compared to the M6's +12.5 dBu, which may benefit users needing louder headphone monitoring.
In impedance, the MOTU M6 has 2.65 Kilohms for mic inputs, 2 Megohms for line inputs, and 1 Megohm for Hi-Z inputs, while the Clarett+ 4Pre lists a uniform input impedance of 2.2 Kilohms across its inputs. This difference in impedance values suggests varying load handling capabilities between the two interfaces.
Dynamic range is another distinguishable factor. The MOTU M6 offers a dynamic range of 115 dBA for mic inputs, 114 dBA for line inputs, and 120 dBA for line/monitor outputs. Conversely, the Clarett+ 4Pre shows a slightly superior dynamic range with 118 dB for mic and line inputs and 124 dB for line/monitor outputs.
When it comes to Total Harmonic Distortion plus Noise (THD+N), the MOTU M6 presents a THD+N of -97 dB for mic inputs and less than -110 dB for line/monitor outputs, while the Clarett+ 4Pre offers a lower THD+N of -110 dB for mic inputs and -106 dB for line/monitor outputs, indicating a cleaner signal path.
Lastly, the Equivalent Input Noise (EIN) for mic inputs of both interfaces is impressive, with the MOTU M6 showing -129 dBu A-weighted, and the Clarett+ 4Pre having less than -129 dBu, both ensuring low noise levels in recordings.
Overall, while both interfaces offer high-quality performance, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre typically provides superior specifications in terms of maximum input levels, dynamic range, and THD+N, making it a slightly more advanced option for professional audio recording and production.
Digital Audio
Sample Rates
Up to 192 kHz 44.1 / 48 / 88.2 / 96 / 176.4 / 192 kHz
Sample Rate Conversion
Bit Depths
24-Bit 24-Bit (AD/DA Conversion)
Sync Sources
Internal ADAT, Internal, S/PDIF
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface both offer high-quality audio performance, but they differ in several key features that may influence a user's choice depending on their specific needs.
Both interfaces support sample rates up to 192 kHz and offer 24-bit depth, providing professional-grade audio resolution. However, the MOTU M6 is known for its zero-latency direct monitoring and a latency of 2.5 ms at 96 kHz, which is dependent on buffer size and input to output. This makes it a strong choice for users who require real-time monitoring without noticeable delays. The Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre, while not specifying exact latency figures, is also designed for low-latency performance, but it doesn't highlight zero-latency direct monitoring as a specific feature.
When it comes to sync sources, the MOTU M6 offers internal sync only, which might be sufficient for users with simpler setups. In contrast, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre provides additional flexibility with multiple sync sources, including ADAT, Internal, and S/PDIF. This makes the Clarett+ 4Pre more versatile for users who need to integrate their interface into a more complex digital audio environment with various sync requirements.
In summary, the MOTU M6 excels in offering zero-latency direct monitoring, making it ideal for users who prioritize real-time audio monitoring without delays. The Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre, on the other hand, provides greater flexibility with multiple sync sources, catering to users who need to synchronize with a broader range of digital audio equipment. Both interfaces support high-resolution audio with sample rates up to 192 kHz and a 24-bit depth, ensuring top-notch audio quality for professional recordings.
Audio Storage & Playback
Memory Card Slot
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface are both high-quality audio interfaces that cater to the needs of professionals and enthusiasts alike. One aspect that they share in common is the absence of a memory card slot. This feature is not available on either the MOTU M6 or the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre, which means users will need to rely on external storage solutions or their connected devices for data storage and transfer.
Both interfaces utilize USB Type-C connectivity, ensuring fast and reliable data transfer, which is crucial for maintaining low latency and high audio fidelity during recording and playback. The MOTU M6 offers a robust set of features, including high-quality preamps and versatile monitoring options, making it suitable for a variety of recording and production environments. Similarly, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre is known for its exceptional preamp quality, extensive I/O capabilities, and overall reliability, making it a popular choice among audio professionals.
In summary, while both the MOTU M6 and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre lack a memory card slot, they make up for it with their advanced connectivity options, superior audio quality, and versatile functionality. These interfaces are designed to meet the demands of modern recording setups, ensuring that users can achieve professional results without the need for built-in memory card support.
Compatibility
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11 or Later (64-Bit Only)
macOS 10.13 or Later (64-Bit Only)
Windows 10 or Later (64-Bit Only)
macOS 10.11 or Later
macOS 11
Windows 7 or Later
Required Hardware
Available USB 2.0 Port
USB Cable (Included)
Available USB 2.0 Port, USB 3.0 / 3.1/3.2 Gen 1 Port, or USB-C Port
USB Cable (Included)
Internet Connection
Required for Software/Driver Download Required for Registration, Software/Driver Download
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later (64-bit only) and Windows 10 or later (64-bit only). In terms of plug-ins, the MOTU M6 does not come with any included plug-ins. The processor requirements are relatively modest, requiring a 1 GHz Intel Core i3 for Mac and a 1 GHz Intel Pentium for PC users. The RAM requirements are 2 GB with 4 GB recommended, and storage requirements are 500 GB. The hardware requirements include an available USB 2.0 port, and it comes with a USB cable. An internet connection is required for software and driver downloads.
On the other hand, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later and macOS 11, as well as Windows 7 or later. Unlike the MOTU M6, the Focusrite Clarett+ does not come with any included software. It does not have mobile device compatibility. The required hardware includes an available USB 2.0 port, USB 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 Gen 1 port, or USB-C port, and it also comes with a USB cable. An internet connection is required for registration and for downloading software and drivers.
In summary, both interfaces require an internet connection for software and driver downloads. The MOTU M6 has more specific OS compatibility and a slightly more stringent storage requirement, while the Focusrite Clarett+ offers broader compatibility with a range of USB ports. Neither device includes additional software or plug-ins, but both come with the necessary USB cables for connectivity.
Power
Power Requirements
AC/DC Power Adapter (Included) AC/DC Power Adapter (Included)
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface both come with included AC/DC power adapters, ensuring reliable and consistent power supply for professional audio recording and production environments. The MOTU M6 is straightforward in its power requirements, simply stating the inclusion of an AC/DC power adapter. This simplifies the setup process, allowing users to focus on their audio projects without needing to worry about additional power specifications.
On the other hand, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre provides more detailed power specifications, indicating that it requires a 12 VDC power adapter with a 2 A output and a center-positive polarity. This additional information can be particularly useful for users who need to replace the power adapter or integrate the interface into a more complex studio setup. The inclusion of these specific power requirements highlights Focusrite’s attention to detail and ensures that the Clarett+ 4Pre maintains optimal performance under its recommended power conditions.
In summary, while both interfaces include the necessary AC/DC power adapters, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers more detailed specifications on its power requirements, potentially providing more clarity and assurance for users managing their studio equipment. The MOTU M6, with its simpler approach, still guarantees reliable operation but without the additional technical details.
Physical
Anti-Theft Features
Kensington Security Slot Kensington Security Slot
Dimensions
9.21 x 4.75 x 1.8" / 23.39 x 12.06 x 4.6 cm (Chassis Only) 8.74 x 7.56 x 2.5" / 22.2 x 19.2 x 6.3 cm
Weight
2.2 lb / 1.0 kg 3.0 lb / 1.4 kg
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface both come equipped with anti-theft features, specifically a Kensington Security Slot, ensuring that both devices can be securely anchored to prevent unauthorized removal.
In terms of dimensions, the MOTU M6 measures 9.21 x 4.75 x 1.8 inches (23.39 x 12.06 x 4.6 cm) for the chassis only, making it more compact horizontally but slightly taller compared to the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre. The Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre, on the other hand, measures 8.74 x 7.56 x 2.5 inches (22.2 x 19.2 x 6.3 cm), which is more expansive horizontally and vertically, thus occupying a larger footprint on a desktop.
When it comes to weight, the MOTU M6 is lighter at 2.2 pounds (1.0 kg), which makes it more portable and easier to handle compared to the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre that weighs in at 3.0 pounds (1.4 kg). This difference in weight could be a consideration for users who need to transport their audio interface frequently.
Both units offer robust construction and essential anti-theft features, but the MOTU M6 stands out with its lighter and more compact design, while the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre offers a more substantial build with a larger physical presence.
Packaging Info
Package Weight
3.21 lb 5.47 lb
Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
13.9 x 7.8 x 3.2" 11.6 x 11.2 x 5.1"
The MOTU M6 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre Desktop 18x8 USB Type-C Audio/MIDI Interface are two robust options for audio and MIDI interfacing, each bringing unique attributes to the table.
In terms of physical specifications, the MOTU M6 is lighter and more compact. It has a package weight of 3.21 lbs and box dimensions of 13.9 x 7.8 x 3.2 inches. This makes it a more portable option, ideal for musicians and producers who require a mobile setup or have limited space.
On the other hand, the Focusrite Clarett+ 4Pre is heftier and larger, with a package weight of 5.47 lbs and box dimensions of 11.6 x 11.2 x 5.1 inches. The added weight and size could indicate more robust build quality or additional internal components, which might appeal to users looking for a more permanent studio fixture.
Both interfaces connect via USB Type-C, ensuring fast and reliable data transfer. However, the physical characteristics of these devices might influence a buyer's decision based on their specific needs for portability versus a potentially more rugged design.
Customer Images
Videos