Audient iD4 MKII vs MOTU M2: Comprehensive USB-C Audio Interface Comparison

The MOTU M2 and the Audient iD4 MKII are both highly regarded USB-C audio interfaces, each bringing unique strengths to the table.
The MOTU M2 stands out for its exceptional audio performance and comprehensive feature set. It boasts ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology, providing a dynamic range of 120 dB, which ensures pristine audio quality. The M2 offers two combo inputs with preamps, supporting both XLR and TRS connections, making it versatile for various recording needs. Moreover, it includes a full-color LCD screen, offering real-time metering for all inputs and outputs, a feature that is particularly useful for monitoring levels during recording sessions. The M2 also supports loopback functionality, ideal for podcasters and streamers who need to capture computer audio alongside their microphone.
In contrast, the Audient iD4 MKII emphasizes high-quality analog sound and user-friendly design. It features Audient’s renowned Class-A console mic preamps, which deliver a warm, detailed sound signature. The iD4 MKII includes one XLR combo input and one JFET DI input, designed to replicate the input stage of a classic valve amplifier, making it particularly appealing to guitarists. The interface also features a ScrollControl mode, which allows the volume knob to be used as a virtual scroll wheel, adding a layer of versatility in DAW control. The iD4 MKII's robust build quality and compact form make it a great option for musicians on the go.
Both interfaces offer ultra-low latency performance and are bus-powered via USB-C, ensuring convenience and compatibility with modern devices. While the MOTU M2 excels in its digital precision and additional monitoring capabilities, the Audient iD4 MKII shines with its superior analog sound quality and practical design features. Your choice between the two will largely depend on whether you prioritize digital accuracy and extensive monitoring (MOTU M2) or superior preamp quality and ease of use (Audient iD4 MKII).

Detailed Specifications, Pros, and Cons of Audient iD4 MKII and MOTU M2

Audient iD4 MKII

MOTU M2

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews
Purchase Value 85% of users were satisfied with the purchase value of the Audient iD4 MKII, highlighting its competitive pricing for the quality it offers. Users appreciated the robust features and performance that rival more expensive options, making it an excellent choice for both beginners and seasoned audio professionals looking for a budget-friendly solution. 15% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, noting that while the initial cost is competitive, some felt that the inclusion of additional features or bundled accessories would have enhanced its value proposition. 85% Build Quality 90% of users praised the build quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, emphasizing its sturdy construction and premium feel. The metal chassis was frequently mentioned as a standout feature that suggests durability and longevity, making it a reliable choice for both home and on-the-go use. 10% of users were not satisfied with the build quality, citing concerns about the durability of certain components like the rotary encoder. Some users felt these parts might not withstand heavy, prolonged use. 90% Sound Quality 95% of users were very satisfied with the sound quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, often mentioning its superior pre-amps and DACs that deliver clean and clear audio. Professionals and hobbyists alike noted the interface's ability to produce studio-level sound, making it a top choice for those prioritizing audio fidelity. 5% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, mostly due to specific preferences or expectations not being met. A few reported minor issues with noise levels when pushing the interface to its limits, though these cases were rare. 95% Ease of Use 88% of users found the Audient iD4 MKII easy to use, appreciating its straightforward setup and intuitive controls. The interface's simplicity was a highlight, allowing users to focus on their projects without being bogged down by complex configurations. 12% of users were dissatisfied with the ease of use, often due to initial connectivity issues or software setup hurdles. Some users felt the learning curve was steeper than expected, especially those new to audio interfaces. 88% Portability 80% of users appreciated the portability of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting its compact size and lightweight design as ideal for mobile setups or small studio spaces. The USB-C connectivity was also praised for its convenience and quick setup. 20% of users were not fully satisfied with the portability, mentioning that despite its compact size, the need for additional cables and peripherals sometimes made it less travel-friendly than expected. 80% Software Compatibility 82% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the Audient iD4 MKII, appreciating its seamless integration with major DAWs and operating systems. The inclusion of useful software bundles was also a positive aspect for many users. 18% of users experienced dissatisfaction with software compatibility, often due to minor issues with driver installations or specific software not recognizing the interface immediately, leading to frustration during initial use. 82% Customer Support 75% of users were content with the customer support provided for the Audient iD4 MKII, noting the responsive and helpful service they received when encountering issues or inquiries. Many appreciated the promptness and knowledgeability of the support team. 25% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delayed responses or a lack of resolution for their specific problems. Some users felt that more comprehensive troubleshooting resources could improve the overall support experience. 75% Durability 85% of users were satisfied with the durability of the Audient iD4 MKII, often highlighting its robust build and long-lasting performance. Users appreciated the interface's ability to withstand regular use without showing signs of wear. 15% of users expressed concerns about durability, with some experiencing issues with wear and tear on specific components such as knobs or jacks after extended use, leading to worries about long-term reliability. 85% Design Aesthetics 92% of users were impressed by the design aesthetics of the Audient iD4 MKII, commending its sleek and professional look. The interface's modern design and user-friendly layout made it an attractive addition to any studio setup. 8% of users were less satisfied with the design aesthetics, with some preferring a more traditional look or different color options. A few users mentioned that the design, while modern, might not appeal to those with more classic tastes. 92% Latency 87% of users were satisfied with the low latency performance of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting minimal delay during recording and playback. This feature was particularly appreciated by musicians and producers requiring real-time monitoring. 13% of users experienced dissatisfaction with latency, although issues were often linked to specific system setups or software configurations rather than the interface itself, leading to mixed experiences. 87% Compatibility with Instruments 90% of users were pleased with the compatibility of the Audient iD4 MKII with various instruments, highlighting its ability to handle different input types with ease. The high-quality preamps were particularly praised for their performance with guitars and microphones. 10% of users reported dissatisfaction with instrument compatibility, often due to niche requirements or specific setups that did not align perfectly with the interface's capabilities, necessitating additional equipment or adjustments. 90% Control Features 82% of users appreciated the control features of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting the ease of use and functionality provided by the interface's controls. The large rotary encoder was frequently praised for its precision and tactile feel. 18% of users were dissatisfied with the control features, expressing a desire for more advanced options or customizable settings. Some users felt the interface could benefit from additional dials or switches for more nuanced control. 82% Preamp Quality 94% of users were highly satisfied with the preamp quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, often highlighting the clean and transparent sound it provided. The preamps were considered a standout feature, offering performance typically found in higher-end models. 6% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the preamp quality, typically due to specific preferences or compatibility issues with certain microphones. Some users felt that while the preamps were good, they didn't fully meet their personal expectations. 94% Headphone Output Quality 89% of users were satisfied with the headphone output quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, praising its ability to drive a wide range of headphones with clarity and power. Users noted that the output remained clear even at higher volumes. 11% of users were not fully satisfied with the headphone output quality, with some experiencing issues with volume levels or distortion at higher settings. A few users felt that the output could benefit from additional power or clarity for studio-grade headphones. 89% USB-C Connectivity 88% of users appreciated the USB-C connectivity of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting faster data transfer and a more stable connection compared to older USB standards. This feature was seen as a modern enhancement that aligned with current tech trends. 12% of users experienced dissatisfaction with the USB-C connectivity, often due to compatibility issues with older systems or the need for additional adapters. Some users felt that while USB-C is beneficial, it can pose challenges for those without compatible ports. 88% Phantom Power 91% of users were satisfied with the phantom power feature of the Audient iD4 MKII, appreciating its reliable performance with condenser microphones. The ease of activation and consistent power delivery were noted as key benefits. 9% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the phantom power, mainly due to specific cases where the power delivery did not meet expectations for certain high-demand microphones, leading to concerns about its adequacy for all recording situations. 91% Metering 78% of users were satisfied with the metering capabilities of the Audient iD4 MKII, mentioning that the visual feedback provided was adequate for most recording scenarios. Users found the metering useful for monitoring input levels during sessions. 22% of users were dissatisfied with the metering, feeling that more detailed or advanced metering options would enhance the interface's functionality. Some users desired a more intuitive or visually rich metering system for precise adjustments. 78% Driver Stability 84% of users found the driver stability of the Audient iD4 MKII to be reliable, noting minimal issues with crashes or disconnects. Users appreciated the consistent performance across different software and operating system updates. 16% of users experienced dissatisfaction with driver stability, often encountering occasional drops or compatibility issues with specific DAWs. These instances, while not widespread, affected the overall user experience. 84% Input/Output Options 80% of users were content with the input/output options of the Audient iD4 MKII, finding them suitable for a range of recording setups. The combination of XLR and instrument inputs was appreciated for its versatility. 20% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the input/output options, often wishing for more flexibility or additional ports to accommodate complex setups. Some users felt that the interface could benefit from more input/output expandability. 80% Durability of Connectors 86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the connectors on the Audient iD4 MKII, mentioning that they were built to withstand frequent use without degradation. The solid feel of the connectors was a highlight for many. 14% of users expressed concerns about the durability of the connectors, with some experiencing issues with loose connections or wear over time. A few users suggested that more robust materials could enhance longevity. 86% Overall Satisfaction 89% of users reported overall satisfaction with the Audient iD4 MKII, emphasizing its balance of quality, performance, and value. Users appreciated its ease of use and the high-quality audio it delivered, making it a favorite among many. 11% of users were not entirely satisfied overall, often due to specific feature limitations or personal preferences not being met. Some users felt that while the interface performed well, certain aspects could be improved to better meet their needs. 89%	Purchase Value 85% of users expressed satisfaction with the purchase value of the MOTU M2 Audio Interface, highlighting its competitive pricing compared to other interfaces with similar features. Many users appreciated the combination of high-quality sound and functionality at a reasonable cost, making it an attractive choice for both amateur and professional musicians. 15% of users felt dissatisfied with the purchase value, citing instances where they expected more advanced features or additional accessories for the price. Some users compared it unfavorably to cheaper alternatives that offered similar performance, which led to disappointment with the perceived value. 85% Sound Quality 90% of users praised the sound quality of the MOTU M2, noting its clear and crisp audio output and excellent preamps. Users frequently mentioned the superior quality of both the input and output, which they felt enhanced their recording and listening experiences significantly. 10% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, often due to specific technical issues or personal preferences for different audio signatures. Some users experienced noise interference or felt that the sound output did not meet their high expectations, particularly in professional settings. 90% Build Quality 88% of users were satisfied with the build quality of the MOTU M2, appreciating its sturdy construction and durable materials. Many users mentioned the robust design, which they felt was reliable for both studio and mobile use, instilling confidence in its longevity. 12% of users were dissatisfied with the build quality, citing issues such as loose knobs or connectors. Some users found the materials used to be less premium than expected, leading to concerns about potential wear and tear over time. 88% Ease of Use 83% of users found the MOTU M2 easy to use, highlighting its straightforward setup process and intuitive interface. Users appreciated the simple layout, which allowed even beginners to quickly understand and operate the device without extensive technical knowledge. 17% of users experienced difficulties with ease of use, often due to software compatibility issues or a lack of clear instructions. Some users reported a steep learning curve for specific functions, which affected their overall user experience. 83% Driver Stability 80% of users were satisfied with the stability of the MOTU M2 drivers, noting few crashes or disconnections during use. This reliability was particularly valued by users who required consistent performance for professional recording sessions. 20% of users encountered driver stability issues, including occasional crashes or lag, affecting their workflow. These users often experienced frustration when the interface did not perform consistently, particularly during critical recording tasks. 80% Customer Support 75% of users had positive experiences with MOTU's customer support, appreciating the responsiveness and helpfulness of the support team. Users who required assistance found the customer service to be knowledgeable and capable of resolving issues promptly. 25% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delays in response times or unhelpful interactions. Some users felt that their concerns were not adequately addressed, which led to frustration with the level of service provided. 75% Portability 85% of users praised the portability of the MOTU M2, mentioning its compact size and lightweight design as ideal for on-the-go recording. Users found it easy to transport and use in different environments, making it a versatile choice for mobile musicians. 15% of users found the portability lacking, often due to the need for additional accessories or concerns about durability during transport. Some users desired a more compact form factor or integrated protective features for easier travel. 85% Latency Performance 87% of users were satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M2, noting minimal delay during recording and playback. This low latency was particularly appreciated by musicians who required real-time monitoring without noticeable lag. 13% of users experienced latency issues, which affected their recording sessions. Some users found the latency to be higher than expected, especially when using specific software or settings, leading to dissatisfaction with the interface's performance. 87% Compatibility 82% of users highlighted the compatibility of the MOTU M2 with various operating systems and digital audio workstations, allowing seamless integration into existing setups. The device's versatility in working with Mac and Windows platforms was a significant advantage for many. 18% of users faced compatibility challenges, often related to specific software or hardware configurations. These users experienced difficulties in integrating the interface with their preferred setups, which led to dissatisfaction with the overall compatibility. 82% Input/Output Options 80% of users were satisfied with the input and output options offered by the MOTU M2, appreciating the variety and quality of connections available. Users valued the balanced input and output ports, which provided flexibility for different recording needs. 20% of users found the input/output options lacking, desiring more channels or specific types of connections. Some users required additional ports for complex setups, which the M2 did not accommodate, leading to disappointment. 80% Aesthetics 88% of users found the aesthetics of the MOTU M2 appealing, praising its sleek design and professional look. The interface's modern appearance was often noted as a positive feature that complemented their studio setups. 12% of users were dissatisfied with the aesthetics, often preferring a different style or color scheme. Some users felt the design was too simplistic or did not match their personal taste, which affected their overall impression of the device. 88% Installation Process 84% of users found the installation process for the MOTU M2 straightforward and hassle-free, with clear instructions and minimal setup time. This ease of installation was especially appreciated by users who wanted to start using the device quickly. 16% of users encountered challenges during the installation process, including difficulties with software installation or required updates. These issues led to frustration, particularly for users who expected a more seamless setup experience. 84% Software Features 78% of users were satisfied with the software features included with the MOTU M2, appreciating the basic tools and functionality provided for recording and editing. Users found the software adequate for most of their needs, especially when starting out. 22% of users found the software features lacking, desiring more advanced options or additional plug-ins. Some users felt the software was limited compared to other interfaces, which affected their ability to fully utilize the device's potential. 78% Durability 86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the MOTU M2, noting its solid construction and resistance to wear over time. Users appreciated the robust materials that provided confidence in the device's long-term reliability. 14% of users were concerned about the durability, often due to issues with specific components like knobs or buttons. Some users experienced wear and tear sooner than expected, which raised doubts about the interface's longevity. 86% Versatility 83% of users praised the versatility of the MOTU M2, citing its ability to handle various recording scenarios and environments. Users valued its adaptability for different music genres and recording setups, making it a flexible choice for many applications. 17% of users found the versatility limited, often due to specific requirements that the M2 could not meet. Some users needed more features or customization options for particular projects, which the device did not provide, leading to dissatisfaction. 83% Control Features 79% of users were satisfied with the control features of the MOTU M2, appreciating the accessible and functional design of the controls. Users found the controls intuitive and effective for managing their audio settings during use. 21% of users were dissatisfied with the control features, often finding them too basic or lacking in advanced options. Some users desired more precise or customizable controls to better suit their specific audio needs. 79% Power Options 82% of users appreciated the power options of the MOTU M2, noting the convenience of USB power for portability and ease of use. Users valued the ability to operate the device without the need for additional power sources, enhancing its mobility. 18% of users found the power options limiting, often preferring alternative power solutions for specific setups. Some users experienced issues with power stability, particularly when using the interface in environments with variable power availability. 82% Expandability 77% of users were satisfied with the expandability of the MOTU M2, finding it sufficient for basic studio setups and small-scale projects. Users appreciated the ability to connect additional devices as needed within its scope. 23% of users found the expandability insufficient, particularly for larger or more complex audio setups. Some users desired more connectivity options or the ability to chain multiple interfaces together, which the M2 did not support. 77% Pedal Integration 70% of users appreciated the basic pedal integration capabilities of the MOTU M2, finding it suitable for simple setups and straightforward use. Users valued the available connections for integrating pedals into their signal chain. 30% of users were dissatisfied with the pedal integration options, often requiring more advanced features or specific connections. Some users found the integration limited for complex pedal setups, which affected their ability to use the interface effectively. 70% Visual Display 89% of users were highly satisfied with the visual display of the MOTU M2, praising its clear and informative readouts. Users found the display helpful for monitoring levels and making quick adjustments during recording sessions. 11% of users found the visual display lacking, often desiring more detailed information or customizable display options. Some users felt the display could be improved for better visibility in different lighting conditions. 89% Overall Satisfaction 87% of users reported overall satisfaction with the MOTU M2, citing its combination of high-quality sound, build, and functionality as major strengths. Users appreciated its value for money and suitability for a wide range of applications, making it a popular choice among audio enthusiasts. 13% of users expressed overall dissatisfaction, often due to specific unmet expectations or technical issues. Some users encountered compatibility or performance problems that detracted from their experience, leading to disappointment with the interface. 87% Show More

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews

Purchase Value

85% of users were satisfied with the purchase value of the Audient iD4 MKII, highlighting its competitive pricing for the quality it offers. Users appreciated the robust features and performance that rival more expensive options, making it an excellent choice for both beginners and seasoned audio professionals looking for a budget-friendly solution.

15% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, noting that while the initial cost is competitive, some felt that the inclusion of additional features or bundled accessories would have enhanced its value proposition.

85%
Build Quality

90% of users praised the build quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, emphasizing its sturdy construction and premium feel. The metal chassis was frequently mentioned as a standout feature that suggests durability and longevity, making it a reliable choice for both home and on-the-go use.

10% of users were not satisfied with the build quality, citing concerns about the durability of certain components like the rotary encoder. Some users felt these parts might not withstand heavy, prolonged use.

90%
Sound Quality

95% of users were very satisfied with the sound quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, often mentioning its superior pre-amps and DACs that deliver clean and clear audio. Professionals and hobbyists alike noted the interface's ability to produce studio-level sound, making it a top choice for those prioritizing audio fidelity.

5% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the sound quality, mostly due to specific preferences or expectations not being met. A few reported minor issues with noise levels when pushing the interface to its limits, though these cases were rare.

95%
Ease of Use

88% of users found the Audient iD4 MKII easy to use, appreciating its straightforward setup and intuitive controls. The interface's simplicity was a highlight, allowing users to focus on their projects without being bogged down by complex configurations.

12% of users were dissatisfied with the ease of use, often due to initial connectivity issues or software setup hurdles. Some users felt the learning curve was steeper than expected, especially those new to audio interfaces.

88%
Portability

80% of users appreciated the portability of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting its compact size and lightweight design as ideal for mobile setups or small studio spaces. The USB-C connectivity was also praised for its convenience and quick setup.

20% of users were not fully satisfied with the portability, mentioning that despite its compact size, the need for additional cables and peripherals sometimes made it less travel-friendly than expected.

80%
Software Compatibility

82% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the Audient iD4 MKII, appreciating its seamless integration with major DAWs and operating systems. The inclusion of useful software bundles was also a positive aspect for many users.

18% of users experienced dissatisfaction with software compatibility, often due to minor issues with driver installations or specific software not recognizing the interface immediately, leading to frustration during initial use.

82%
Customer Support

75% of users were content with the customer support provided for the Audient iD4 MKII, noting the responsive and helpful service they received when encountering issues or inquiries. Many appreciated the promptness and knowledgeability of the support team.

25% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, citing delayed responses or a lack of resolution for their specific problems. Some users felt that more comprehensive troubleshooting resources could improve the overall support experience.

75%
Durability

85% of users were satisfied with the durability of the Audient iD4 MKII, often highlighting its robust build and long-lasting performance. Users appreciated the interface's ability to withstand regular use without showing signs of wear.

15% of users expressed concerns about durability, with some experiencing issues with wear and tear on specific components such as knobs or jacks after extended use, leading to worries about long-term reliability.

85%
Design Aesthetics

92% of users were impressed by the design aesthetics of the Audient iD4 MKII, commending its sleek and professional look. The interface's modern design and user-friendly layout made it an attractive addition to any studio setup.

8% of users were less satisfied with the design aesthetics, with some preferring a more traditional look or different color options. A few users mentioned that the design, while modern, might not appeal to those with more classic tastes.

92%
Latency

87% of users were satisfied with the low latency performance of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting minimal delay during recording and playback. This feature was particularly appreciated by musicians and producers requiring real-time monitoring.

13% of users experienced dissatisfaction with latency, although issues were often linked to specific system setups or software configurations rather than the interface itself, leading to mixed experiences.

87%
Compatibility with Instruments

90% of users were pleased with the compatibility of the Audient iD4 MKII with various instruments, highlighting its ability to handle different input types with ease. The high-quality preamps were particularly praised for their performance with guitars and microphones.

10% of users reported dissatisfaction with instrument compatibility, often due to niche requirements or specific setups that did not align perfectly with the interface's capabilities, necessitating additional equipment or adjustments.

90%
Control Features

82% of users appreciated the control features of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting the ease of use and functionality provided by the interface's controls. The large rotary encoder was frequently praised for its precision and tactile feel.

18% of users were dissatisfied with the control features, expressing a desire for more advanced options or customizable settings. Some users felt the interface could benefit from additional dials or switches for more nuanced control.

82%
Preamp Quality

94% of users were highly satisfied with the preamp quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, often highlighting the clean and transparent sound it provided. The preamps were considered a standout feature, offering performance typically found in higher-end models.

6% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the preamp quality, typically due to specific preferences or compatibility issues with certain microphones. Some users felt that while the preamps were good, they didn't fully meet their personal expectations.

94%
Headphone Output Quality

89% of users were satisfied with the headphone output quality of the Audient iD4 MKII, praising its ability to drive a wide range of headphones with clarity and power. Users noted that the output remained clear even at higher volumes.

11% of users were not fully satisfied with the headphone output quality, with some experiencing issues with volume levels or distortion at higher settings. A few users felt that the output could benefit from additional power or clarity for studio-grade headphones.

89%
USB-C Connectivity

88% of users appreciated the USB-C connectivity of the Audient iD4 MKII, noting faster data transfer and a more stable connection compared to older USB standards. This feature was seen as a modern enhancement that aligned with current tech trends.

12% of users experienced dissatisfaction with the USB-C connectivity, often due to compatibility issues with older systems or the need for additional adapters. Some users felt that while USB-C is beneficial, it can pose challenges for those without compatible ports.

88%
Phantom Power

91% of users were satisfied with the phantom power feature of the Audient iD4 MKII, appreciating its reliable performance with condenser microphones. The ease of activation and consistent power delivery were noted as key benefits.

9% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the phantom power, mainly due to specific cases where the power delivery did not meet expectations for certain high-demand microphones, leading to concerns about its adequacy for all recording situations.

91%
Metering

78% of users were satisfied with the metering capabilities of the Audient iD4 MKII, mentioning that the visual feedback provided was adequate for most recording scenarios. Users found the metering useful for monitoring input levels during sessions.

22% of users were dissatisfied with the metering, feeling that more detailed or advanced metering options would enhance the interface's functionality. Some users desired a more intuitive or visually rich metering system for precise adjustments.

78%
Driver Stability

84% of users found the driver stability of the Audient iD4 MKII to be reliable, noting minimal issues with crashes or disconnects. Users appreciated the consistent performance across different software and operating system updates.

16% of users experienced dissatisfaction with driver stability, often encountering occasional drops or compatibility issues with specific DAWs. These instances, while not widespread, affected the overall user experience.

84%
Input/Output Options

80% of users were content with the input/output options of the Audient iD4 MKII, finding them suitable for a range of recording setups. The combination of XLR and instrument inputs was appreciated for its versatility.

20% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the input/output options, often wishing for more flexibility or additional ports to accommodate complex setups. Some users felt that the interface could benefit from more input/output expandability.

80%
Durability of Connectors

86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the connectors on the Audient iD4 MKII, mentioning that they were built to withstand frequent use without degradation. The solid feel of the connectors was a highlight for many.

14% of users expressed concerns about the durability of the connectors, with some experiencing issues with loose connections or wear over time. A few users suggested that more robust materials could enhance longevity.

86%
Overall Satisfaction

89% of users reported overall satisfaction with the Audient iD4 MKII, emphasizing its balance of quality, performance, and value. Users appreciated its ease of use and the high-quality audio it delivered, making it a favorite among many.

11% of users were not entirely satisfied overall, often due to specific feature limitations or personal preferences not being met. Some users felt that while the interface performed well, certain aspects could be improved to better meet their needs.

89%

Purchase Value

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

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

85%
Sound Quality

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

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

90%
Build Quality

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

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

88%
Ease of Use

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

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

83%
Driver Stability

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

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

80%
Customer Support

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

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

75%
Portability

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

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

85%
Latency Performance

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

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

87%
Compatibility

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

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

82%
Input/Output Options

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

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

80%
Aesthetics

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

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

88%
Installation Process

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

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

84%
Software Features

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

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

78%
Durability

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

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

86%
Versatility

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

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

83%
Control Features

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

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

79%
Power Options

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

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

82%
Expandability

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

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

77%
Pedal Integration

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

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

70%
Visual Display

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

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

89%
Overall Satisfaction

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

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

87%

Pros:
High-quality preamps and AD/DA converters. Compact and portable design. USB-C connectivity for faster data transfer and power. Direct monitoring with zero-latency. Robust build quality.	Excellent sound quality with ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology. Low latency performance for real-time monitoring. Sturdy and compact build, suitable for mobile use. USB-C connectivity ensures fast data transfer. Clear and detailed LCD metering.

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

Key Specs
Channels of I/O
Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs at 96 kHz	Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
96 kHz / 24-Bit	192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
1 Preamp	2 Preamps
Analog Audio I/O
1x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced Mic/Line Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Hi-Z Input (Front Panel) 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output (Front Panel) 1x 1/8" / 3.5 mm TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output (Front Panel)	2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 2x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output
Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11.6 or Later macOS 11.1 or Later Windows 7 or Later 6 or Later iPadOS	macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power	USB Bus Power

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface are both compact, high-quality audio interfaces, but they differ significantly in terms of their specifications and features.
The MOTU M2 offers a higher maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit compared to the Audient iD4 MKII, which supports up to 96 kHz at 24-bit. This makes the M2 a better option for those who require higher resolution audio recording. In terms of channels and I/O, the M2 provides 2 analog inputs and 2 analog outputs. It is equipped with 2 microphone preamps via 2 combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced/unbalanced mic/line/Hi-Z inputs. For outputs, it includes a 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone output, 2x 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs (DC-coupled), and 2x RCA TS unbalanced line outputs.
On the other hand, the Audient iD4 MKII is designed with 2 analog inputs and 2 outputs, but it only features 1 microphone preamp. It offers a combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced mic/line input and a dedicated 1/4" TRS unbalanced Hi-Z input on the front panel. For monitoring, it includes 2x 1/4" TRS balanced monitor outputs, a 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone output, and an additional 1/8" TRS unbalanced headphone output, both located on the front panel.
Both interfaces use USB-C for host connection and are compatible with macOS and Windows operating systems, with the M2 supporting macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later, and the iD4 MKII supporting macOS 10.11.6 or later, macOS 11.1 or later, Windows 7 or later, and iPadOS. Both units are powered via USB bus power, making them highly portable and convenient for mobile recording setups.
In summary, the MOTU M2 excels with its higher sampling rate and additional microphone preamp, while the Audient iD4 MKII offers a more versatile range of headphone outputs and a dedicated Hi-Z input. Each interface has its unique advantages, catering to different recording needs and preferences.

General
Channels of I/O
Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs at 96 kHz	Analog: 2 Inputs / 2 Outputs
Maximum Sampling Rate
96 kHz / 24-Bit	192 kHz / 24-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
1 Preamp	2 Preamps
Input Level Adjustment
2x Knob	2x Knob
Expansion Slots

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface offers a higher maximum sampling rate of 192 kHz at 24-bit compared to the Audient iD4 MKII, which supports a maximum sampling rate of 96 kHz at 24-bit. Both interfaces provide 2 analog inputs and 2 analog outputs. However, the MOTU M2 features 2 microphone preamps, while the Audient iD4 MKII has only 1 microphone preamp.
Both interfaces include 2 knobs for input level adjustment and lack built-in microphones and expansion slots. The MOTU M2's higher sampling rate could be advantageous for users requiring higher fidelity recordings, whereas the Audient iD4 MKII is suitable for standard high-quality recording needs with its reliable preamp and user-friendly design.

Signal Processing
Pad

Gain/Trim Range
Mic/Hi-Z Inputs: 58 dB Hi-Z Inputs: 40 dB	Mic Inputs: 0 dB to +60 dB Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 0 dB to +57 dB
High-Pass Filter

Solo/Mute
Mute per Master

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface are both robust choices for audio production, yet they differ in certain specifications.
The MOTU M2 does not feature a pad option, similar to the Audient iD4 MKII. In terms of gain/trim range, the MOTU M2 offers a range of 0 dB to +60 dB for mic inputs and 0 dB to +57 dB for line/Hi-Z inputs. Comparatively, the Audient iD4 MKII provides a gain/trim range of 58 dB for mic/Hi-Z inputs and 40 dB for Hi-Z inputs, indicating a slightly narrower range for Hi-Z inputs.
Both interfaces lack a high-pass filter, which means users would need to manage low-frequency content through other means. Regarding solo/mute functionality, the MOTU M2 does not include either solo or mute options, while the Audient iD4 MKII offers a mute function per master, providing a bit more control over the monitoring and recording process.
In essence, the MOTU M2 and the Audient iD4 MKII are closely matched in several aspects but differ primarily in gain/trim range specifications and the inclusion of a mute feature in the Audient iD4 MKII.

Connectivity
Analog Audio I/O
1x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced Mic/Line Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Hi-Z Input (Front Panel) 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output (Front Panel) 1x 1/8" / 3.5 mm TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output (Front Panel)	2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 2x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output
Phantom Power
48 V ± 4 V, Selectable On/Off	48 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs)
Digital Audio I/O

Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
Host Connection Protocol
USB 3.0 / 3.1/3.2 Gen 1	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

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface are both high-quality audio interfaces designed to cater to the needs of musicians, podcasters, and audio engineers. However, they have some differences in terms of their features.
The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface offers a versatile range of analog audio inputs and outputs. It includes 2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced inputs that can accommodate microphones, line-level sources, and Hi-Z instruments. For output, it provides a 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone jack, 2x 1/4" TRS balanced line outputs that are DC-coupled, and 2x RCA TS unbalanced line outputs. The MOTU M2 also includes selectable 48V phantom power for each input. In addition to its analog I/O capabilities, the MOTU M2 features MIDI I/O with 1x DIN 5-Pin Input and 1x DIN 5-Pin Output, making it suitable for users who work with MIDI controllers or other MIDI-enabled devices. The interface connects to the host computer via USB-C using the USB 2.0 protocol, ensuring broad compatibility with various systems.
In contrast, the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface provides a slightly different set of features. It has 1x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS balanced input for microphones and line-level sources, and a dedicated 1/4" TRS unbalanced Hi-Z input located on the front panel for instruments. For outputs, it includes 2x 1/4" TRS balanced monitor outputs, 1x 1/4" TRS unbalanced headphone output (also on the front panel), and an additional 1/8" / 3.5 mm TRS unbalanced headphone output, giving users more flexibility for monitoring. The iD4 MKII also offers 48V ± 4V phantom power, with a current supply of 10 mA per channel. Unlike the MOTU M2, the Audient iD4 MKII does not have MIDI I/O capabilities. It connects to the host computer via USB-C and utilizes the USB 3.0/3.1/3.2 Gen 1 protocol, offering potentially faster data transfer rates.
In summary, the MOTU M2 is an excellent choice for users who need comprehensive analog input/output options along with MIDI integration, while the Audient iD4 MKII focuses more on providing high-quality analog audio I/O and multiple headphone outputs, without MIDI capabilities. Both interfaces offer USB-C connectivity, but the MOTU M2 uses the USB 2.0 protocol, whereas the Audient iD4 MKII utilizes the USB 3.0/3.1/3.2 Gen 1 protocol.

Performance
Frequency Response
A/D Converters: 10 Hz to 40 kHz ±0.5 dB D/A Converters: 10 Hz to 40 kHz ±0.1 dB Headphone Outputs: 10 Hz to 40 kHz ±0.1 dB Mic, Line Inputs: 10 Hz to 40 kHz ±0.5 dB (Min Gain) Hi-Z Inputs: 10 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.5 dB (Min Gain)	Mic Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0/-0.1 dB Line, Hi-Z Inputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.15 dB Line Outputs: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0/-0.1 dB
Maximum Input Level
Mic Inputs: +12 dBu Line Inputs: +21 dBu Hi-Z Inputs: +12 dBu	Mic Inputs: +10 dBu (Min Gain) Line/Hi-Z Inputs: +16 dBu (Min Gain)
Maximum Output Level
Headphone Outputs: +5.46 Vrms (600-Ohm Load)	Line Outputs: +16 dBu (Balanced) Line Outputs: +9.5 dBu (Unbalanced) Headphone Outputs: +12.5 dBu
Impedance
Mic Inputs: 2.8 Kilohms (Balanced) Line Inputs: > 8 Kilohms (Balanced)	Mic Inputs: 2.65 Kilohms Line Inputs: 2 Megohms Hi-Z Inputs: 1 Megohm Line Outputs: 100 Ohms
Dynamic Range
A/D Converters: 120 dB (A-Weighted) D/A Converters: 125.5 dB (A-Weighted) Headphone Outputs: 125.5 dB (A-Weighted)	Mic Inputs: 115 dBA Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 114 dBA 1/4" Line/Monitor Outputs: 120 dBA RCA Line Outputs: 119 dBA Headphone Outputs: 115 dBA
THD+N
Mic/Line Inputs: 0.0017% (at 0 dBu) Hi-Z Inputs: 0.1% (at 0 dBu) A/D Converters: < 0.001% (at -1 dBFS) D/A Converters: < 0.0006% (at -1 dBFS) Headphone Outputs: < 0.0009% (at -1 dBFS)	Mic Inputs: < -97 dB / < 0.0014% Line/Hi-Z Inputs: < -100 dB / < 0.001% 1/4" Line/Monitor Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.00032% RCA Line Outputs: < -105 dB / < 0.00056% Headphone Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.0003%
EIN
Mic/Line Inputs: -129 dB A-Weighted	Mic Inputs: -129 dB A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source, Max Gain)

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface offer a variety of features tailored to different recording and audio production needs.
Starting with frequency response, the MOTU M2 has a range of 20 Hz to 20 kHz for mic, line, and Hi-Z inputs with minimal deviation, while the Audient iD4 MKII extends its range from 10 Hz to 40 kHz for most of its inputs and outputs, also with minimal deviation. This makes the Audient iD4 MKII potentially more versatile for capturing higher frequencies.
In terms of maximum input levels, the MOTU M2 offers +10 dBu for mic inputs and +16 dBu for line/Hi-Z inputs, whereas the Audient iD4 MKII provides a higher level of +12 dBu for mic inputs and +21 dBu for line inputs, making it more capable of handling louder sources without distortion.
When it comes to maximum output levels, the MOTU M2 provides +16 dBu (Balanced) and +9.5 dBu (Unbalanced) for line outputs, with headphone outputs at +12.5 dBu. The Audient iD4 MKII, however, lists its headphone output at +5.46 Vrms into a 600-Ohm load with a maximum power output of 223 mW into 30 Ohms, 280 mW into 62 Ohms, and 100 mW into 600 Ohms, suggesting it can drive a wide range of headphone impedances effectively.
Regarding impedance, the MOTU M2 offers mic inputs at 2.65 Kilohms, line inputs at 2 Megohms, and Hi-Z inputs at 1 Megohm, with line outputs at 100 Ohms. The Audient iD4 MKII has mic inputs at 2.8 Kilohms and line inputs greater than 8 Kilohms. Both interfaces provide low impedance outputs, ensuring compatibility with various equipment.
In terms of dynamic range, the MOTU M2 provides 115 dBA for mic inputs, 114 dBA for line/Hi-Z inputs, 120 dBA for 1/4" line/monitor outputs, and 119 dBA for RCA outputs. The Audient iD4 MKII boasts higher figures, with A/D converters at 120 dB, D/A converters at 125.5 dB, and headphone outputs matching the D/A converters at 125.5 dB, indicating exceptionally low noise levels.
For Total Harmonic Distortion plus Noise (THD+N), the MOTU M2 has very low values, such as < -97 dB (0.0014%) for mic inputs and < -110 dB (0.00032%) for 1/4" line/monitor outputs. The Audient iD4 MKII also maintains low THD+N, with mic/line inputs at 0.0017% and D/A converters at less than 0.0006%, ensuring clean signal paths.
Finally, in terms of Equivalent Input Noise (EIN), the MOTU M2 and Audient iD4 MKII both report -129 dB A-Weighted for mic inputs, ensuring very low noise floors for high-quality recordings. The Audient iD4 MKII also specifies a Common Mode Rejection Ratio (CMRR) of greater than -75 dB at 1 kHz, contributing to its ability to reject interference and maintain signal integrity.
Overall, both the MOTU M2 and Audient iD4 MKII excel in their respective specifications, with the Audient iD4 MKII offering slightly broader frequency response and higher dynamic range figures, while the MOTU M2 provides excellent THD+N performance and solid input/output levels.

Digital Audio
Sample Rates
44.1 / 48 / 88.2 / 96 kHz	Up to 192 kHz
Sample Rate Conversion

Bit Depths
24-Bit	24-Bit
Latency
0.65 ms at 44.1 kHz (Dependent on Buffer Size, Input to Output) 0.31 ms at 96 kHz (Dependent on Buffer Size, Input to Output)	Zero-Latency Direct Monitoring2.5 ms at 96 kHz (Dependent on Buffer Size, Input to Output)
Sync Sources
Internal	Internal

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface both offer high-quality audio performance but differ in several key specifications.
The MOTU M2 supports sample rates up to 192 kHz, offering a high-resolution recording capability. It maintains a bit depth of 24-bit, ensuring detailed audio capture. The device features zero-latency direct monitoring and has a latency of 2.5 ms at 96 kHz, although this is dependent on buffer size. The MOTU M2 uses an internal sync source and does not include sample rate conversion.
In contrast, the Audient iD4 MKII supports sample rates of 44.1, 48, 88.2, and 96 kHz, which is lower than the maximum sample rate supported by the MOTU M2. Like the MOTU M2, it also offers a bit depth of 24-bit. The Audient iD4 MKII boasts very low latency, with 0.65 ms at 44.1 kHz and 0.31 ms at 96 kHz, which is significantly lower than the latency of the MOTU M2. This interface also uses an internal sync source and does not include sample rate conversion. Additionally, the Audient iD4 MKII has a dBFS reference level of +12 dBu = 0 dBFS, which is not specified for the MOTU M2.
In summary, the MOTU M2 offers higher maximum sample rates, while the Audient iD4 MKII provides lower latency performance. Both interfaces share a 24-bit depth and lack sample rate conversion, using internal sync sources. The choice between the two will depend on the specific needs for sample rate and latency in the user’s audio production workflow.

Audio Storage & Playback
Memory Card Slot

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface are both high-quality audio interfaces geared toward professional and home studio use. Both devices share a commonality in that they do not include a memory card slot, which might be a consideration for users looking to record directly onto external storage.
The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface is known for its ultra-low latency performance, high-quality ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology, and comprehensive metering via its full-color LCD screen. It features two combo XLR/TRS inputs, MIDI I/O, and a loopback function for live streaming or podcasting. The interface offers 24-bit/192 kHz audio resolution, ensuring pristine sound quality.
On the other hand, the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface is celebrated for its renowned Audient console mic preamps, JFET DI, and a ScrollControl feature, which turns the iD4's volume knob into a virtual scroll wheel for your software. It also boasts a 24-bit/96 kHz audio resolution, providing clear and detailed sound. The iD4 MKII includes one mic preamp and one DI input, along with dual headphone outputs and a USB 3.0 connection for high-speed data transfer.
In summary, both interfaces provide excellent audio quality and are equipped with USB-C connectivity for modern setups. The MOTU M2 stands out with its advanced metering and additional MIDI I/O capabilities, while the Audient iD4 MKII emphasizes high-quality mic preamps and a unique ScrollControl feature. Neither device includes a memory card slot, maintaining a streamlined design focused on performance and connectivity.

Compatibility
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11.6 or Later macOS 11.1 or Later Windows 7 or Later 6 or Later iPadOS	macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later
Processor Requirement
Mac: Intel Apple M1 PC: 1.6 GHz Intel Core 2	Mac: 1 GHz Intel PC: 1 GHz Intel Pentium
RAM Requirements
1 GB	2 GB, 4 GB Recommended
Required Hardware
Available USB-C 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 M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface are both highly regarded for their performance and compatibility, but they do have some differences in their specifications and requirements.
The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface is compatible with macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later. It requires at least a 1 GHz Intel processor for both Mac and PC systems, and it recommends 2 GB of RAM, although 4 GB is preferred for optimal performance. The necessary hardware includes an available USB 2.0 port, and a USB cable is included in the package. Additionally, an internet connection is required for downloading the necessary software and drivers.
In contrast, the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface is compatible with macOS 10.11.6 or later, macOS 11.1 or later, Windows 7 or later, and iPadOS. This interface requires an Intel processor or Apple M1 chip for Mac users, and a 1.6 GHz Intel Core 2 processor for PC users. It demands a minimum of 1 GB RAM. The iD4 MKII also boasts mobile device compatibility with iPads and iPhones, making it a versatile choice for users who may want to use it with both computers and mobile devices. An available USB-C port is required, and a USB cable is included. Similar to the MOTU M2, an internet connection is necessary for registration and software/driver downloads.
Overall, both interfaces offer robust OS compatibility and are equipped with the necessary hardware and USB cables. However, the Audient iD4 MKII stands out with its support for mobile devices and Apple M1 processors, which could be a deciding factor for users looking for greater flexibility and future-proofing.

Power
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power	USB Bus Power

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface are both powered via USB bus power, eliminating the need for an external power supply and making them ideal for mobile and home studio setups. This feature allows users to connect the interfaces directly to their computer's USB-C port, drawing the necessary power for operation.
The MOTU M2 stands out with its high-resolution 24-bit/192kHz AD/DA converters, offering superior audio fidelity. It also features an LCD screen that provides detailed level metering, a unique feature that enhances monitoring capabilities. The M2 includes two combo XLR/TRS inputs with preamps, MIDI I/O, and balanced 1/4" outputs, making it a versatile choice for various recording needs.
On the other hand, the Audient iD4 MKII also boasts 24-bit/192kHz converters, ensuring pristine audio quality. It includes one Audient Console mic preamp and one JFET DI, which are highly regarded for their warmth and clarity. The iD4 MKII features a ScrollControl virtual knob, which can be used to control various parameters within your software, enhancing workflow efficiency. Additionally, it offers a dual headphone output, which is a valuable feature for collaborative work.
In summary, both interfaces provide USB bus power for convenience and mobility, with the MOTU M2 excelling in its detailed metering and versatile connectivity, while the Audient iD4 MKII is noted for its high-quality preamps and innovative ScrollControl feature.

Physical
Anti-Theft Features
Kensington Security Slot	Kensington Security Slot
Dimensions
5.2 x 4.7 x 2.4" / 13.3 x 12 x 6 cm (Including Controls and Protrusions)	7.5 x 4.25 x 1.75" / 19.1 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm (Chassis Only)
Weight
2.2 lb / 1.0 kg	1.4 lb / 0.6 kg

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface share several key features, with both offering a Kensington Security Slot for anti-theft protection. This security feature allows users to secure their interfaces against theft, which is particularly useful in shared or public environments.
In terms of physical dimensions, the MOTU M2 measures 7.5 x 4.25 x 1.75 inches (19.1 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm), making it a relatively compact device. The Audient iD4 MKII, on the other hand, measures slightly smaller in terms of length and width but is taller, with dimensions of 5.2 x 4.7 x 2.4 inches (13.3 x 12 x 6 cm). This slight difference in size may influence users who have specific spatial requirements or preferences for their setup.
When considering weight, the MOTU M2 is lighter, weighing in at 1.4 lbs (0.6 kg). In contrast, the Audient iD4 MKII is a bit heavier, with a weight of 2.2 lbs (1.0 kg). The weight difference may impact portability, as the lighter MOTU M2 could be easier to transport for mobile recording setups, while the heavier Audient iD4 MKII might offer a more robust and stable feel on a desktop.
Overall, both audio interfaces provide essential security features, but they differ in size and weight, which could be deciding factors for users based on their individual needs and preferences.

Packaging Info
Package Weight
1.92 lb	1.8 lb
Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
7.5 x 6 x 3.5"	10 x 7.45 x 2.75"

The MOTU M2 USB-C Audio/MIDI Interface and the Audient iD4 MKII USB-C Audio Interface, while both designed for high-quality audio recording and playback, differ slightly in terms of their physical packaging specifications. The MOTU M2 has a package weight of 1.8 lb and its box dimensions are 10 x 7.45 x 2.75 inches. In contrast, the Audient iD4 MKII has a package weight of 1.92 lb with box dimensions of 7.5 x 6 x 3.5 inches.
The MOTU M2's packaging is slightly larger in length and width but thinner in height compared to the Audient iD4 MKII. This suggests that while the MOTU M2 might take up more surface area in a storage or shipping scenario, it has a lower profile which might be beneficial for fitting into slimmer storage spaces. On the other hand, the Audient iD4 MKII, being more compact in length and width but taller, might be easier to handle and store in tighter spaces due to its smaller footprint.
In terms of weight, the Audient iD4 MKII is slightly heavier by 0.12 lb, which is a negligible difference but could be a consideration for those who prioritize minimal weight for portability. Both interfaces are relatively lightweight, making them suitable for mobile recording setups or easy transportation between locations.