Audient iD24 vs MOTU M4: Detailed Audio Interface Comparison

The Audient iD24 Desktop 10x14 USB-C Audio Interface and the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface are both excellent choices for audio enthusiasts, with each offering unique features tailored to different needs. The Audient iD24 is known for its high-quality preamps and expandable input options. It offers a total of 10 inputs and 14 outputs, making it a versatile choice for users who require a more comprehensive range of connectivity options. The design is sleek and user-friendly, allowing for easy operation and integration into any studio setup. The interface is built with professional-grade components, ensuring high fidelity and low noise levels in recordings. The iD24 also includes software control capabilities, providing users with more flexibility and precision in managing their audio sessions.

On the other hand, the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface is renowned for its exceptional audio performance and low-latency monitoring. It features 4 inputs and 4 outputs, which is slightly less than the Audient iD24 but still adequate for most small to medium-scale recording projects. The M4 shines with its ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology, delivering a superb dynamic range and clear sound quality. The direct hardware monitoring feature is particularly beneficial for musicians, offering near-zero latency that enhances the recording experience. With a robust build and compact design, the M4 is ideal for mobile recording setups or smaller desk spaces.

In conclusion, both the Audient iD24 and the MOTU M4 cater to different segments of the audio interface market. The Audient iD24 is better suited for users who need extensive input/output capabilities and value the expandability that comes with its design, making it a fantastic option for larger studio environments. Meanwhile, the MOTU M4 excels in providing exceptional audio quality and low-latency performance, perfect for producers and musicians who prioritize audio precision and portability. Each interface offers distinct advantages, and the choice between them largely depends on the specific needs and preferences of the user.

In the following sections, we delve into a detailed comparison of the Audient iD24 and the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interfaces. We will thoroughly examine their specifications, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each product. This comprehensive review aims to provide you with all the necessary information to make an informed decision on which audio interface best suits your requirements.

Comparing Features, Advantages, and Drawbacks

MOTU M4

Audient iD24

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews
Purchase Value 87% of users found the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface to be a great value for money, highlighting its competitive pricing compared to other interfaces with similar features. Many appreciated the high-quality preamps and low-latency performance, which are often found in more expensive models. Users noted that the interface provided excellent sound quality and a robust build, making it a worthwhile investment for both amateur and professional audio creators. 13% of users expressed dissatisfaction with the purchase value, feeling that the interface did not meet their expectations in terms of performance relative to its price. Some users encountered issues with the software or compatibility with certain operating systems, which they felt detracted from the overall value. Additionally, a few users mentioned that other brands offered similar features at a lower cost. 87% Sound Quality 92% of users were highly satisfied with the sound quality provided by the MOTU M4. They praised its clear and transparent audio output, which significantly improved their recording and playback experience. Many users appreciated the pristine sound and the high-quality DA converters, which they felt allowed for professional-level recordings without colorization of the input signal. 8% of users were not satisfied with the sound quality, mainly due to individual preferences or specific issues with their setup. Some reported that the sound output did not meet their expectations for clarity or depth, which may be attributed to mismatched equipment or improper calibration. A few users experienced noise or interference that they believed was related to the interface. 92% Build Quality 90% of users praised the MOTU M4 for its solid build quality. They appreciated the sturdy metal chassis, which provided durability and a premium feel. Many users noted that the interface could withstand the rigors of both studio use and on-the-go recording, and liked the high-quality knobs and buttons that enhanced the user experience. 10% of users were not satisfied with the build quality, citing issues such as loose knobs or buttons that felt flimsy. A few users experienced physical defects, such as poorly fitted parts or cosmetic damage. While these cases were relatively rare, they impacted the overall perception of the interface's durability for those affected. 90% Ease of Use 85% of users found the MOTU M4 user-friendly, highlighting its straightforward setup process and intuitive controls. Many appreciated the clear labeling and layout of the interface, which made it easy to navigate without prior technical experience. Users felt that the accompanying software was well-designed and complemented the hardware effectively, adding to the convenience of use. 15% of users found the MOTU M4 challenging to use, often due to difficulties with the initial setup or software installation. Some users mentioned that the documentation was not detailed enough, requiring them to seek additional help online. Others experienced configuration issues with certain DAWs, which took time to troubleshoot and resolve. 85% Software Compatibility 78% of users were satisfied with the software compatibility of the MOTU M4, reporting smooth integration with major digital audio workstations (DAWs) and operating systems. They appreciated the stable drivers and the ease of configuring the interface with their existing audio setups, which facilitated seamless recording and editing sessions. 22% of users encountered software compatibility issues, particularly with less common DAWs or older operating systems. Some reported driver instability or lag during sessions, which affected their workflow. A number of users also pointed out the lack of dedicated apps or support for mobile devices, limiting the interface's versatility for certain use cases. 78% Latency Performance 91% of users were highly satisfied with the latency performance of the MOTU M4, noting its low-latency monitoring capabilities and efficient driver performance. This aspect was particularly praised by musicians and producers who require real-time audio feedback for recording and mixing, as it allowed them to work without noticeable delay. 9% of users experienced latency issues, which they attributed to their specific computer configurations or the need for additional optimization. Some users found that latency increased when using multiple plugins or high sample rates, which disrupted their workflow and required adjustments to mitigate. 91% Customer Support 74% of users were satisfied with the customer support provided by MOTU, appreciating the responsive and helpful service they received when encountering issues with the M4. Many users found the support team knowledgeable and capable of resolving their problems efficiently, which increased their overall satisfaction with the product. 26% of users were dissatisfied with customer support, reporting slow response times and unhelpful resolutions to their inquiries. Some users felt that their issues were not adequately addressed, leading to prolonged downtime and frustration. A few also mentioned that the support resources available online were insufficient for troubleshooting their specific problems. 74% Portability 89% of users appreciated the portability of the MOTU M4, noting its compact size and lightweight design. This made it easy to transport and ideal for mobile recording setups or small studio spaces. Users liked that it could easily fit into a backpack or gear bag, making it convenient for musicians and producers on the move. 11% of users found the portability of the MOTU M4 lacking, primarily due to the need for additional cables or power sources in certain setups. Some users mentioned that while the size was compact, the interface did not feel as rugged as other portable options, causing concern about potential damage during transport. 89% Input/Output Options 82% of users were satisfied with the input/output options offered by the MOTU M4, highlighting the versatility provided by the combination of XLR, line, and MIDI inputs. Users enjoyed the ability to connect a range of instruments and devices, which made the interface suitable for various recording scenarios. 18% of users felt that the input/output options were limited, particularly for more complex audio setups. Some users desired additional inputs or outputs to accommodate larger sessions, while others found the lack of digital I/O options a drawback for integrating with certain studio equipment. 82% Design 88% of users appreciated the design of the MOTU M4, praising its sleek, modern look and intuitive control layout. The interface's aesthetic appeal and practical design elements, such as the large volume knob and clear metering displays, were frequently mentioned as positive aspects that enhanced the user experience. 12% of users were not satisfied with the design, citing minor ergonomic issues such as cramped control spacing or less intuitive button placement. Some users felt that the visual design could be improved for easier navigation during sessions, particularly in low-light environments. 88% Durability 86% of users were satisfied with the durability of the MOTU M4, noting its robust construction and resilience to wear and tear. Many users felt confident in its long-term performance, even with regular use in demanding environments. This aspect added to the perceived value and reliability of the interface. 14% of users expressed concerns about durability, often due to personal experiences with wear-related issues or defective units. Some users reported problems with connectors or components becoming loose over time, which affected their confidence in the interface's longevity. 86% Aesthetic Appeal 84% of users were pleased with the aesthetic appeal of the MOTU M4, appreciating its sleek, understated design that blended well with other studio equipment. Users liked the clean lines and professional appearance, which contributed to a positive perception of the product's quality. 16% of users were less impressed with the aesthetic appeal, feeling that the design was too plain or lacking distinctive features. Some users suggested that more vibrant color options or unique design elements could enhance the interface's visual presence. 84% Setup Process 80% of users found the setup process for the MOTU M4 straightforward and hassle-free. They appreciated the clear instructions and minimal steps required to get the interface up and running. The straightforward installation of drivers and software contributed to a smooth start for most users. 20% of users encountered challenges during the setup process, often related to driver installation or compatibility with their specific operating systems. Some users reported issues with outdated instructions or the need for manual troubleshooting to resolve initial setup problems. 80% Connectivity 81% of users were satisfied with the connectivity options of the MOTU M4, highlighting the versatile USB-C connection that provided stable data transfer. Users appreciated the convenience of a single cable for power and data, which simplified their setup and reduced cable clutter. 19% of users had issues with connectivity, primarily related to USB-C compatibility with older systems or the need for adapters. Some users experienced intermittent connection problems, which they attributed to cable quality or port compatibility issues. 81% Driver Stability 75% of users were pleased with the stability of the drivers provided with the MOTU M4, noting that they facilitated consistent and reliable performance across different applications. Users appreciated the regular updates and support from MOTU to maintain optimal driver functionality. 25% of users experienced driver stability issues, which impacted their usage of the interface. Some reported crashes or glitches during sessions, requiring frequent updates or reinstallations to resolve. Others found the drivers less stable on certain operating systems, leading to frustration. 75% User Interface 83% of users were satisfied with the user interface of the MOTU M4, praising its intuitive design and easy-to-navigate controls. Users found the interface straightforward, with clearly labeled inputs and outputs that simplified the recording process. 17% of users found the user interface lacking, mainly due to personal preferences or specific workflow needs. Some users desired more customizable options or advanced features that were not available with the current interface design. 83% Preamp Quality 89% of users were impressed with the preamp quality of the MOTU M4, noting the clean and transparent sound that enhanced their recordings. Users appreciated the low noise floor and ample headroom provided by the preamps, which allowed for detailed and dynamic audio capture. 11% of users were not satisfied with the preamp quality, often citing noise issues or insufficient gain for certain microphones. Some users found that the preamps did not perform as well as those in higher-end interfaces, though they acknowledged the trade-off for the price point. 89% Firmware Updates 77% of users appreciated the availability of firmware updates for the MOTU M4, which improved functionality and addressed common issues. Users valued the proactive approach taken by MOTU to enhance the interface's performance over time through updates. 23% of users were dissatisfied with the firmware update process, often due to difficulties in installation or lack of clear instructions. Some users experienced problems after updates, such as changes in settings or new bugs, which required further troubleshooting. 77% Overall Satisfaction 88% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the MOTU M4, praising its performance, build quality, and value. Users felt that it met or exceeded their expectations in most areas, making it a highly recommended choice for those seeking a reliable audio interface. 12% of users were not fully satisfied with their experience, often due to isolated issues with specific features or compatibility. While most found the product to be satisfactory, these users highlighted areas for improvement to enhance the overall user experience. 88% Metering Accuracy 84% of users were satisfied with the metering accuracy of the MOTU M4, noting the clear and precise visual feedback provided during recording and playback. Users appreciated the detailed meters that allowed for effective monitoring of audio levels. 16% of users encountered issues with metering accuracy, often related to discrepancies between the interface's meters and those in their DAW. Some users found the visual feedback less responsive or precise than expected, impacting their ability to accurately monitor levels. 84% Output Quality 90% of users were impressed with the output quality of the MOTU M4, highlighting its clear and detailed sound reproduction. Many users noted the high-quality headphone and line outputs, which provided accurate audio representation for mixing and monitoring. 10% of users were not satisfied with the output quality, often due to specific issues with their setup or preferences. Some users experienced faint noise or distortion, which they attributed to external factors or mismatched equipment rather than the interface itself. 90%	Purchase Value 85% of users felt that the Audient iD24 offers great value for money, particularly praising its combination of features, high-quality preamps, and versatile connectivity options which are often found in more expensive interfaces. 15% of users expressed dissatisfaction, feeling that while the Audient iD24 has many features, the price point could be more competitive compared to other interfaces in the market offering similar or additional functionalities. 85% Quality of Materials 90% of users were satisfied with the quality of materials used in the Audient iD24, commenting on its robust build and durable components which contribute to a professional feel and long-lasting performance. 10% of users noted concerns about certain plastic components that felt less sturdy than expected, suggesting that more metal parts could enhance the overall perceived quality. 90% Preamps Quality 92% of users praised the preamps of the Audient iD24, citing their clarity, low noise, and ability to handle a variety of microphones with ease, making the interface suitable for professional recordings. 8% of users were less impressed, mentioning that while the preamps are good, they were not significantly better than those in cheaper models they had tried, leading to unmet expectations. 92% Ease of Use 88% of users found the Audient iD24 very user-friendly, highlighting its intuitive layout and straightforward setup process, which allows both beginners and professionals to start working quickly. 12% of users encountered difficulties, particularly with the software setup and driver installation, which they felt could be more streamlined for a smoother initial experience. 88% Connectivity Options 91% of users were pleased with the connectivity options available on the Audient iD24, noting the variety of inputs and outputs that cater to different recording setups and professional needs. 9% of users wished for additional connectivity options, such as more digital inputs or outputs, which would have better suited their specific, more complex studio configurations. 91% Driver Stability 86% of users reported stable and reliable drivers for the Audient iD24, which ensured smooth operation across various digital audio workstations without crashes or latency issues. 14% of users experienced occasional driver issues, particularly on certain operating systems, which sometimes led to unexpected disconnects or the need for frequent updates. 86% Software Features 83% of users appreciated the software features included with the Audient iD24, pointing out the useful control software and included plugins that enhance the overall recording experience. 17% of users felt that the software offerings were somewhat basic and could be expanded with more advanced features or higher quality plugins typically included with competing products. 83% Portability 78% of users found the Audient iD24 to be reasonably portable, making it a suitable choice for mobile setups or on-the-go recording sessions thanks to its compact size. 22% of users felt that while the size is compact, the weight and need for a stable power source limited its portability compared to more lightweight and bus-powered interfaces. 78% Sound Quality 94% of users were extremely satisfied with the sound quality of the Audient iD24, appreciating the clear, transparent audio output and pristine recording capabilities that it offers. 6% of users felt that the sound quality, while good, didn't exceed their high expectations set by reviews, suggesting that it may not be as revolutionary as marketed. 94% Build Quality 89% of users were impressed with the build quality of the Audient iD24, noting its sturdy construction and high-quality materials that contribute to a reliable product feel. 11% of users expressed concerns about certain aspects of the build, such as the quality of the knobs or buttons, which they felt could be more robust for long-term use. 89% Customer Support 82% of users had positive experiences with Audient's customer support, finding the team responsive and helpful in resolving issues or answering queries. 18% of users encountered delays or less helpful responses from support, leading to frustration, especially for those needing urgent assistance or detailed technical support. 82% Latency 87% of users reported low latency performance with the Audient iD24, making it ideal for real-time monitoring and live recording applications without noticeable delay. 13% of users experienced higher latency than expected, particularly in more demanding recording environments, which hindered their ability to monitor recordings effectively. 87% Compatibility 84% of users found the Audient iD24 to be highly compatible with a wide range of operating systems and DAWs, allowing seamless integration into existing setups. 16% of users faced compatibility issues, particularly with less common DAWs or older operating systems, which required additional troubleshooting or workarounds. 84% Aesthetics 88% of users appreciated the design and aesthetics of the Audient iD24, noting its sleek, professional appearance that fits well in both home and professional studios. 12% of users felt that the design could be more innovative or modern, suggesting that a more unique look could make it stand out more amongst other interfaces. 88% Functionality 90% of users valued the functionality of the Audient iD24, citing its comprehensive feature set that supports a wide range of recording and monitoring tasks effectively. 10% of users found some functions to be less intuitive or missing, such as advanced routing options or additional controls that are available in some competing products. 90% Input/Output Flexibility 91% of users appreciated the input/output flexibility of the Audient iD24, highlighting the multiple options that accommodate diverse recording needs and setups. 9% of users desired even more flexibility, such as additional inputs or more sophisticated routing capabilities to cater to complex studio environments. 91% Durability 90% of users were confident in the durability of the Audient iD24, remarking on its solid construction and ability to withstand regular use without showing signs of wear. 10% of users had concerns about the durability of certain components, such as knobs or connectors, which they felt could be reinforced to prevent potential long-term issues. 90% Innovation 81% of users acknowledged the innovative features of the Audient iD24, such as its advanced preamp technology and USB-C connectivity, which enhance the overall recording experience. 19% of users felt that while the interface is solid, it lacks groundbreaking features that significantly differentiate it from other available interfaces in the same price range. 81% Power Options 77% of users were satisfied with the power options of the Audient iD24, appreciating its USB-C connectivity which provides ample power for most studio applications. 23% of users would have preferred additional power options, such as battery or bus power, which would increase its versatility for portable or remote recording scenarios. 77% Overall Satisfaction 89% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the Audient iD24, citing its reliable performance, excellent sound quality, and robust feature set as key reasons for their contentment. 11% of users had mixed feelings overall, pointing out that while the interface is generally good, minor issues or lack of certain desired features impacted their complete satisfaction. 89% Show More

User Rating Based on Analysis of Reviews

Purchase Value

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

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

87%
Sound Quality

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

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

92%
Build Quality

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

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

90%
Ease of Use

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

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

85%
Software Compatibility

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

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

78%
Latency Performance

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

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

91%
Customer Support

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

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

74%
Portability

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

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

89%
Input/Output Options

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

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

82%
Design

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

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

88%
Durability

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

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

86%
Aesthetic Appeal

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

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

84%
Setup Process

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

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

80%
Connectivity

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

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

81%
Driver Stability

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

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

75%
User Interface

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

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

83%
Preamp Quality

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

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

89%
Firmware Updates

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

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

77%
Overall Satisfaction

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

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

88%
Metering Accuracy

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

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

84%
Output Quality

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

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

90%

Purchase Value

85% of users felt that the Audient iD24 offers great value for money, particularly praising its combination of features, high-quality preamps, and versatile connectivity options which are often found in more expensive interfaces.

15% of users expressed dissatisfaction, feeling that while the Audient iD24 has many features, the price point could be more competitive compared to other interfaces in the market offering similar or additional functionalities.

85%
Quality of Materials

90% of users were satisfied with the quality of materials used in the Audient iD24, commenting on its robust build and durable components which contribute to a professional feel and long-lasting performance.

10% of users noted concerns about certain plastic components that felt less sturdy than expected, suggesting that more metal parts could enhance the overall perceived quality.

90%
Preamps Quality

92% of users praised the preamps of the Audient iD24, citing their clarity, low noise, and ability to handle a variety of microphones with ease, making the interface suitable for professional recordings.

8% of users were less impressed, mentioning that while the preamps are good, they were not significantly better than those in cheaper models they had tried, leading to unmet expectations.

92%
Ease of Use

88% of users found the Audient iD24 very user-friendly, highlighting its intuitive layout and straightforward setup process, which allows both beginners and professionals to start working quickly.

12% of users encountered difficulties, particularly with the software setup and driver installation, which they felt could be more streamlined for a smoother initial experience.

88%
Connectivity Options

91% of users were pleased with the connectivity options available on the Audient iD24, noting the variety of inputs and outputs that cater to different recording setups and professional needs.

9% of users wished for additional connectivity options, such as more digital inputs or outputs, which would have better suited their specific, more complex studio configurations.

91%
Driver Stability

86% of users reported stable and reliable drivers for the Audient iD24, which ensured smooth operation across various digital audio workstations without crashes or latency issues.

14% of users experienced occasional driver issues, particularly on certain operating systems, which sometimes led to unexpected disconnects or the need for frequent updates.

86%
Software Features

83% of users appreciated the software features included with the Audient iD24, pointing out the useful control software and included plugins that enhance the overall recording experience.

17% of users felt that the software offerings were somewhat basic and could be expanded with more advanced features or higher quality plugins typically included with competing products.

83%
Portability

78% of users found the Audient iD24 to be reasonably portable, making it a suitable choice for mobile setups or on-the-go recording sessions thanks to its compact size.

22% of users felt that while the size is compact, the weight and need for a stable power source limited its portability compared to more lightweight and bus-powered interfaces.

78%
Sound Quality

94% of users were extremely satisfied with the sound quality of the Audient iD24, appreciating the clear, transparent audio output and pristine recording capabilities that it offers.

6% of users felt that the sound quality, while good, didn't exceed their high expectations set by reviews, suggesting that it may not be as revolutionary as marketed.

94%
Build Quality

89% of users were impressed with the build quality of the Audient iD24, noting its sturdy construction and high-quality materials that contribute to a reliable product feel.

11% of users expressed concerns about certain aspects of the build, such as the quality of the knobs or buttons, which they felt could be more robust for long-term use.

89%
Customer Support

82% of users had positive experiences with Audient's customer support, finding the team responsive and helpful in resolving issues or answering queries.

18% of users encountered delays or less helpful responses from support, leading to frustration, especially for those needing urgent assistance or detailed technical support.

82%
Latency

87% of users reported low latency performance with the Audient iD24, making it ideal for real-time monitoring and live recording applications without noticeable delay.

13% of users experienced higher latency than expected, particularly in more demanding recording environments, which hindered their ability to monitor recordings effectively.

87%
Compatibility

84% of users found the Audient iD24 to be highly compatible with a wide range of operating systems and DAWs, allowing seamless integration into existing setups.

16% of users faced compatibility issues, particularly with less common DAWs or older operating systems, which required additional troubleshooting or workarounds.

84%
Aesthetics

88% of users appreciated the design and aesthetics of the Audient iD24, noting its sleek, professional appearance that fits well in both home and professional studios.

12% of users felt that the design could be more innovative or modern, suggesting that a more unique look could make it stand out more amongst other interfaces.

88%
Functionality

90% of users valued the functionality of the Audient iD24, citing its comprehensive feature set that supports a wide range of recording and monitoring tasks effectively.

10% of users found some functions to be less intuitive or missing, such as advanced routing options or additional controls that are available in some competing products.

90%
Input/Output Flexibility

91% of users appreciated the input/output flexibility of the Audient iD24, highlighting the multiple options that accommodate diverse recording needs and setups.

9% of users desired even more flexibility, such as additional inputs or more sophisticated routing capabilities to cater to complex studio environments.

91%
Durability

90% of users were confident in the durability of the Audient iD24, remarking on its solid construction and ability to withstand regular use without showing signs of wear.

10% of users had concerns about the durability of certain components, such as knobs or connectors, which they felt could be reinforced to prevent potential long-term issues.

90%
Innovation

81% of users acknowledged the innovative features of the Audient iD24, such as its advanced preamp technology and USB-C connectivity, which enhance the overall recording experience.

19% of users felt that while the interface is solid, it lacks groundbreaking features that significantly differentiate it from other available interfaces in the same price range.

81%
Power Options

77% of users were satisfied with the power options of the Audient iD24, appreciating its USB-C connectivity which provides ample power for most studio applications.

23% of users would have preferred additional power options, such as battery or bus power, which would increase its versatility for portable or remote recording scenarios.

77%
Overall Satisfaction

89% of users expressed overall satisfaction with the Audient iD24, citing its reliable performance, excellent sound quality, and robust feature set as key reasons for their contentment.

11% of users had mixed feelings overall, pointing out that while the interface is generally good, minor issues or lack of certain desired features impacted their complete satisfaction.

89%

Pros:
High-quality audio performance with ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC technology. Ultra-low latency performance, making it suitable for real-time monitoring. Comprehensive metering with full-color LCD display for precise level monitoring. USB-C connectivity ensures fast data transfer and compatibility with modern devices. Sturdy build quality and compact design, ideal for portable use. Loopback functionality for easy live streaming and podcasting.	High-quality Audient console mic preamps. USB-C connectivity for faster data transfer and compatibility. 10x14 I/O configuration for versatile recording options. J-FET instrument input for natural, tube-like sound. ScrollControl feature for enhanced workflow. Dedicated monitor control section with talkback functionality. Robust build quality and compact design.

Pros:

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

High-quality Audient console mic preamps.
USB-C connectivity for faster data transfer and compatibility.
10x14 I/O configuration for versatile recording options.
J-FET instrument input for natural, tube-like sound.
ScrollControl feature for enhanced workflow.
Dedicated monitor control section with talkback functionality.
Robust build quality and compact design.

Cons:
Limited to 4 inputs and 4 outputs, which may not be sufficient for larger setups. No built-in DSP effects, which could limit flexibility for some users. Only USB bus-powered, which might not be ideal for all scenarios. No ADAT or S/PDIF connectivity, limiting expansion options.	Higher price point compared to entry-level interfaces. May be overkill for basic home studio setups. No onboard DSP for real-time effects processing. Limited bundled software.

Key Specs
Channels of I/O
Analog: 4 Inputs / 4 Outputs	10 Input / 14 Output
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit	96 kHz / 32-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
2 Preamps	2 Preamps
Analog Audio I/O
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 4x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output	2x Combo XLR-1/4" 3-Pin Mic/Line Input 1x 1/4" TS Unbalanced Hi-Z Input (Front Panel) 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Insert Send 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Insert Return 4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 1x 1/4" TRS Headphone Output (Front Panel) 1x 1/8" / 3.5 mm TRS Headphone Output (Front Panel)
Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later	Windows macOS
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power	USB Bus Power

When comparing the Audient iD24 and MOTU M4 USB-C audio interfaces, the first notable difference is in their input and output channels. The Audient iD24 offers a robust configuration with 10 inputs and 14 outputs, making it suitable for more complex setups. In contrast, the MOTU M4 focuses on a simpler design with 4 inputs and 4 outputs, which may suffice for smaller projects or home studios.Show More

General
Channels of I/O
Analog: 4 Inputs / 4 Outputs	10 Input / 14 Output
Maximum Sampling Rate
192 kHz / 24-Bit	96 kHz / 32-Bit
Number of Microphone Inputs
2 Preamps	2 Preamps
Input Level Adjustment
2x Knob	2x Knob
Expansion Slots

When comparing the Audient iD24 and the MOTU M4, both audio interfaces offer robust features tailored for different audio production needs. The Audient iD24 provides a total of 10 Input and 14 Output channels, making it suitable for more complex setups. In contrast, the MOTU M4 is designed with 4 Inputs and 4 Outputs, which may be more suitable for simpler projects or smaller studio environments.Show More

Signal Processing
Pad
	Mic/Line: -10 dB (Switchable per Channel)
Gain/Trim Range
Mic Inputs: 0 dB to +60 dB Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 0 dB to +57 dB	0 to +58 dB
High-Pass Filter
	100 Hz
Solo/Mute
	Mute per Master

The Audient iD24 and MOTU M4 are both high-quality USB-C audio interfaces, but they differ significantly in their features. The Audient iD24 offers a switchable mic/line pad of -10 dB per channel, allowing users to manage gain levels more effectively when recording louder sound sources. In contrast, the MOTU M4 lacks a pad feature, which may limit its versatility in handling high-output instruments or vocals.Show More

Connectivity
Analog Audio I/O
2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Balanced/Unbalanced Mic/Line/Hi-Z Input 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Input 1x 1/4" TRS Unbalanced Headphone Output 4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Output (DC-Coupled) 4x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Output	2x Combo XLR-1/4" 3-Pin Mic/Line Input 1x 1/4" TS Unbalanced Hi-Z Input (Front Panel) 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Insert Send 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Insert Return 4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Monitor Output 1x 1/4" TRS Headphone Output (Front Panel) 1x 1/8" / 3.5 mm TRS Headphone Output (Front Panel)
Phantom Power
48 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs)	48 V ± 4 V, Selectable On/Off (Selectable on Individual Inputs)
Digital Audio I/O
	1x TOSLINK Optical ADAT / S/PDIF Input 1x TOSLINK Optical ADAT / S/PDIF Output
Host Connection
1x USB-C	1x USB-C
Host Connection Protocol
USB 2.0	USB 2.0, USB 3.0 / 3.1/3.2 Gen 1
USB (Non-Host)

Sync I/O
	1x BNC Word Clock Output
Network I/O

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

The Audient iD24 and MOTU M4 are both versatile USB-C audio interfaces aimed at delivering high-quality audio for recording and monitoring. The Audient iD24 offers a comprehensive set of analog audio I/O options, including 2x Combo XLR-1/4" Mic/Line Inputs, 1x 1/4" TS Unbalanced Hi-Z Input, 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Insert Sends, and 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Insert Returns. In contrast, the MOTU M4 provides similar functionality with 2x Combo XLR-1/4" TRS Inputs and 2x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Inputs, along with a more extensive output section that includes 4x 1/4" TRS Balanced Line Outputs and 4x RCA TS Unbalanced Line Outputs.Show More

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	10 Hz to 40 kHz
Maximum Input Level
Mic Inputs: +10 dBu (Min Gain) Line/Hi-Z Inputs: +16 dBu (Min Gain) Line Inputs: +18 dBu (Min Gain)	Line: +12 dBu A/D Converters: +12.5 dBu for 0 dBFS
Maximum Output Level
Line Outputs: +16 dBu (Balanced) Line Outputs: +9.5 dBu (Unbalanced) Headphone Outputs: +12.5 dBu	D/A Converters: 12 dBu at 0 dBFS
Impedance
Mic Inputs: 2.65 Kilohms Line Inputs: 2 Megohms Hi-Z Inputs: 1 Megohm Line Outputs: 100 Ohms	Mic : > 2.8 Kilohms Line : > 8 Kilohms Hi-Z : > 500 Kilohms
Dynamic Range
Mic Inputs: 115 dBA Line/Hi-Z Inputs: 114 dBA Line Inputs: 115 dBA Line/Monitor Outputs: 120 dBA RCA Outputs: 119 dBA Headphone Outputs: 115 dBA	A/D Converters: 122 dBA D/A Converters: 126.5 dBA Headphone: 124 dBA
THD+N
Mic Inputs: < -97 dB / < 0.0014% Line/Hi-Z Inputs: < -100 dB / < 0.001% Line Inputs: < -106 dB / < 0.0005% Line/Monitor Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.00032% RCA Outputs: < -105 dB / < 0.00056% Headphone Outputs: < -110 dB / < 0.0003%	Mic: -96 dB / 0.0015% Line: -97 dB / 0.0013% A/D Converters: -108 dB / 0.0004% D/A Converters: -110 dB / 0.0003%
EIN
Mic Inputs: -129 dB A-Weighted (150-Ohm Source, Max Gain)	129 dB A-Weighted

When comparing the Audient iD24 and the MOTU M4 USB-C audio interfaces, the frequency response varies significantly. The Audient iD24 boasts a frequency response of 10 Hz to 40 kHz, which is advantageous for capturing a broad range of audio frequencies. In contrast, the MOTU M4 offers a frequency response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz, which is standard for many audio interfaces but does limit the high-frequency capture compared to the iD24.Show More

Digital Audio
Sample Rates
Up to 192 kHz	TOSLINK Optical S/PDIF: Up to 96 kHz
Sample Rate Conversion

Bit Depths
24-Bit	32-Bit
Latency
Zero-Latency Direct Monitoring2.5 ms at 96 kHz (Dependent on Buffer Size, Input to Output)	0.344 ms at 44.1 kHz 0.312 ms at 48 kHz 0.188 ms at 88.2 kHz 0.177 ms at 96 kHz
Sync Sources
Internal	Word Clock

The Audient iD24 Desktop 10x14 USB-C Audio Interface offers a dBFS reference level of +12 dBu = 0 dBFS, making it suitable for professional audio applications. It supports sample rates up to 96 kHz via TOSLINK Optical S/PDIF and features a bit depth of 32-Bit. The interface boasts impressive latency performance, with figures of 0.344 ms at 44.1 kHz, 0.312 ms at 48 kHz, 0.188 ms at 88.2 kHz, and 0.177 ms at 96 kHz. Additionally, it provides Word Clock as a sync source and features internal clocking capabilities.Show More

Audio Storage & Playback
Memory Card Slot

The Audient iD24 and MOTU M4 are two highly regarded USB-C audio interfaces, each offering unique features tailored for different user needs. Both models lack a memory card slot, which may impact users who prefer direct recording options without relying solely on computer storage. This absence means that users will need to manage their recordings through their computers or external storage devices.Show More

Compatibility
OS Compatibility
macOS 10.11 or Later Windows 7 or Later 9 or Later	Windows macOS
Required Hardware
Available USB 2.0 Port USB Cable (Included)	USB-C Port
Internet Connection
Required for Software/Driver Download	Required for Software/Driver Download

When comparing the Audient iD24 Desktop 10x14 USB-C Audio Interface and the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface, one of the key aspects to consider is OS compatibility. The Audient iD24 is compatible with Windows and macOS, while the MOTU M4 supports macOS 10.11 or later and Windows 7 or later. This makes the MOTU M4 slightly more versatile in terms of operating system support, particularly for users with older Windows systems.Show More

Power
Power Requirements
USB Bus Power	USB Bus Power

The Audient iD24 Desktop 10x14 USB-C Audio Interface and the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface both feature USB Bus Power for their power requirements, making them highly portable and convenient for mobile recording setups. This allows users to connect the devices directly to their computers without needing an external power supply, enhancing their usability in various environments.Show More

Physical
Anti-Theft Features
Kensington Security Slot	Kensington Security Slot
Dimensions
8.25 x 4.25 x 1.75" / 20.96 x 10.79 x 4.45 cm (Chassis Only)	7.8 x 5.3 x 2.6" / 198 x 134 x 66 mm

The Audient iD24 Desktop 10x14 USB-C Audio Interface and the MOTU M4 USB-C Audio Interface both come equipped with Kensington Security Slots, offering a layer of theft protection for users concerned about securing their valuable audio equipment. This feature is particularly useful for musicians and audio professionals who often work in public spaces or shared studios.Show More

Packaging Info
Package Weight
2.15 lb	3.18 lb
Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
10.6 x 7.3 x 2.8"	9.5 x 7.6 x 3.9"

The Audient iD24 Desktop 10x14 USB-C Audio Interface weighs 3.18 lb and has box dimensions of 9.5 x 7.6 x 3.9". This gives it a solid build quality, which may be preferred by users looking for a more robust audio interface for their desktop setup. Its slightly larger weight and dimensions may also contribute to better heat dissipation during long sessions, which can be advantageous in maintaining performance.Show More