Damn censorship. Thanks 

Bummer … didn’t get to read it and I am gearing up to replace my Delta 1010 ... from the little bit I can glean from what you guys wrote here, it sounds like the mid-level gear is solid.  I’ve been tossing around the idea of replacing my Delta 1010 (8 line level inputs / PCI) with either a pricier equivalent or more line level channels.  I am NOT interested in an interface with mic-preamps and I want to stay with the older PCI or PCIe technology.
 
For example:
 
The RME Multiface II and the accociated PCIe card (you need to buy both) would run $1498 and would be a direct replacement for my Delta 1010 (8 line level inputs).
 
Alternatively, the MOTU 24I/O Core PCIe would run $1420 and would give me a total of 24 line level inputs.
 
On a per channel basis the RME is $187.25 versus $59.17 for the MOTU.
 
So, from what you are saying about the results of the shoot-out is that I should feel confident investing in the MOTU at 1/3 the price on a per channel basis and go with infinitely more useful 24 channels.

They pulled that thread some time ago. A lot of people questioned the results. It was not so much a "which is best" thread as it was a "which is the most neutral when going out and back into the sound card. The Lynx Hilo was at the top of the list at the end. But a more effective test would have been to line up a reference test track and then get people to vote on the outcome. That might have been more useful to future buyers of the technology. The AD convertors themselves are not as important as "Does the design sound better or worse than the next design?"

Batsbrew- love the graphic! Thanks for the chuckle.

Wow Bitflipper! I can't believe you tried to use the word $p!c in your post? I'm sure the NSA is tracking your movements "carefully..." As well they should? I can see where they ****'ed out your racist comments in your post. At least it's Spic and Span now.
 
Can't go wrong with a Fireface 800?

For the record.....I'm mostly neutral on the discussion. I've had to make changes to my converters over time, and as my income increased, the cost of my converters has increased too. I don't have Lynx or Apogee, but a pair of RME converters. What I have noticed is that the more expensive converters generally offer more channels of AD/DA, options and are easily expandable to add more and more channels. For example, I could add another 16 channels and record all 32 simultaneously while holding up and keeping latency down.
 
For comparison, all I can do is listen to my older recording versus my newer ones. Honestly, there's things about the older recordings that I like better, and there are things that I like better on the new gear. I think that the more layered and multi-channeled the work, the more noticeable the differences are. Most of the stuff I recorded earlier on was simpler, and now there is more going into the recordings (literally), thus I like the RMEs better on work that has larger track count.
 
Last, don't forget that Apogee, Lynx, etc. are really designed to be pro-grade converters that live between large consoles and the DAW with the ability to record 48+ analog sources at once, powered on and in use 24 x 7. Most of us don't have these requirements, thus we don't need to spend the bucks on them.
 
It's no different than the exact same discussions about cameras. Does an artist need a $5000 DSLR body? No. Does a pro that will lug it around all the time, drop it, and depend on it for her/his living? It's not because it takes that much better pictures, but because it gives a professional the tools they need to make their living without cause for concern. The camera built into an iPhone can take a picture of the same quality as a $5k DSLR (for the most part) and certainly when in the hands of a regular person. Thus, the $5K DSLR is not intended for me, but the manufacturer wouldn't mind one bit if I could afford one.

for whatever it's worth.
 
all of the songs (recordings) i have posted in the last few years, have been done with a MAudio Audiophile 192 card.
either analog straight into the card, or thru a $219 ART DPS digital convertor, straight to sound card via SPDIF.
 
 
 
or, in the case of a few older recordings, directly into a roland VS-1880 preamp and convertor.
 
 
 
i don't doubt that a better converter would help my fidelity.
 
but it has not stopped me.
 

So what you have proven, Bat.....is that performance trumps converters. :-)

MakeShift
So what you have proven, Bat.....is that performance trumps converters. :-)

I've been saying that for the longest time as well, Mike. Someone made a mention in this thread about noticing the differences when you have large track counts...this is true in my experience as well. The cheaper interfaces sort of skewer mixes in my opinion to where they get harder to mix and place correctly.
 
For example, if you were to record and mix using a Realtek on board soundcard, you'll do fine until you start to get some tracks recorded. If you redo the same project using a better interface with better converters, this is where you can notice the differences in sound sizes as well as translation and transparency. Having used Realtek's quite a bit in my time on all my non-recording boxes, there have been times where I've actually finished full song ideas, or at least sketches of full song ideas. What I notice is, lower track counts don't seem to make much difference even though the card records at 16/44 only. Add lots of tracks and it skewers up quickly.
 
Yet, some instruments actually sound GOOD using it...go figure! Bitflipper and I talked a bit about it before. I had mentioned doing a guitar track for a client just to see if he liked the idea so I used one of my stock Dell service boxes with a Realtek just to sketch out the idea. He loved it, so we kept it just as it was. Later in the week, I brought the work file with me to my studio and fired it up on the good stuff. I then tried to play the guitar using all my good stuff to see how it would compare.
 
Believe it or not, that Realtek did something to the sound in a good way that I wasn't quite getting with the good cards I have. To this day I don't know exactly what was different other than the Realtek probably filters/converts differently than a good recording card and this lack of performance was a good thing this time. I have the same gear at my home studio as I do the real studio in terms of guitar, cabs and guitar amps/guitar pre-amps. For this particular sound, I used XLR speaker sim out from one of my guitar tube pre amps. So the sound was identical to what I got at home using the same patch, same guitar. Whatever the case, it was pretty cool that the Realtek made a difference for the better.
 
So yeah man....I'm definitely in the camp of performance and knowing what you are doing will far exceed the gear you use....unless of course you are using stuff that is literally degrading your sound from the start. :) I've done some pretty cool recordings using Realtek's in my time. Nothing that I'd put on a CD and sell, but stuff that's good enough to make a few people say "I'd be happy with a sound like that". It's not great, but it's definitely acceptable. :) When you know what you're doing and your monitors are allowing you to hear what you're supposed to hear, inexpensive gear and middle of the road stuff can definitely raise a few eyebrows.
 
-Danny