After exhaustive research, I’m between the and the new or UA Twin MkII Quad. I’m struggling to decide between these three and seek your guidance.

I am an alleged, emerging songwriter using Logic Pro X. I’m fairly new to recording in my sparse home studio. I record acoustic and electric guitar, bass and vocals- one source at a time. I play guitar and some bass. I just picked up a new bass and would like to use it direct through the new rig. BTW- Chris Squire used a pick. :-)

For what it’s worth, I’m a Mac tech using a 2012 QC i7-based MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM and 1TB SSD.

The Pros and Cons from my perspective... *UPDATED 1/25/17 and again on 2/7/17- I learned more; much of that attributed to the insight provided in this thread. The comparison is now between the Quad with the belief that the primary reason one would invest in UA is to use UAD higher demand sampled plugins. The Quad provides better ability to use those plugins.

UA Apollo Twin MkII Quad *Updated to Quad to get more of what you're buying UA Apollo for.
http://www.uaudio.com/audio-interfac...twin-mkii.html

Pros
• UAD’s vast, exclusive plugin library mainly consisting of sampled, high-end gear and also including high quality amp sims that cannot be implemented on other devices. There are several native plugins also under the UAD umbrella. From a quality standpoint, any also available native plugins function no better on Apollo hardware than on any other hardware.
• Plugins are included with the device purchase.
• Additional set of line outs to easily support PA speakers and/or a DI bass/guitar rig.
• Four DSP’s to run higher demand, sampled plug-ins at the device level. DSP's also provide the ability to run a guitar and/or bass DI rig without even running your DAW.
• More “How To” Resources + UAD Forum which equates to a real user community although I notice several posts with no replies- it remains to be seen how valuable the UAD user forum actually is. UAD videos are abundant but UAD also uses videos to sell (and support) UAD plugins. There i$ an agenda to the plugin sales-dominant business model.
• Expandable, in fact, can function as a controller of other UA devices.
• Has knobs/hardware-based control. This may not be a big deal to me.
• Has a power switch (minor pro and only listed because the Element lacks this).
• Pete Thorn is on board with the Apollo Twin and has been inspiring in his utilization of it (great youtube videos!)

Cons
• Converter, pre, input gain plus the monitor and headphone out specs are not as good as Element (refer to post #14 for details).
• If using native plugins, roundtrip latency is 4.2ms if monitoring through the DAW. This also requires Input Delay Compensation to be switched off in Console 2.0 (this one needs to be researched a bit)
• More expensive (+$700 over )

Apogee Element 24
http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/element-24

Pros
• Converter, pre, input gain plus the monitor and headphone out specs are best in class ($900 or under and also superior to Apollo Twin MkII - refer to post #14 for details).
• $700 less which could go toward a better pair of monitors...or anything (like a Fractal Audio Systems AX8)
• A simpler workflow that doesn't involve simulated outbound gear (no Console 2.0 with plugins) This could also equate to a lower likelihood of latency issues to work through.
• iOS app that provides remotely controlled functionality.
• Features some Logic integration which should equate to an advantage in ease of implementation. I suspect this is a minor advantage.
• built-in digital clock i/o (not meaningful to me at this point).

Cons
• No additional line outs to support PA speakers and/or a DI bass/guitar rig.
• Apogee provides no user forum = no real community, fewer resources.
• No ability to run many of UAD's industry leading plug-ins. There are definitely other great plug-ins but you won't be able to run UAD's plug-ins.
• No plugins are currently included with the device purchase.
• No DSP’s to run higher demand, sampled plugins although there is a big question about the need for DSP's when considering the power of current computer technology.
• Not expandable. The Apogee Element is not compatible with any other Apogee product line. Apogee states that compatibility is planned for the future. Two Elements can be used together provided a Thunderbolt port is available for each Element.
• No power switch. This may be minor but really?

Questions/Concerns (added on 2/18/17)
Considering the UA Apollo workflow dictated by Console 2.0, would I ever want or need to monitor through the DAW?
These are both late-2016 devices, why would UA let Apogee surpass them on specs (see post#14)? Aren't Apollo owners paying enough for dated DSP's, knobs and buttons?
Considering Apogee Elements' 10db gain advantage, would a Cloudlifter/boost still be advisable when using a Shure SM7b?
Which UAD plugins are most likely to make me forget about the Element spec advantage?



Other honorable interfaces that have been on my radar = Motu 624 and the Focusrite Clarett 2Pre.

Any disclosure you can offer this rookie is greatly appreciated!