What do y'all use to record with in your home project studio

Todd Weger · Post by **Todd Weger** » 5 Feb 2001 3:22 pm

I currently have a 1992 Fostex 280 4-track cassette machine. Fine for a scratch-pad to quickly put down some ideas, but not good enough to do a serious project.

I am considering either a Roland VS-890 (or, possibly the VS-1880), or maybe spend another grand or so, and get the Yamaha AW4416HDCD. Both these units are pretty much "start to finished masters" complete, and have their respective strengths and weaknesses.

Anyone using digital machines to record with? Any recommendations? Things to avoid? Things you like about your machine? Things you DON'T like?

Thanks for any advice you have.
TJW

------------------
Todd James Weger/RD/RTD
www.franchise-yourself.com
1960 Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6)

ToneJunkie · Post by **ToneJunkie** » 5 Feb 2001 7:43 pm

Todd,

Click on my site link below and you can have a look at the extent of my personal recording sickness. When you get to the main page, click on "The Studio" and you can take the grand tour. I use the Tascam DA-88 digital 8 track and the machine is rock solid and sounds amazing; nice A/D and D/A converters. But I expect I will be mostly disk-based soon...

Cheers

------------------
Robert Hicks - Fessenden S12U

Home Page: http://www.members.home.net/tonejunkie
Email: rhhicks@home.com

Dave Boothroyd · Post by **Dave Boothroyd** » 6 Feb 2001 12:36 am

If you are serious about recording at home, one major factor to think about is data compression.
I hope we all know that MP3, for example produces smaller file sizes by ignoring parts of recorded signal. This is called lossy compression. Well so does the Roland- it's not an MP3 recorder, but it does use lossy data compression to save disk space.
A Tascam DA88 or an ADAT records pure uncompressed digital audio, so if there is a tiny 21kHz+ harmonic lurking behind your open E string, the DA88 will record it but the Roland won't. And that harmonic might just be the thing that gives you the sound you want.
It all depends on how much the exact sound means to you.
If all you want is a workpad recorder,you won't care, but if you are hoping to go right to commercial standard masters, lossy compression won't do, I'm afraid.
By the way Roland are not the only ones to use compression on their digital workstations. Recorders which are uncompressed will say so prominently in the spec. Compressed ones tend to avoid the subject!

------------------
Cheers!

John Lacey · Post by **John Lacey** » 6 Feb 2001 7:31 am

Todd, I bought a Roland VS1680 back in June and have had a ball with it. Other players I know own them and they are extremely versatile and good-sounding, compression notwithstanding. All kinds of editing features and the quick response of the hard-disk based system make it a joy to operate. 16 tracks are fine with me, the only thing I don't have is their CD burner with which one can archive a project as it's rather costly, $850. in Canada. I'd personally recommend the Roland 1680, 1880, or wait a few months and the 2480 should be released. There's more contenders out there but Roland has the longest track record and also a dandy user group, the VS Planet. I decided NOT to go with computer-based because of the instablility factor. Also, with the 1680, I've taken it on the road along with headphones and have complete recording projects. [This message was edited by John Lacey on 06 February 2001 at 07:34 AM.]

Joe E · Post by **Joe E** » 6 Feb 2001 7:41 am

Ok my 2 cents,

If you want professional gear use a ADAT or DA-88. You can pick ADAT's up used for 7-900 bucks. These units are compatible with just about every studio in the world. You will end up with extra gear going this route, but its worth it if your serious.

Many times a year I send or recieve ADAT tapes form all of the world to record tracks on projects. This is a wonderful thing. (I'm not sure if you could do this on a Roland)

If your need is NOT for Professional quality gear then go with the Roland. Many of the formites have done very well with these all in one units.

Bill Terry · Post by **Bill Terry** » 6 Feb 2001 7:48 am

While I agree with what Dave says about 'lossy compression' in his technical explanation, I think that to dismiss any digital workstation that employs data compression as

a workpad recorder

is a bit extreme.

I bought a VS-1680 at a fire sale close out price recently and while it may not be 'state of the art' commercial quality, it ain't bad, especially given the price, and is certainly not what I'd call 'workpad' quality. I was very close to purchasing an ADAT or the Tascam machine, but I got some good advice to check out HD recorders, not just Roland, but the genre in general.

I looked at PC based systems (typically uncompressed digital) and stand-alone workstations by several manufacturers. I ended up with the Roland because it fits my needs and budget, and I've had pretty good luck with Roland products in the past.

Likes:
1) I felt the audio quality was very good, although I will admit this is subjective. I have to say I expected to not like it, knowing that data compression was being used.
2) No hassles with installing cards, software, etc. Turn it on, you're ready to go.
3) Portable, you can haul it around and do remote recording with exceptional quality. This was a requirement that I really wanted.
4) Random track access, and multipoint autolocator. Amazing how quickly you get used to 0 seconds rewind and cueing time. The 'Transport' and locator controls are dedicated and very easy to use.
5) Extremely powerful on board editing, flying tracks around, cutting and pasting, punch-ins, etc.

Dislikes:
1) Documentation is sorta skimpy and weird. Typical of Roland, Yamaha and a lot of other Japanese manufacturers in general.
2) Lots of multifunction 'soft' keys and controls, especially in the mixer section. This can be a bit intimidating to get around, especially some of the more esoteric functionality.
3) No CD burner included, you have a SCSI port on the back, and either have to shell out big bucks for the Roland, or find a compatible Plextor CDRW. Other than this, no easy, reliable way to archive data once the HD is full.

One last thought on data compression; not all techniques are the same. Lots of ways to do it, some better than others. Trust your ears. Just my opinion, FWIW.....

------------------
bterry.home.netcom.com

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 6 Feb 2001 8:27 am

I use a Roland VS-880 (the original). It has a steep learning curve, but it does make great sounding recordings. The newer models are more user-friendly.

Glenn Austin · Post by **Glenn Austin** » 6 Feb 2001 9:36 am

Do yourself a favor and download the free version of ProTools at www.Digidesign.com.You need Win 98 and a minimum of 128Meg o ram.It plays a max of 8 tracks,has editing,mixing console,effects automation etc.Then if that works out you can upgrade to a bigger digidesign system for between 500 to 1000 bucks.You already have a computer, so why not!

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 6 Feb 2001 9:50 am

If I'm not mistaken, the VS-880 has three or four different modes of recording. One of those (master mode?) doesn't use compression. At least I don't think it does.

I've found a great deal on a VS-880 that's been upgraded to V-xpanded. It will soon be replacing my Yamaha 4-track cassette recorder (which has mysteriously become 3-track only recently).

The VS-880 is "old technology", but the price is right. Now, if I can just find me an external Plextor 4220T CD-RW, I'll be set.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Greg Derksen · Post by **Greg Derksen** » 6 Feb 2001 10:50 am

I would say the only negatives about the
Roland stuff at all are, Compressed Audio
which compared to the Cassette is still way
better, and moving audio to other studio's.
Adat's are cheap, extemely versitile,
(Lightpipe) in and out, connects with Moto,
Pro Tools 001, Cubase. And probably a little
more Pro in sound, especially the 20 bit
Recorders. One other thing to keep in mind,
if you use Adat or D-88 type units, your outboard gear can be specifically selected,
Example , TC M1 Reverbs or Lexicon MPX500
are awesome verbs and are reasonable.
If you are serious about recording,maybe
go with something like the new Aleses 24
Hardisk, Reasonable, 24 TRACK, 24 Bit Non-Compressed Audio, Light Pipe. Should be
very prestine for sound. No learning Curve.
If however you want to enjoy it as a hobby
and still get semi Pro results, get a used
Roland workstation, Hardly takes up any room,
lots of features, (Maybe to many) but remember you will be learning for a while
with it , and your learning Roland's software
that relates only to Roland.
Check out Pro-Tools 001 Also! Greg

pdlstl · Post by **pdlstl** » 7 Feb 2001 8:34 am

I'm doing PC-based hard-disk recording. I'm using:

HP 1.4gig Pentium 4
60 gig HD
36 gig 10K rpm HD
256 megs of RDRAM
Cakewalk Pro Audio 9 (will upgrade to Sonar when it releases in March)
M-Audio Delta 44 analog interface
Roland USB Midi interface
Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro Board
Lexicon delay and reverb
SansAmp stereo rackmount amp simulator
Alesis M1 powered monitors (I have the S1 subwoofer on order)

oh, and uh, a Mullen D-10 w/ 8 and 6

Current set-up gives me 64 digital tracks with 256 virtual tracks. Sonar upgrade will expand to unlimited digital tracks.

Very happy with this rig.....[This message was edited by pdlstl on 07 February 2001 at 08:35 AM.][This message was edited by pdlstl on 07 February 2001 at 08:41 AM.]

Steve Stallings · Post by **Steve Stallings** » 12 Feb 2001 5:54 pm

Adats (original black face)
Mackie 24X8
Soundcraft 40X8
Reverbs:
Lexicon
TC Electronics
Alesis Q2
Zoom
Delays:
Lexicon
Roland
Digitech
TC Electronics
BBE 862 Exciter
Berhinger Gates and Compressors
Mastering Deck : Alesis Masterlink (an awesome tool)

I am going to be adding a 24 channel Hard Disk recorder soon. I am waiting for the involuntary beta testing of the first Mackie and Alesis units before committing

------------------
Steve Stallings
Bremond, Texas
Carter D10/Evans