Best & Easiest Digital Recorder?

Dennis Detweiler · From: Solon, Iowa, US

I need a digital recorder to record individual tracks to build original instrumentals. Something easy to use (moron friendly). Recommended brand and model? Thanks
_________________
1976 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics 427 pickup, 1975 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics X-12 pickup, Revelation preamp, Carbon Copy Delay and Hall Of Fame Reverb, Crown XLS 1002, 2- 15" Eminence Wheelhouse speakers, ShoBud Pedal, Effects Pedals. 1949 Epiphone D-8.

Joe Drivdahl · From: Montana, USA

Dennis,
I'm interested in this tread too. I see Musicans Friend has a 16 track Fostex for $700 ( I think it was ). But I have always heard Fostex are probably the easiest to use, if not the best sounding.

Joe

Ben Jones · From: Seattle, Washington, USA

consider software, its not as hard as it seems, actually its easier to use than the stand alone recorders IMHO..not to mention its considerably cheaper, you get unlimited tracks, visual audio editing, free vst plug in instruments and effects, etc etc.

however if you must go with a stand alone, look for:
1. dedicated controls for EQ, pan, etc. Nothing interrupts your workflow like having to dig out the phonebook sized manual, then press eight different buttons and read a teeny weenny lcd display with cryptic characters just to pan a track.
2. built in cd burner.

I have a roland vs840 that has neither and it is a drag to use. when i discovered software multitracking (I use Tracktion 2) it was like going from carving stone tablets to microsoft word.

Mark van Allen · From: Watkinsville, Ga. USA

Dennis, I'd agree that software recording is the best bang-for-buck, other than the learning curve each system requires. I really love ProTools.

The stand-alone recorder-in-a-box systems always compromise on something and most of the ones I've seen and used are a bit frustrating that way.
If you already have a mixer and any kind of outboard effects for mixing, maybe you should look into a stand-alone digital recorder, like the Alesis Adat or Tascam DA series. They have digital speed and clarity and work just like a standard cassette deck.

If your search leads that way, let me know, I have several mint Tascam DA-38 recorders for sale. Real workhorses.

Richard Tipple · From: Ohio, USA

I have the Fostex VF80EX digital hard drive recorder.
This little recorder beats anything I have ever owned.
16 tracks with cut & paste, punch in & out, all the bells & whistles I could ever want, compression, track exchange, reverb, delay, master mixdown mode and on and on and quiet as any Pro studio Ive ever been in.
When its all mixed down in stereo, just a few buttons pushed and your master mix is burned to a CD in the internal CD burner.

I can save up to 99 songs on the internal hard drive to re-do or re-mix if I want to do so.
I think its a great hard drive digital recorder for the money and its very user friendly. I was laying down tracks within 2 hours out of the box !

The $ was around $500.00 from Musicians Freind a few months ago.

David Doggett · Posted 2 May 2007 9:55 am

At Harmony Central the user reviews say the Tascam digital recorders are more user friendly than the Fosdexes. The Zoom H4 does CD quality and MP3 recording of excellent quality, and comes with Cubase software you load into your computer for mixing and CD burning. Actually you don't even need the software for CD burning. You can load directly from the Smart Card into your computer media player for CD burning.

Joey Ace · From: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

I don't agree that the software route is the best way for simplicity. I like the hardware, all in one, approach.

You might find yourself spending more time troubleshooting compatibility issues than you do recording.

To each his own. My advice is to get a good Porta-Studio (or equiv) and spend the time learning to use it.

I use a Tascam 2488, but I'm sure the other brands will all do the job for you. Pick one and be prepared to spend some time with it.

Dom Franco · From: Beaverton, OR, 97007

I have owned several models of Fostex digital recorders and they are very easy to use. With play stop, fast forward and rewind buttons just like a tape recorder it just don't get any easier!

Great sound quality. You can find a used one on ebay for small change... Just make sure it comes with the manual and that the seller has a good feedback reputation.

Dom

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

ok, you are not gonna like this answer..

Best and easiest ?

Compared to what and who are you asking ?

there is NO BEST or EASIEST..

they are all good and sort of intuitive..

If you ask someone who uses a Fostex they will tell you Fostex is best and easiest..same with Boss..etc....

here's the deal, each of these brands have tried to create an intuitive path to easy..but that does not make it easy for everyone..There are 3 catagories of users, maybe more,

1) those that have been recording as a hobby of sorts there entire lives

2) those that have some experience recording as a hobby ...

3) those that never did anything with the red button, ever.

Catagory 1 folks will take the units home and record there first song before they even remove the manual from the plastic bag, the brand doesn't matter.

Catagory 2 folks may remove the manual and look up a few features

Catagory 3 folks may not understand page 1, regardless of the brand.

The biggest issue with multitrackers now is the added features that may confuse the initial intent, which is to record something on track 1, then track 2 , etc...

All of these units are basically small PC's which record music, they all use an operating system which MUST have some minimal understanding before note 1 is recorded. The trick is to first use the unit in it's simplest form to get music recorded.

My wife could never operate any of my recorders, my daughter could figure them all out if she sat down with them. Same units, two different people.

Boss, Fostex , Zoom and Tascam etc. spend gobs of engineering money on programmers who's job it is to create an operating system which MOST people can undestand, note I didn't say all. If the programmer was able to think in the SIMPLE mode then they will have a good overall product.

The problem with the marketing of all of these systems is that they encourage folks to BUY then go home and create a CD. That probably happens 50% of the time. The other 50% are on EBAY.

I purchased my Yamaha AW2816 which uses the OS2 operating sytem, not intuitive at all, off of EBAY . the list was $2000, it was 3 months old and I paid $900. The guy told me he couldn't figure it out.
the unit in my mind is excellent but it is not to be compared with my other Tascam or Boss units, but it was not intended to be either. The original purchaser lost $1000 on that deal. When the unit arrived at my door it had 3 minutes of recording on the hard drive.The guy told me he just couldn't figure out how to actually get anything recodred on any track.

A local Guitar singer friend purchased a complete Roland 24 track system from GC, he never owned a recorder before this. After going back and fourth to GC for assitance he finally threw in the towel, he traded it all for a Utility trailer.

Point, understand what it is you want to do in it's simplist form, buy a unit that matches that requirement. Do not put a project in front of the purchase. Be sure to tell the store folks what your skill level is . Boss, Tascam, Fostex , etc.. are all very good and although easy is "subjective", they can all get the job done. Some here will find the operating easy, some will find it more difficult.Just because I say Boss is the easist doesn't mean it is..just because someone else thinks Fostex is easiset doesn't mean it is..Some think PC based recording is easiest, maybe it is , if you are really PC literate and know your way around the PC and WINDOWS.

The largest overall problem is and has always been basic recording skills . All of the manufacturers try to write those techniques into a manual but I don't actually believe that is possible.

Don't over buy your first recorder, keep it simple.

Easy is subjective.

Jack Stoner · From: Kansas City, MO

I'd be careful with a used Fostex. I have two of them that need parts and I'm having problems getting them from Fostex. One, a VF16, belongs to another person and needs a Fast Forward switch and my own VF160 that needs a Stop switch. Neither recorder has a lot of "recording" time on them.

The hard drive in the VF16 went bad, too, but I can't say that was a Fostex problem. Getting a new drive wasn't a problem since it is a standard IDE computer type drive, although there are only certain types that Fostex lists as being compatible.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

Jack raises a very valid issue as well..new recorders use some sort of memory card..that is where we are now.

I would say that any purchase should be a unit that uses a memory card along with USB rather than a hard drive. My Yamaha uses a 20 gig IDE drive and it is a pain in the butt to swap them . I can use a 40 or 60 but only certain brands and models of IDE drives. No USB on this unit.

When seeking a unit also be sure to learn how large the memory card can be, some units have limits on memory card capacity. That will get old fast....

A unit that can take a 1 gig or 2 gig card with USB capability in my view would be appropriate.

Randy Cordle · From: Illinois, USA

If you want to record music and not spend most of your time reading manuals and scratching your head see my original post:

http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=99579
_________________
www.Bluestemstrings.com

Joey Ace · From: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Good post Tony!

I'll again say you have to learn how to use your tools.

The first time you turn on a digital recorder you'll feel as dumb as the first time you tried a computer.

These machine have far more features then most people need. It's similar to Word Processors. I use MS WORD, and don't understand what a lot of the features do.
I do understand the ones I need, and I use the program a lot and am happy with it.

This analogy applies to recorders.

Dennis Detweiler · From: Solon, Iowa, US

Thanks for all the feedback.
I can manipulate an Alesis SR-16 drummer. And I've used a Roland TR-909 in the past.
Sounds like an 8 track unit with card would be a reliable basic for what I need.
I just want to be able to build one song at a time, one track at a time. Then mix it. Eventually dump it onto a CD. Then move to the next song. Being able to add the effects to each track afterwards might be a factor in choosing a brand and model. I don't know what each brand and model is capable of doing.
I don't have a computer.
Suggestions appreciated. Thanks
_________________
1976 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics 427 pickup, 1975 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics X-12 pickup, Revelation preamp, Carbon Copy Delay and Hall Of Fame Reverb, Crown XLS 1002, 2- 15" Eminence Wheelhouse speakers, ShoBud Pedal, Effects Pedals. 1949 Epiphone D-8.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

Dennis, most of the recorders out there, if not ALL of them, have the ability to add and change EQ to individual tracks and add Reverb and/or delays to each track as well, that is no longer an issue, they all do that. The high end recorders allow for much more sophistication of signal processing and effects.

One thing not mentioned which may be of consideration is having a unit with a LOW IMPEDANCE mic input as well as the HI Z Guitar input which I beleive they all have now as well.

IF your PC has a pretty good CD burner the CD burning option on the recorder may not be that important.

Ben Jones · From: Seattle, Washington, USA

The ONLY reason I can think of to go with a stand alone over software in this day and age is mobility.
Many people think that setting up a computer based DAW is difficult. It is not. I knew nothing about computer recording and was able to setup my rig in under an hour. There is simply a misconception amongst people who havent tried it. I used to be one of those people until I tried it for myself. I could never go back to a stand alone now, Just as i could never go back to a typewriter, when there is a word processor sitting right here.

But i totally understand the reluctance..it does seem intimidating. i was shocked at how easy it was, even for a buffoon like myself Shocked

Gil Berry · From: Westminster, CA, USA

I know less than nothing about this subject..but..I have a brother who is a darn good singer, plays a little keyboard, a little bass, a little guitar, and is a very good drummer. He uses digidesign hardware and software with his computer to make multi-track recordings and his results are nothing less than professional. I do know he has spent A LOT of time learning how to use this, but his cd's (which he doesn't sell) are as well made as anything put out by the recording studios - and sound better than 90 per cent of the trash being marketed today as music... Razz

b0b · From: Cloverdale, CA, USA

I think that "best" and "easiest" are opposites when it comes to recorders. The best ones tend to have a lot of features, and with those features comes complexity.

I like my Roland VS, but I don't think anyone could call it "easy to use". I've been using Roland VS recorders for nearly a decade now and I still don't understand a lot of the features.
_________________
-𝕓𝕆𝕓- (admin) - Robert P. Lee - Recordings - Breathe - D6th - Video

Randy Cordle · From: Illinois, USA

Bob, I'm in total agreement with you. I've got a VS1824 that I use on the rare occasion, but I grab my MR8-HD most of the time when inspiration strikes. The trouble with home recording in general is dealing with equipment is the last thing you want to do when you just want to play music. I use the VS1824 when I'm not playing and want to put my engineer's hat on. Mic placement, watching levels, and navigating menus leaves no time for playing! The MR8-HD is as close to a cassette recorder as you can get and still be recording at 16 bit 44.1Kz. It would have been unthinkable 10 years ago to have ANY equipment that is this easy to use and still CD quality at the price point.
_________________
www.Bluestemstrings.com

Dennis Detweiler · From: Solon, Iowa, US

Is the MR8HD capable of adding external effects after recording to each track (an effects loop on each track)?
_________________
1976 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics 427 pickup, 1975 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics X-12 pickup, Revelation preamp, Carbon Copy Delay and Hall Of Fame Reverb, Crown XLS 1002, 2- 15" Eminence Wheelhouse speakers, ShoBud Pedal, Effects Pedals. 1949 Epiphone D-8.

Randy Cordle · From: Illinois, USA

Dennis,
The MR8-HD has a effects level control for each channel so you can adjust the level of "reverb" or "delay" on each track. It is NOT the best sounding reverb, but is usable in small quantities if you wish. The MR8-HD is a great machine to use as an audio capture recorder or a sketchpad for quick inspiration. You CAN use it for entire compositions, but it is best to export the tracks to PC and work on them there. I enjoy being creative with the MR8-HD, but also I'm aware of it's limitations. Fostex also makes a higher track count version for $100 more that also has some preset EQ available, but it doesn't do anything the MR8 can't do with a little planning and creativity.
_________________
www.Bluestemstrings.com

Dennis Detweiler · From: Solon, Iowa, US

Thanks Randy,
On the MR8HD, can I record the steel dry, without effects and then plug my rack gear into my recorded steel track for a final mix. Or, do I have to use the onboard MR8HD effects? I would assume each channe (track) would have to have an "effects in" and "effects out" to do this?
_________________
1976 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics 427 pickup, 1975 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics X-12 pickup, Revelation preamp, Carbon Copy Delay and Hall Of Fame Reverb, Crown XLS 1002, 2- 15" Eminence Wheelhouse speakers, ShoBud Pedal, Effects Pedals. 1949 Epiphone D-8.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

The Fostex manual states you can add external effects while recording, it is not clear if you can do that after the track is recorded dry. If it can, that would really be a plus for this nice small unit.

Historically there are a couple of ways to do this.

You can isolate (send) the desired track(s) to an external output(s) then send them to another external device( processor) and back to a recorder input to either be recorded with the effect or just MIXED as part of the final product.

As an example, the Yamaha AW2816 that I use has 8 separate inputs that can be assigned to any or all of the 16 tracks, and then there is what they term a 4 channel OMNI OUT which allows you to feed any/all channels to one of these separate OUPUTS to be directed to another processor or whatever and then back to one of the 8 inputs. So basically even if you had 16 tracks RECORDED for a project, you could still Mix in another 8 LIVE tracks in addition to the Recorded 16 tracks for the end product.

Or..

The unit may have the ability to plug and play two additional Ext. processors during the recording or mix down process of which they can be assigned to any of the 8 inputs and/or ALL of the 16 recorded tracks. The AW that I use can do this as well, but it is klugie in the setup so I use the ext. outputs instead.

Keep in mind that the lower cost recorders are intended for fast easy production,and they all do that very well. But to get into more advanced production techniques you may have to do some research and step up to a unit which can match the needs.

Independent assignable track outputs are always a plus and can make life very good when you need them.

Generally if a unit has multiple inputs which are assignable to any or all tracks , the operating system of that unit will be more sophisticated and allow for much more flexibility. But it may also come with a steeper price tag.

I read up on many of these lower cost units as I have been considering getting an 8 track for my daughter who currently has a 4 track where she has figured out all sorts of odd ways to get things done.

Young and ambitious sure beats OLD and complacent.

Good luck

tp

PS, the AW2816 Yamaha I have uses the OS2 operating system, I would NOT consider this to be user friendly, I would rate the ease of use as a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 10, and I feel I have some good experience with home recorders over the past 40 years ! The results are very fine but thats a different subject.

Randy Cordle · From: Illinois, USA

Nice post, Tony.

Dennis,
To do what you described easily would require effect send/return jacks and controls which the MR8-HD does not have. As Tony states, more options require a jump up in the complexity/price of a recorder.
You could probably achieve the desired results by feeding the output to your rack setup and recording the processed signal to a new track, although you would have to pad the output signal to get it down to a level that your rack inputs would like. The recorder's output would be line out level and your rack gear is looking for an instrument level input.
_________________
www.Bluestemstrings.com

Dennis Detweiler · From: Solon, Iowa, US

Great replies. Thanks.
My concern is the quality of dubbing. Dubbing with effects already on the recorded track usually makes it a little more noticeable. Dubbing dry then mixing effects seems to blend better. If one of the basic model recorders has individual channel outputs, possibly patching it through the rack gear and recording it into another channel for a mixed track?
3 of my 4 rack gear units have input and output levels. The BBE Sonic Maximizer has no level controls. Would this control the line out signal for this idea?
Thanks again.
I reread your posts after posting this. So, I guess bottom line is: Which, if any, of the lower priced recorders have individual channel outputs that could accommodate external patching from one channel/track to another channel/track? Kind of like the old obsolete telephone operator that connected phone calls with phone plugs while you wait Smile

_________________
1976 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics 427 pickup, 1975 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics X-12 pickup, Revelation preamp, Carbon Copy Delay and Hall Of Fame Reverb, Crown XLS 1002, 2- 15" Eminence Wheelhouse speakers, ShoBud Pedal, Effects Pedals. 1949 Epiphone D-8.

Forum Index > Recording	Goto page 1, 2 Next	Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic