| Author |
Topic: Recording Format Preferences |
Bill Cutright
From:
Akron, OH
|
Posted 10 Feb 2002 12:34 am |
|
There was another, recent ,post that was skirting this, but it, sort of, took a mic opinion/debate slant, so I thought I'd start another: I'm interested in hearing opinions, pros/cons, and experiences comparing the available recording formats of manufacturers:
ADAT (and derivitives) vs. DA88 (ditto) vs. Hard disk pc based systems vs. Mackie vs. Roland (1680/2480) vs. Yamaha (4416), etc. Specifically, info about sound quality, dependability ease of use, value, and, maybe, cut through some of the advertising hype, etc.
Or, (since this is really s'posed to be about steel, but...) if you know of a site that relates to this.
(Incidentally, I do get MIX, and the reviews they do, tho good, they don't ever get into anything that comprehensive. Plus with their ad base heavily consisting of the above mentioned companies, they're not going to come out and say one is better than another, but, rather they're all good, and, it, probably, depends...But I'm thinkin otherwise.)
Thanks, Cutty
|
|
|
|
John Lacey
From:
Black Diamond, Alberta, Canada
|
Posted 10 Feb 2002 6:57 am
|
|
| I used several different systems, ie ADAT and computer recording as well as being in many tape studios in my studio life, but for a home unit I chose a Roland 1680 almost 2 years ago. I've been very happy with the unit and it produces excellent results. A 2480 is overkill and you can now buy a used 16-1880 pretty cheap. I haven't had a chance to compare with the Yamaha units but I'm sure they're all fine. I chose the Roland cause a friend of mine bought one for doing fiddle projects and was very happy with it. I don't usually master to the CDR-II that comes with it but enter the computer and master and tweak with Soundforge 4.5. I save the data disks with the CDR-II so that I can wipe the hard drive clean. It's also very crash-resistant. |
|
|
|
Joe Smith
From:
Charlotte, NC, USA
|
Posted 10 Feb 2002 8:06 am
|
|
Bill, I started with two ADATs and a Mackie 24/8 bus mixer. I later sold them and got the Roland VS88EX.
The ADATs did a great job but I had to send them back about three times for repairs.
The Roland works good and has never let me down. It does have a big learning curve. It took me a while to fugure things out.
If I ever deside to purchase another recorder, I will get the 1880. |
|
|
|
Jay Ganz
From:
Out Behind The Barn
|
Posted 10 Feb 2002 9:03 am
|
|
I recently got ahold of a Korg D1600.
For years I had an ADAT-XT with Mackie
mixer, but I decided to make a change.
Glad I did!!!
For more info & opinions on all this
stuff.....just click here. |
|
|
|
Allen
From:
Littleton, CO USA
|
Posted 10 Feb 2002 5:11 pm
|
|
Bill, I did quite a bit of digging before I bought my Roland VS-890. Looked at them all. There are a lot of good units out there, so it's a matter of some basic issues.
Do you want a computer based system or a stand alone DAW? Most of the inputs I received were strong on all digital DAW's. A stand alone system gives you some portability advantages over a computer based DAW. Most of the proponents of computer DAW's said you should go with a dedicated system, use it for nothing other than recording, and most said use a Mac.
How many channels do you need? That drives a lot of the decision. Do you want to master to a CD-R/RW?
Answer your basic need questions, then look for the best system to meet those needs.
Check out "www.vsplanet.com" for a BBS for Roland VS users.
Roland VS systems are easy to use, once you understand some of the basic functions and layered controls. Don't trust the manuals, they are somewhat poorly written.
I was comparing the Roland VS line, Tascam 788, Boss series, Mackie & Korg.
I chose the VS-890 based on functions vs my needs, quality, reputation and I got a great deal on mine.
Remember, as someone else said, once you start down this path it is a bottomless pit.
------------------
Allen Harry
Mullen D-10, 8 & 6
Nashville 1000
|
|
|
|
