| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Leonard
Lokahi
USA
124 Posts |
 Posted - 10/12/2005 : 06:07:28 AM
|
| Thanks for the info, cpatch. I'll print your comments out and try it. I think it's a great device. The software for downloading songs to it is also good. Very portable, too. Especially good because it's so easy to set up - not such a big production as the laptop, mixer, etc. So for taping rehearsals it's really convenient. LRR |
Be the change that you wish to see in the world. M. Gandhi |
 |
|
|
Lawrence
Ha`aha`a
USA
1597 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 10:18:05 AM
|
OK Here is the beginning of a List of recorders/interfaces
suitable for field use with a LapTop or standalone and that
have MORE THAN TWO ANALOG input (recording) channels:
All listed units must be capable of 24bit/96Khz or better!
Many of them have multiple digital I/O (like SPDIF and ADAT),
but for field use, the number of useable ANALOG ins and outs
is a critical criteria.
(I will fill in more details by edits when I can)
Roland/Edirol R4: portable field recorder with Hard Disk
.................. 4 channel, nice stand-alone packaging
$1000?
PreSonus PS-Firebox: 4in? 4out?, FireWire
$400
PreSonus PS-FireStation: (cute huh?) 8in 8out, FireWire
$600
Echo AudioFire8: 8in 10out FireWIre
$600
Echo AudioFire12: 12in XXout FireWire
$800
MOTU (this MFG chooses NOT to publish specs and manuals on the
web - so I WILL NOT buy from them and reccommend that you do not
either)
Mackie Onyx 1220: Mixer with built-in digitizers (14 channels)
$930 (with the digitial interface included)
RME Fireface: 8in 8out, (does not have any preamps!)
$1500 (way too expensive for something without preamps)
Lexicon Omega: 4in 4out,
$300 an older unit but still a good value for what it has
E-MU 1616 LapTop DAS: 6in 6out, (TWO preamps), CardBus (PCMCIA)
$400 - this looks like the best value for money for a portable system.
Tascam FW1082: FireWire
Info above is from chicken scratches I made while browsing web.
some inaccuracies are expected.
|
Mahope Kākou...
...El Lorenzo de Ondas Sonoras |
Edited by - Lawrence on 10/13/2005 2:44:31 PM |
|
|
|
Reid
Ha`aha`a
Andorra
1526 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 1:54:42 PM
|
Lorenzo,
The nonstandards are changing so fast, do you know which Firewire is being used in each case? I append a stolen text from a NY paper that is rapidly declining in quality (so Andy can plead that it is of no material value when he gets sued for some bogus theft of info).
<begin nonquote>
Q. Which is faster, U.S.B. or FireWire?
A. U.S.B. (Universal Serial Bus) and FireWire (also known as IEEE 1394 and i.Link) each have two varieties, so speed ratings depend on which versions are being compared. Regular FireWire, which can transfer data at up to 400 megabits per second, is faster than U.S.B. 1.1 (12 megabits per second) but rated slower than U.S.B. 2.0, which can transfer up to 480 megabits of data a second.
Because of the way each technology controls that data transfer, however, FireWire is often faster than U.S.B. 2.0 in tests in copying data at sustained speeds. A faster version of the standard, FireWire 800, can copy data at speeds up to 800 megabits per second.
<end nonquote>
...Reid |
|
|
|
Lawrence
Ha`aha`a
USA
1597 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 3:03:09 PM
|
Reid,
I think most of the FireWire units above are 400Mbs.
Firewire is presently specified up to 3200Mbs, however,
the actual speed you get will be the slowest speed
at either end of the wire, and I think my LapTop is
the original 400Mbs. There are just a very few FireWire800
devices available right now (the spec is way ahead of actual
hardware). The speed needed to support the audio data rate can
be multiplied out by the number of channels times the number
of bits (24) times the sample rate (say 96Khz). For 8 channels
in and out (16 effective channels): 16*24*96000 = 36.8Meg bits
per second which is far below the peak rates supported for
FireWire400 and USB2(480).
But what about latency? Ignoring buffers for a moment,
the latency would be one sample minimum and even if you
had an inifinitely fast transfer rate you would only gain
the length of one sample in latency. Now with buffers
these times would be muliplied by the buffer length and can
become significant. But latency only matters in OverDub
situations and most field recodings are "on the fly" without
overdubs. In any case I have not had much trouble with
latency, even with multiple overdubs, but I keep my buffer
settings as short as I reasonably can.
One more thing: The E-MU unit is PCMCIA card based, which is
theoretically VASTLY FASTER than either FireWire or USB, but
you need an available PCMCIA slot on you LapTop (not problem
for me!).
|
Mahope Kākou...
...El Lorenzo de Ondas Sonoras |
Edited by - Lawrence on 10/13/2005 3:04:21 PM |
|
|
|
Mark
Ha`aha`a
USA
1628 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2005 : 4:16:57 PM
|
quote:
MOTU (this MFG chooses NOT to publish specs and manuals on the
web - so I WILL NOT buy from them and reccommend that you do not
either)
Gee, Lawrence, that's a little harsh. Particularly inasmuch as MOTU interfaces, particularly the 2408 in all its guises, have been industry standards for years.
Try to find something else that will "speak" TDIF, ADAT, S/PDIF, TOSlink, AES/EBU and analog all at the same time! When I was in the biz, my studio was built around the 2408; I traded it out to a pro studio for some time, so it is still very much in use. I now have a first generation 828, and would recommend it (or at least the more recent one) or the Traveler to anyone. DP is a heavy program, more than most TPers need. AudioDesk, which is bundled with the MOTU stuff, is very, very good.
Specs, you say? You can fool a lot of people with specs...
Seriously, I wouldn't buy gear based on specs, I'd buy it based on experience, and reading reviews, talking to users, checking out user groups, etc., etc., etc. Tho' I agree with you that MOTU ought to make more of an effort to educate potential users. I suppose it has to do with "resting on your laurels" on some such.
But here's some urls to cruise for features:
http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/traveler/features.html
http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/compare.html/en
That being said, I'd go with something more portable like the FireBox, unless you are doing serious multi channel remote work.
Other than that, my hat is off to ya, Lawrence, for taking the time to help out...
cheers,
M |
|
|
|
Reid
Ha`aha`a
Andorra
1526 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 10:55:39 AM
|
Lawrence (and anybody else who cares to explain),
I have been working at figuring out latency you mentioned and I understand the basics. The hardware is not as much of a problem for me as the software (drivers, etc.) - WDM putting 30 ms in by default, but I use Echo's Purewave drivers which minimizes the problem.
It recently became important because Sarah and I overdubbed for the first time ( an interesting cross-continent effort that somebody else should talk about - yeah, a tease).
First:
There are only 2 situations that I have read about that are adversely affected by latency: monitoring *identical* signals in the performer's cans so that there is comb-filtering and the performer thinks things are off, and hence goes off more.
and,
Overdubbing a track where you don't know what the latency actually is, so that the track is slid (usually forward) and the sound gets out of sync.
So, how do I deal with these things without funny analog signal paths. And, should I care at all?
Second:
What buffer size do you use? I just have used the default 2048 Echo console buffer but some guys talk about 256 bit buffers. My cpu seems totally unstressed at 1.3ghz (which is not so fast these days, but seems plenty fast enough) so I could probably decrease the buffer size, but I don't want to go through a major research project to figure out something optimal (given that I even knew how to judge the results).
...Reid |
|
|
|
Lawrence
Ha`aha`a
USA
1597 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 3:28:21 PM
|
quote:
Gee, Lawrence, that's a little harsh.
Yes- that is harsh and the way I want it to be! (You are welcome to forward this post to MOTU)
1) Obviously, MOTU has a website
2) also Obviously, it creates it's user manuals on a computer.
3) It only takes 3 clicks of a mouse to put the manual on the website.
So, therefore they intentionally want to prevent potential buyers from accessing necessary prior purchase information (and existing users as well)!
I will not buy ANY hardware if I cannot determine in detail how I am going to use it. I can download the manuals to nearly every piece of equipment that I use, whether it is a $75,000 LeCroy digital oscilloscope or a $10 RadioShack gadget. If these people (MOTU) do not want to put their manuals on the web then they do not want to sell the product to me, pure and simple, and their customer support must also suck, since it already does even before purchase.
Now there are a lot of software providers that withhold manuals from all but registered users, in order to reduce software piracy, but there is simply no excuse for hardware makers to do this (unless they have something to hide).
I have heard good things about MOTU in the past but I cannot (and will not) recommend them until they change their ways.
|
Mahope Kākou...
...El Lorenzo de Ondas Sonoras |
Edited by - Lawrence on 10/17/2005 3:31:09 PM |
|
|
|
Lawrence
Ha`aha`a
USA
1597 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 3:34:10 PM
|
Reid,
To answer some of your questions I need to sit in front of my audio studio computer, so hold on.
|
Mahope Kākou...
...El Lorenzo de Ondas Sonoras |
|
|
|
`Ilio Nui
`Olu`olu
USA
826 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 3:45:38 PM
|
You want "Customer Support" with ATTITUDE, buy MOTU. Nothing MOTU lives on any of my machines since I sent my MIDI Timepiece back eight years ago.
Hope that's not too harsh (actually I don't care)
Dave |
|
|
|
Ray Sowders
Akahai
USA
96 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 4:02:36 PM
|
Howzit Andy,
Just for grins let’s get back to your original question! What to select out there...hmmm. Personally I think it comes down to your budget. Several advisers have given you some ideas, or call Sweetwater (or any equivalent) and see what their sales engineers may have to offer. Yes, they are sales people, but many times can be helpful, particularly if you have a relationship with anybody already. After working with several of the most popular hard disc recording systems, I found the good news is, they all work pretty well and are getting more inexpensive every day. Something else to consider is do you want to use your computer, or going to a dedicated recorder of some type? There are advantages and disadvantages of each. Your “front end” meaning your, mics, pre amps etc. may be seen as even more important then your recorder. Sometimes it’s worth it to get some help from any of your friends who can help fill in the gaps. Bottom line is try to find something YOU can feel comfortable working with. All the money and shining lights and buttons don’t make a good recording. I think it’s the song and the players’ heart that makes it come across. The idea of a mini disc is a fine too. It’s simple, and given a chance you can make some nice recordings. No need to rush. While you’re thinking things over today’s gear becomes obsolete, and tomorrows is getting more inexpensive! Hey one more thing…once you record the song and can burn it to CD try my old method. Take it to Circuit City and tell the sales guy you want to buy some new speakers. You can play the disc on every set of speakers in the store. Sometimes it helps get your mix right! Best of luck, if you need to ask any questions feel free.
A hui hou,
Ray
|
|
|
|
Lawrence
Ha`aha`a
USA
1597 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 6:02:36 PM
|
Ray,
Andy already has a minidisc.... right?
but...
quote:
Hey one more thing…once you record the song and can burn it to CD try my old method. Take it to Circuit City and tell the sales guy you want to buy some new speakers. You can play the disc on every set of speakers in the store.
Now that is a GREAT idea!! (Until you go back to that same store SIX times in one Month, that is) 
|
Mahope Kākou...
...El Lorenzo de Ondas Sonoras |
Edited by - Lawrence on 10/17/2005 6:38:57 PM |
|
|
|
Admin
Pupule
USA
4551 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 6:44:24 PM
|
Thanks Ray. And yes, I do have a minidisc recorder. I guess I'm striving for something that will sound even better.
This topic always risks me ending up just as confused if not more than before I started. But everyone's posts are very helpful. Still do not know what to research or get but it's all been good. |
Andy |
|
|
|
Ray Sowders
Akahai
USA
96 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2005 : 07:01:41 AM
|
Hi Andy,
I remember when my friends and I used to get lost talking about gear and recording, someone would usually remind me that even the great Frank Zappa faced with the same type of conversation would say.."just shut up and play your guitar"...Sounds like Frank!
Ray |
|
|
|
Lawrence
Ha`aha`a
USA
1597 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2005 : 10:03:03 AM
|
Since this IS "Da Kine Music Gear" forum AND Andy asked:
quote:
I'm fishing for advice on recording equipment.
then lots of wala'au about gear is exactly what is expected here!
"Just shut up and play your guitar" belongs in a different forum.
Now back to the intended thread:
Andy, you just need to get your requirements figured out. For instance: 1) do you want to record directly into a computer? By asking about the MBox your implied answer to this question is yes. Next question then immediatley becomes: 2) How many channels do you want to record at the same time? This is a very basic decision, you need not do any further research till you decide this one. If the answer is more than two then the list of equipment I posted above is a good place to start researching. The ones I posted are also intended to be good to use with a LapTop if your THIRD criteria is portablilty or field use. There are also lots of other good interfaces that will plug into a DeskTop computer, but are not as portable.
P.S. If you are satisfied with your minidisc recorder but you want to transfer the files in digital form into the computer you can buy a minidisc HOME UNIT (like I have - I think the model is a Sony JE920??) which has optical and SPDIF outputs to your computer sound card. You may be able to pick one of these up on eBay for $100 or so. But if you are thinking ahead and want more channels then do not bother with the minidisc home unit.
Yes, the technology is always changing, but that is not sufficient reason to holdback from getting something now (otherwise we would all still be sitting in caves waiting for someone to invent fire). Most of the stuff is petty good audio quality these days so you do not need to worry too much about needing to replace it. (Even though most computer related stuff goes obsolete every three years or so) For instance I have an original Echo Layla interface (6 years old and 16 bits not 24bits) that I still use and it still sounds fine, but it is in it's THIRD newer computer)
|
Mahope Kākou...
...El Lorenzo de Ondas Sonoras |
Edited by - Lawrence on 10/19/2005 11:00:33 AM |
|
|
|
Puna
Lokahi
USA
227 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2005 : 06:17:07 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lawrence
Since this IS "Da Kine Music Gear" forum AND Andy asked:
quote:
I'm fishing for advice on recording equipment[quote].
[quote]Originally posted by Andy
This topic always risks me ending up just as confused if not more than before I started.
I think I agree with Andy...I often end up more confused than when I started.
I think this thread (and others like it) has taught me several things:
There is a LOT of stuff about recording that I don't have a clue about...
There are a LOT of people on this forum that do...
So, my overall conclusion is that if I just want to record myself for practice reasons/etc., then there are a lot of simple options. If I want something more than that, I'm hiring one of you guys!
Puna |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
