Members MarkydeSad Posted November 17, 2018 Members Share Posted November 17, 2018 Looks like we're back to good old knobs and faders. Good, I hate computer recording https://www.harmonycentral.com/expert-reviews/tascam-model-24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Etienne Rambert Posted November 17, 2018 Members Share Posted November 17, 2018 I like it. It's a good price too. At $700 - I'd jump. But at $999 I'll pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 17, 2018 Members Share Posted November 17, 2018 I commented in there. I think there will be more and more of a backlash against computer recording. Between overpriced/underpowered Macs and Windows updates breaking drivers, you have to maintain a computer recording setup as much as you used to have to maintain a reel-to-reel multitrack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nat whilk II Posted November 17, 2018 Members Share Posted November 17, 2018 I'd switch to hardware like this if: 1. it could host VSTs2. the audio quality was as good as the upper tier interfaces3. had some decent monitor controls, talkback, and phantom power per input (not all or none.) I've been looking at the SSL X-Desk at lot lately and getting very intruiged. SSL brings that modular, expandable approach in on all their products, too. What is so irking about using computers - and this goes for a lot more than music - is that the computer industry has simply made "almost good enough" a way of doing business. Sell something that begs for the next, better version of itself. Perpetual market creation. nat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted November 18, 2018 CMS Author Share Posted November 18, 2018 I'd switch to hardware like this if: 1. it could host VSTs 2. the audio quality was as good as the upper tier interfaces 3. had some decent monitor controls, talkback, and phantom power per input (not all or none.) Going back to 2000, Mackie offered the HDR24/96 24-track recorder and d8b 24-channel digital console which, when mated, made a great digital audio workstation. Audio quality was as good as the upper (but not uppest) tier audio interfaces of the day, and I contend that the HDR's A/D and D/A converters are equal in quality to the Focusrite Scarlett series. The d8b's mic preamps were essentially the Onyx design (before the Onyx was released as its own console) and that was a very clean transformerless preamp for the day. It had full monitor control and talkback, as well as moving fader automation, and recorder transport controls including a very smooth job/shuttle wheel. VSTs were just barely invented then, but in addition to the multi-band EQ and dynamics on every channel, Mackie offered an option card for the mixer that could be loaded with plug-ins from Drawmer, Massenberg, and Acuma (a Mackie company at the time) and could be applied to the mixer channels. But comparing it to the TASCAM that Phil reviewed, the Mackie setup would have set you back 8 to 10 grand in 2000/2001 dollars. And like the TASCAM, there was no third-party software to run on it, and this line didn't last long enough for many updates, though there were a few, which for the most part, were bug-free. I've been looking at the SSL X-Desk at lot lately and getting very intruiged. SSL brings that modular, expandable approach in on all their products, too. That's a nice system, but a pretty expensive way to go. And you're still dependent on a computer as your recorder. The API Box is a similar concept, and comparable in price to the SSL, too, over ten grand plus your computer. What is so irking about using computers - and this goes for a lot more than music - is that the computer industry has simply made "almost good enough" a way of doing business. Sell something that begs for the next, better version of itself. Perpetual market creation. As far as sound quality goes, I think that computers are completely good enough. But computers have led us along the path of constant updates and upgrades, plus it's hard to dedicate a computer to a single purpose - because it's there you really want to be able to check your e-mail and you Twitter account, maybe write some music, keep track of your sessions and projects, and do your bookkeeping. It's darn hard to force yourself to set up a computer-based DAW that works smoothly and don't upgrade anything. But you know that you're going to be tempted with a plug-in that needs an OS update in order to run. On hardware, you don't have that option - you just buy another piece of hardware to do the job. If I had a little more patience, I think I could be pretty happy with a copy of MixBus or Reaper, a hardware controller like the PreSonus 16-channel Faderport, and a nicely tuned Windows 7 computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mats Nermark Posted November 18, 2018 Members Share Posted November 18, 2018 I still run my Windows 7 PC for recording and I fear the day I have to get a new computer as that likely will have Windows 10. plus it's hard to dedicate a computer to a single purpose - because it's there you really want to be able to check your e-mail and you Twitter account, maybe write some music, keep track of your sessions and projects, and do your bookkeeping. I realized early on that in order to have peace of mind I needed to dedicate my PC to recording. So I have the PC for recording, a MacMini for general surfing and business applications and a low cost Asus mini PC for business applications that only runs on a PC. I have them all hooked up to a monitor switcher so I only need one monitor screen. Cheers, Mats N Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.