Jump to content

Cheap, simple, PC connectable hardware multitracks?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Hello. I have come to the conclusion that I do not get on with software multitrackers; my most productive time, recording, was at uni with a pretty simple 16-channel desk and pair of ADATs.

 

However, I like using my PC to create drum loops and so on. So what I think I might like is a cheapish (maybe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That does look good, but it does way more than I need. I'm really after something very, very simple - the fewer options the better!

 

Ta anyways - the Yamaha has gone on my "think about" list. The link I found for it first had a link to the Fostex MR8HD - anyone tried that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most cheap HD recorders are only 16 bit. It's a real shame to settle for 16 bits, when 24 bit recording is so much better.

 

Since you are making loops in your PC, and you intend to transfer back into the PC for burning the CD - why not just suck it up and record to PC? The problems are mainly in your head. You don't have to use every feature of your DAW - you can treat it as a simple recorder, if you want to.

 

HD recorders still don't solve the basic problems of a PC - noise. At least with a PC you can run it in another room, and duplicate your keyboard, mouse and video monitor.

 

Personally - I am hanging out for somebody to make a portable DC powered multitrack recorder that records to flash disk and is truely silent. When that happens, I will much prefer to track to that, as long as I can dump it over USB2 into my PC for editing. I want the power to record my guitar parts in the middle of a forest (to get away from AC hum), or to record a piano or a church organ - or capture environmental reverb - that sort of thing.

 

In the meantime - Cubase SX is as good as any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree. I'm about as hardware a guy as you'll get, but I've totally taken to software recording. Both Tracktion and PT are as straightforward as I need, yet have enough power to let me occasionally stretch my muscles in the DAW world. I dont' regret choosing this setup at all.

 

Nonetheless, I think you're looking for the Tascam DP01.

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my original post; I do NOT want a software solution. I do not get on with them. I am after a hardware multitrack recorder. I've been through a number of bits of audio software and none of them have the same intuitive simplicity. If I need to adjust a level or a pan position or tweak some EQ or any other it-should-be-there-right-in-front-of-me thing then I don't want to have to open another window.

 

1) Hardware

2) PC connectable

3) Cheap

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by dot-dot-dot

I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my original post; I do NOT want a software solution. I do not get on with them. I am after a hardware multitrack recorder. I've been through a number of bits of audio software and none of them have the same intuitive simplicity. If I need to adjust a level or a pan position or tweak some EQ or any other it-should-be-there-right-in-front-of-me thing then I don't want to have to open another window.


1) Hardware

2) PC connectable

3) Cheap


:)

 

I'll keep my eyes open for you at NAMM. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks mister!

 

My apologies if I've come across as grumpy - I have asked on another forum, and they've all essentially called me an idiot for wanting a hardware solution. I'm sure software works better for them, but it's just not working for me. There are things I am happy to do in software (fine sample editing, drum loop building, even final mixing) but I just find it a strain to use for the initial recording of tracks. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

1) Hardware

2) PC connectable

3) Cheap

 

 

Sound quality not important?

 

Tracking with a computer is the easy part. You have decent software meters, and you don't need to pan or eq or any of the other things that you say you have issues with.

 

I don't think you are crazy to want hardware. Just not realistic to expect it cheap. Unless you have accept the crap 16 bit toys out there at the moment.

 

Have you considered a control surface for a software DAW?

 

I really want a hardware recorder - but it must be 24 bits, and at least 8 tracks. I want to record to silent flash cards, and I want to use battery power. The reason I want this is for portability and for silence - not because it would be any easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by Kiwiburger

Sound quality not important?

 

 

Not really. 16-bit, 44kHz is good enough for me. I want to get on with recording, not agonise over a dB or two of extra noise.

 

 

Have you considered a control surface for a software DAW?

 

 

Y'know, I thought that I'd said several times now that I don't want a software solution. Yes, I've considered forking out for a control surface, but that whole concept, to me, points to the fact that a hardware recording interface is obviously superior to a software one.

 

To put it in words that I think you might be able to understand, I want a crap 16-bit toy. I am neither doing this professionally, nor am I enough of a cork-sniffer to worry about whether someone listening to something I've recorded will say "Well, the tune is ok, but I can barely hear it - the quality is just awful dahling. To think people still record at only CD quality!" *faints*

 

Can we please move past the bit where everyone tells me I'm wrong, over and over and over again, and get to the bit where someone says "In that sort of area, these are the units I would look into"? If I come back in a few months to ask what would be a good mic for a given application, are we going to have to go through this again, or have a thread that's largely about what colour cable I should be using, or that I should in fact be using some sort of non-mic sound pickup device, or will I get advice on mics?

 

(BTW - thanks, aliengroover!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by the stranger

I agree with this. Plus, I had a MR8 and it sounded like {censored}.

 

:D

 

Now that's useful!

 

How is the PC connectivity on the Tascam? I'll have a look at the Zoom as well.

 

I think I have a slight preference for a hard-drive based system, but will certainly consider the (presumably quieter) memory card based ones too. Thanks for the suggestions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I've been saying for some time that I want a 24 bit, 8 or 16 track, basic HD recorder. ADAT in, 8 mic pres, headphone mixer on board, no editing, PC / Mac hookup.

 

Just streamlined quality. The new ADATs are almost it exept for a few things, and I'm thinking the price will dive on this technology soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Alesis ADAT is an Alesis DAT (Digital Audio Tape) machine that uses Super VHS Tapes to record 8 tracks of 16 bit digital (later versions 20 bits).

 

They came out the same time as Mackie mixers, and the combination gave many people a cheap entry into digital recording.

 

The combination inspired the legendary 1996 work by the artist Fletcher entitled "{censored} On A Stick" .

 

http://www.mercenary.com/{censored}onastick.html

 

The latest version uses a 40 gig hard disk and transfers to PC via ethernet.

 

Still not quite what I want - I want silent flash card storage and USB2. They way iPods are developing, it shouldn't be too far into the future to expect something good in a small cheap package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I own a lot of Roland stuff and it's good quality, but complicated. Anything they make that says 'Boss' on it is much simpler to use. (and yeah, the companies have split I believe).

 

I'd try and find one of the earlier Boss 8-track recorders with built in CD drive. Then you could easily archive and transfer tracks to computer via CD-R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I know that dotty doesn't want to use his PC for recording (only drum beats, sample editing and final mixing apparantly) ...

 

He doesn't care about sound quality, which is good because he isn't going to get any from these toy boxes.

 

But to be honest, I think he is going to be sadly frustrated at how difficult these cheapie recorders are to use. Setting peak levels? Good luck! Transfering to PC? Good luck!

 

I hate the way Roland offers "24 bit converters" but "records at 16 bits". Stupid freaks. Or the way you loose most of you tracks if you actually want the high quality settings.

 

The Tascam and Yamaha stuff looks good, but it's bloody expensive. And noisy and not really portable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by Kiwiburger

I know that dotty doesn't want to use his PC for recording (only drum beats, sample editing and final mixing apparantly) ...


He doesn't care about sound quality, which is good because he isn't going to get any from these toy boxes.


But to be honest, I think he is going to be sadly frustrated at how difficult these cheapie recorders are to use. Setting peak levels? Good luck! Transfering to PC? Good luck!


I hate the way Roland offers "24 bit converters" but "records at 16 bits". Stupid freaks. Or the way you loose most of you tracks if you actually want the high quality settings.


The Tascam and Yamaha stuff looks good, but it's bloody expensive. And noisy and not really portable.

 

 

When push comes to shove, none of the digital stuff sounds all that great.

With that in mind, it's all in what you want and whether or not you learn that particular gear's ins and outs.

It seems to me that everyone is trying to get that old analog sound with digital and if that's really true, why not just stick with analog all the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Kiwiburger

I know that dotty doesn't want to use his PC for recording (only drum beats, sample editing and final mixing apparantly) ...


He doesn't care about sound quality, which is good because he isn't going to get any from these toy boxes.


But to be honest, I think he is going to be sadly frustrated at how difficult these cheapie recorders are to use. Setting peak levels? Good luck! Transfering to PC? Good luck!


I hate the way Roland offers "24 bit converters" but "records at 16 bits". Stupid freaks. Or the way you loose most of you tracks if you actually want the high quality settings.


The Tascam and Yamaha stuff looks good, but it's bloody expensive. And noisy and not really portable.

 

Come on Kiwi, can we please stop with the elitist attitude? :rolleyes:

 

Dot said he wants hardware suggestions. Software isn't of interest to him. Pointing out the potential downsides to that decision once or twice is okay (even if he didn't ask for that opinion), but there's no reason to keep pushing it. If he's cool with 16 bit, that's his call. If he wants inexpensive hardware, that's his choice. :)

 

Not everyone wants / needs / can afford a 8068 and a Studer... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

Originally posted by dot-dot-dot

Sorry; dumb question. What exactly
is
an ADAT? We had two S-VHS based 8-track recorders at uni which were always referred to as ADATs, but I've also seen hard drive based thingies referred to by the term.

 

 

Right... Alesis also calls the newer hard disc, hardware recorders an ADAT. Those are 24 track, 24 bit, PC connectivity, etc. But they're also overkill for what you're looking for, and don't have a headphone mixer.

 

So if Alesis made an 8 or 16 track hard disc recorder that could hookup to your PC and had mic pres and a headphone mixer with mutiple outs, you'd (and so would I) have what you need. The 24 track version is down around $1500. Seems do-able to me...

 

I want it for location recording of drums, pianos and guitars, to then add to my Pro Tools session.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It would be really nice to have a little (8 or 12 channel would likely be plenty) desk and a little digital multitrack recorder, but I think that'd work out to a lot more money than I'd want to put in (yet!). I'm only looking to record things for my own amusement/entertainment/self improvement, and possibly post them on this fine infer-web - I have no intentions of, for instance, trying to make an album.

 

I'm starting to think that PC connectivity isn't that important to me. I can record drums in as if the PC was a hardware drum machine, rather than transferring them as a WAV or similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Tascam has a few units that have USB capability that may be what you are wanting. I understand your story also. I prefer to record tracks with a stand alone and use computer software to tweak. I use a Roland 2480 (way beyound your budget). Tascam has good units that will fit your needs. I would recommend a Boss but I don't think they have USB units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Come on Kiwi, can we please stop with the elitist attitude?

Sure. I'll just stop posting here, no worries.

 

Just for the record - I wasn't trying to be elitist at all. Choosing to record with software is the exact opposite - it's the poor mans choice.

 

I was simply trying to point out some pitfalls in the decision he is making.

 

 

Anyway - it's been fun here (sort of) but I realise that Phil has had issues with me from the beginning, and i'm not exactly popular here so I choose to cease polluting this forum.

 

I may continue in the Recording forum, because that's more where my interests lie. I think we have too many forums here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...