Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 I hear this alot. I record 11 inputs into my Tascam which is USB 2.0 with no issues. I don't get it, do I have magic usb? USB 2.0 @ 480 Mbps vs Firewire 800 @ 800 Mbps. Firewire has the ability to push greater amounts of data. If your setup is getting the job done, it's getting the job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roguetitan Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 USB 2.0 @ 480 Mbps vs Firewire 800 @ 800 Mbps.Firewire has the ability to push greater amounts of data. If your setup is getting the job done, it's getting the job done. I thought firwire was only 400 MBPS:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 I thought firwire was only 400 MBPS:confused:That's IEEE1394a. USB 2.0 us a significant improvement over the old USB 1.0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ender_rpm Posted January 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 The good info just keeps coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mikgag Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm getting one of the Tascam 1641s soon. What PCs are you running with it?speed? ram?any issues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 That's IEEE1394a. USB 2.0 us a significant improvement over the old USB 1.0.Here's a better answer to your point about IEEE1394a. Link to page regarding USB versus Firewire 400. "Question: Which is faster Hi-Speed USB 2.0 or FireWire?Answer: In sustained throughput FireWire is faster than USB 2.0. Question: If Hi-Speed USB 2.0 is a 480 Mbps interface and FireWire is a 400 Mbps interface, how can FireWire be faster?Answer: Differences in the architecture of the two interfaces have a huge impact on the sustained throughput. FireWire vs. USB 2.0 - Architecture * FireWire, uses a "Peer-to-Peer" architecture in which the peripherals are intelligent and can negotiate bus conflicts to determine which device can best control a data transfer * Hi-Speed USB 2.0 uses a "Master-Slave" architecture in which the computer handles all arbitration functions and dictates data flow to, from and between the attached peripherals (adding additional system overhead and resulting in slower data flow control) FireWire vs. USB 2.0 Hard Drive Performance Comparison Read and write tests to the same IDE hard drive connected using FireWire and then Hi-Speed USB 2.0 show: Read Test: * 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 33% faster than USB 2.0 * 160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 70% faster than USB 2.0 Write Test: * 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 16% faster than USB 2.0 * 160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 48% faster than USB 2.0 Question: So which products should I choose FireWire or Hi-Speed USB 2.0?Answer: Often the choice will be made for you by the product itself. Some types of products are only available with the FireWire interface and some only with USB. For all out sustained throughput, as shown above a FireWire external hard drive will provide the best performance. But for convenience and compatibility between multiple computers a USB 2.0 external hard drive would probably be the better choice (since practically every computer has a USB port)." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roguetitan Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 That's IEEE1394a. USB 2.0 us a significant improvement over the old USB 1.0.Ya I have had no problems whatsoever with this Tascam interfacehowever I hear people using Vista having no luck at all with it but then again folks with Vista are having no luck with a lot of other interfaces also.I have 2 E Machines with windows XP media edetion and the interface works good on both computers.I hooked the interface up on a friend of mine new dell with vista and it had pops and dropoutsWindows Vista is not a very good windows edition for DAW IMOso buyer beware if you are running vista, make sure the interface you are looking at is compatible with windows vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 Ya I have had no problems whatsoever with this Tascam interface however I hear people using Vista having no luck at all with it but then again folks with Vista are having no luck with a lot of other interfaces also. I have 2 E Machines with windows XP media edetion and the interface works good on both computers. I hooked the interface up on a friend of mine new dell with vista and it had pops and dropouts Windows Vista is not a very good windows edition for DAW IMO so buyer beware if you are running vista, make sure the interface you are looking at is compatible with windows vista. That's a really good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roguetitan Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm getting one of the Tascam 1641s soon. What PCs are you running with it? speed? ram? any issues? E Machines with Windows XP Media edetionI love it No issues what so ever just make sure when recording you are running only your DAWif you are running Vista either get another computer that has XP or get something that is compatable with that crap Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roguetitan Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 That's a really good point. Not to offend anyone but Vista flat out sucks IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 Not to offend anyone but Vista flat out sucks IMOYou're not the only one who feels that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super Bass Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 Vista is working fine for me but I've stripped back all the unnecessary crap. E-MU released Vista drivers for the 1616 and their other interfaces. Surprisingly they also released 64-bit Vista drivers, not many companies doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassred Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm going through a similar search, but for USB connectivity, Looking at the Presonus Audiobox, 2 inputs, bus powered, for use as a quick on the go solution to lay down some Ideas. We've got a 24 track setup in the rehearsal room for full-on recordings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm interested in why more people don't look at the Zoom H4 for this function. Not only does it record band practices and gigs, but you can also input song ideas. It also works as a USB interface. I've never tried mine that way, but a product like that would kill more than one bird with a stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super Bass Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm interested in why more people don't look at the Zoom H4 for this function. Not only does it record band practices and gigs, but you can also input song ideas. It also works as a USB interface. I've never tried mine that way, but a product like that would kill more than one bird with a stone. I have one. I think that it's good in the context of recording a live band.Other than that I think that the preamps are very weak in it and the USB interface performs badly. It also has high latency which makes that part of it unusable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lokidecat Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 Reaper > Audacity for multi-tracking. I use it with the TonePort -> GearBox(software head/cab/effect modeler that comes with the TonePort) -> ReaperOr sometimes PodXT -> Reaper Both work, but the TonePort will do guitar, bass and vocals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roguetitan Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 Reaper > Audacity for multi-tracking. the op is looking for an interface not program software. however since you mentioned it Reaper is what I use with the 1641 and they are very compatible with each other:thu: but then again the Reaper is pretty much compatible with just about any interface you link it to. Audacity Meh it is good for freeware i guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lokidecat Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 the op is looking for an interface not program software.however since you mentioned it Reaper is what I use with the 1641 and they are very compatible with each other:thu:but then again the Reaper is pretty much compatible with just about any interface you link it to.Audacity Mehit is good for freeware i guess An interface is only so good with what you use with it. And since the OP mentioned they were using audacity, I figured I'd toss Reap out there (since you can use is for free, pay if you like it) as an alternative. Made my recording life significantly easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pickdust Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 I have the Lexicon Omega interface (it has 2 LXR, 6 1/4 " inputs and plugs into the PC via USB) and a copy of Cubase SE3 with Ezdrummer installed within and it meets all my needs. Subtract EZD and you'r definitely under $500. PD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ender_rpm Posted January 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 OPtions are stil open on a DAW sprogram,I have no experience with any of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super Bass Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 I use FL Studio. It's geared towards soft synths a lot but works great for recording and mixing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bluedogaudio Posted January 22, 2009 Members Share Posted January 22, 2009 MOTU UltraLite mk3 FireWireMOTU 828 is another good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted January 22, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2009 OPtions are stil open on a DAW sprogram,I have no experience with any of them A special edition of Cubase will come with many of them. I'd wait until I got the interface. As is there are some out there that arte free, like the already mentioned Reaper and Audacity to Cubase. I personally use Tracktion 2.0 for multi-tracking and WaveLabs 5.0 for mastering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roguetitan Posted January 23, 2009 Members Share Posted January 23, 2009 OPtions are stil open on a DAW sprogram,I have no experience with any of them I I either own or have experience with Acid, Pro Tools, Cubase, Cubase LE 4, Kristal Audio Engine, Audacity, Wavosaur, Garage band and I can guarantee you none of them are more user friendly than the Reaper. Reaper tech team are continually making upgrades to the program which does not cost youa thing to upgrade to the latest version IMO it is the best you will finf Period. Dont Fear The Reaper Excellent Free DAW's Wavosaur Kristal Audio Engine Audacity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lonerstoenr Posted January 23, 2009 Members Share Posted January 23, 2009 On a slightly related note, anyone know a good site for free VSTs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.