1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Anyone using AW4416?

Discussion in 'Recording' started by Ang1970, Jul 8, 2001.

  1. Ang1970

    Ang1970 Well-Known Member

    A client of mine recently purchased a AW4416, and now wants to know whether it will support OMF in the near future. (Buy first, ask questions later, right? :roll: ) So, I thought I'd ask about it here. Also, any general comments or observations about the device would be appreciated.

    Thanks in advance,
     
  2. patrick

    patrick Guest

    Hi. I'm using the 4416, although I'm not yet an expert. :p

    But, um, I don't know what OMF is. :roll:
     
  3. user_gamesound

    user_gamesound Active Member

    OMF in a 'all-in-one' box?? I seriously doubt it, though they are getting better and better.....OMF seems to me to be suited better in a dedicated DAW that has fully featured EDL editing capability. Does the Yamaha or any other wonder-box have such OMF ability? That is if it works like it should in the first place... :D
     
  4. rihmasto

    rihmasto Guest

    I have a aw4416 in my school but no one has
    used it at all. everyone uses Nuendo or
    Cool Edit or Soundforge for all that job.

    it is quite sad because I know it is good
    multitable.

    Can you give me details how it could be used.
    like for example multitrack portable recording system with compressor, limiter and
    2 effect in one box plus burn it and give it to client. any other ideas? its really now
    not in use because there is no idea how to
    use it.
     
  5. patrick

    patrick Guest

    OK, I found out what OMF is. No, AFAIK they have no plans to support it in the near future, and I can't see why they ever would.

    In the newest OS, they did include an "export wave file" (to CD-r) feature, but it takes longer to export a file than the actual length of the file. It's easier just to put in the expansion cards (adat or whatever) and dump things that way: you can dump 16 tracks via adat in the time it takes to play back your song, plus whatever time it takes to set up.

    Hyeena, I think somebody has to read the manual ;) . If they are happy with Nuendo, I can see why they might not bother with the 4416. I got it because I was tired of fighting the computer all the time, but now I also have a fairly stable computer (PC) thanks to RME's hammerfall and also their suggestions for a music-PC. I am using the 4416 mainly as a mixer right now, connected to two computers by adat (one running Cubase, which I use for midi, and another running Reaktor). I can process with Waves and other plugins in Cubase, and then dump to the 4416 for mixing. As a mixer, it certainly is much more reliable and easier to use than a virtual mixer on a PC, and as far as I can tell it sounds better than Cubase, at least. I'm not sure about the dynamics and the EQ--I can tell that they do something, but I have yet to find anything that makes me say "hey, that sounds good!" My plans are to build up my front end, though, to get the best possible sound before converting.
     
  6. Ang1970

    Ang1970 Well-Known Member

    Thanks Patrick.

    The reasons OMF would be preferred over ADAT or other such transfer would be reliability and convenience - time notwithstanding. Also I'd much rather toss in a cd than have him schlep the whole thing into the studio. But I guess those are the only options for now. Oh well.
     
  7. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    One of the items I teched at Sweetwater was the AW4416..it's a great unit if you dont have a computer system and you'd like to take it to other people's houses and so forth. The unit itself takes some time to understand how it works with all the layers and the inputs versus the monitor section. I dont think that Yamaha will ever impliment OMF since that would deal with a serious OS revision as well as needing a larger drive possibly!!If anything you could get the expansion slots for it and send it out digitally to a DAW machine for serious editing capabilities.
    If anyone has any specific questions they would like to ask,,I'll try and answer them the best I can. I know the unit pretty well(even helped mr Born on the Bayou with it!!)
    Opus
     
  8. Ang1970

    Ang1970 Well-Known Member

    How many digital outputs is it capable of?
     
  9. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    Straight from the factory it has SPDIF output..the unit has two optional IO slots for either ADAT or TDIF or Analog expansion cards..so you could have 16 channels of ADAT optical in and out if neccessary. Hope that answers your question
    Opus
     
  10. Ang1970

    Ang1970 Well-Known Member

    Yup, thanks. :)
     
  11. patrick

    patrick Guest

    decided to ask this in a new post...
     
  12. Old thread, but I thought I'd post it for anyone interested...

    I own two and use them in my commercial studio on a daily basis. According to some at Yamaha, I was the first to digitally cascade and sync two of them. I probably have one of (if not THE) most maxed out, tricked out AW system in the world... Waves Y56K card, lightpipe cards to computer DAW, extra HDD's... etc. I've written a few articles about them, beta tested software releases and the Y56K card and am a fairly good source if you have any questions - operationally or from a potential buyer standpoint.

    Any questions, just give a shout! :)
     
  13. Patrick, a few suggestions and thoughts for you:

    If you have not done so already, you NEED to upgrade to OS 2.0 on the AW. In addition to several bug fixes and other goodies, it gives the AW complete MIDI CC capabilities - now you can REALLY use that 4416 with your computer DAW because you can use the AW's faders to control the DAW's onscreen faders, etc.

    As you've already noticed, having a dedicated control surface is a big plus over mixing with a mouse - at least to most people. I'm in agreement with Opus - for many people a device like the 4416 is a great alternative to a computer based recording setup. But since each of these two systems has weaknesses that the other corrects, the pairing of them makes for a GREAT setup.

    Take the 4416 out for remote recording sessions. Bad acoustics at home but great ones in a friends house / church / warehouse / whatever? Want a REAL acoustic piano but don't own one? Take the recorder to the piano. Take the AW and do some tracking over there - where ever "there" is. You're not a slave to one acoustical environment with a portable device like this. sure, you can take the computer, but it is much more of a hassle.

    Want to use the AW as a "front end" for your DAW? No problem. The preamps, while a little shy in the gain department, sound pretty good in a "neutral" sort of way, and the A/D converters are surprisingly good (much better than the 02R converters IMO). The two onboard effects processors (not to mention the available Waves Y56K card) and the AW's onboard EQ and dynamics processors can take some of the load off your CPU...

    ...and that CPU is still nice to have! NO stand alone DAW is going to come anywhere near to a computer insofar as editing and functions of that nature. So use the DAW for that... and for additional computer based plug ins and for more tracks. Remember, the AW has a 16 track (128 virtual track) 24 bit / 44.1 - 48 KHz non-data compressed HDR on board, but the mixer maxes out at 44 channels... Four of those are for the onboard stereo efx returns, sixteen for the disk playback tracks, leaving you with 24 more - if you asign 8 from the analog inputs, that still leaves 16 from the option card slots or whatever (although I can honestly say they could have left the sample pads off an I'd not miss them a bit)... Stick a pair of lightpipe cards in and you can fly all 16 tracks into your DAW in real time for editing. Or you can fly 16 tracks OUT of your DAW into the AW for mixing.

    At least for me, having the two systems together has been a much better way to go than having either one alone would have been.

    Best of luck, and let me know if you have any specific questions I can help with.
     
  14. farmerfrick

    farmerfrick Guest

    I'm a farmer diversifying into music, setting up a studio and I need advice...AW4416 or VS2480?
    I play stringed things, will be recording native acoustic instruments, voices, synths, samples and MIDI stuff. Since I'm almost new to the whole scene, accessibility & ease of use are key. Also on the kit list are iBook + Logic (& Reason?)& outboard fx. Any voices out there to guide me thro' the wilderness?
     
  15. Ang1970

    Ang1970 Well-Known Member

    Hi farmer...
    (Dead Link Removed)

    Cheers! :)
     
  16. Farmer, for me, it came down to the audio quality, and Roland is still using data compression on the VS2480. Sure, you can run up to 16 tracks WITHOUT compression, but if you want the higher sample rate or 24 tracks, you're stuck with data compression - and I can hear that. For acoustic instruments, the AW is great. The Roland only beats the AW in one area IMO - and that is onboard editing. It's a bit easier and more powerful than the AW's. But that's what computers are for - editing on a computer is going to be easier / better more powerful than on any stand alone type unit, and interfacing the AW to a computer DAW is easy and very powerful.

    As far as Logic goes, I've been using their software since before their WAS an Emagic (back when they were called C-Lab). I love it, but it's definitely NOT something I'd recommend to someone who is just starting out. The learning curve for that software is pretty steep.
     
  17. Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe:
    Farmer, for me, it came down to the audio quality, and Roland is still using data compression on the VS2480. Sure, you can run up to 16 tracks WITHOUT compression, but if you want the higher sample rate or 24 tracks, you're stuck with data compression - and I can hear that. And the Roland is considerably more expensive. For acoustic instruments, the AW is great. The Roland only beats the AW in one area IMO - and that is onboard editing. It's a bit easier and more powerful than the AW's. But that's what computers are for - editing on a computer is going to be easier / better / more powerful than on any stand alone type unit, and interfacing the AW to a computer DAW is easy and very powerful.

    As far as Logic goes, I've been using their software since before their WAS an Emagic (back when they were called C-Lab). I love it, but it's definitely NOT something I'd recommend to someone who is just starting out. The learning curve for that software is pretty steep.
     
  18. raregroove

    raregroove Guest

    Phil,

    Your posts are really informative. I had a question. I am soon going to be mixerless, previously having used my partners O2R. I have a Nuendo/Logic Audio based Powermac G4 Dual 800 RME hammerfall based system with some nice outboard (Tubetech SMC2A, Avalon stereo EQ, Waves L2, Orville). I was going to get a Houston for fader control but am considering a AW4416 if I can use it to control my mixing software on the computer. However I would also like to use the optional digital I/O to route my Orville/Waves into the system. Could you address these issues.

    1) What are the capabilities for sends and returns digitally? I Have Spif/AES/lightpipe issues

    2) Do you use a Lucid or similar box for global wordclock?

    3) Do you use a digital patch bay or format converter to get everything talking to each other?

    4) How does the combo of waves and yamaha fx stack up in terms of quality? relative to ourboard ie: tc M2000. Mone, Mtwo, PCM 91 etc.

    I know it's a lot of stuff any comments would be helpful as I can see you have a high level of expertise.

    regards,

    raregroove in NYC
     
  19. Originally posted by raregroove:
    Phil,

    Your posts are really informative. I had a question. I am soon going to be mixerless, previously having used my partners O2R. I have a Nuendo/Logic Audio based Powermac G4 Dual 800 RME hammerfall based system with some nice outboard (Tubetech SMC2A, Avalon stereo EQ, Waves L2, Orville). I was going to get a Houston for fader control but am considering a AW4416 if I can use it to control my mixing software on the computer. However I would also like to use the optional digital I/O to route my Orville/Waves into the system. Could you address these issues.



    Well, the AW can certainly be used as a controller for Logic - I'm sure the same can be said for Nuendo, but you might have to "roll your own" MIDI cc templates...

    As far as busing to external efx, the AW has 4 omni (analog) outs... but you want to go digital, correct? There's only one S/PDIF I/O, and you can certainly assign one of the 8 aux sends to that, but it may not be enough for everything you want to do. You can go with lightpipe for any effects units that support that (like the new Kurzweil), which can work well, or use lightpipe and a Z-Sys for multiple asynchronious S/PDIF and / or AES digital.


    1) What are the capabilities for sends and returns digitally? I Have Spif/AES/lightpipe issues

    Again, only one S/PDIF I/O... although you can get an AES card for it too, if you need more digital connectivity.


    2) Do you use a Lucid or similar box for global wordclock?


    Yup - Lucid GENx6. I really like it. My DAW (Frontier Design Dakota / Montana) has W/C in on it, as well as my two AW416's, and they're all connected to the Lucid.


    3) Do you use a digital patch bay or format converter to get everything talking to each other?


    I use a M Audio Digipatch 12 X 6, but just so I can connect things differently as needed. I've got 32 channels of lightpipe on the Dakota / Montana cards, and (depending on what cards I have in the AW's at the moment) 32 channels of lightpipe there, plus two 20 bit ADAT machines (another 16 channels of lightpipe I/O), so the Digipatch allows me to change lightpipe routing as needed without having to do anything other than recall a stored preset.

    4) How does the combo of waves and yamaha fx stack up in terms of quality? relative to ourboard ie: tc M2000. Mone, Mtwo, PCM 91 etc.


    The onboard Yamaha efx are pretty good, but not stellar. As usual, better results are obtainable with a bit of careful tweaking. They're roughly comperable with the REV500 in terms of quality, but with more variation in effects types, and because there's no analog interfacing and ADC DAC's involved, it's quieter.

    Personally, I'd say the Waves card is, for all intents and purposes, the exact equal of the Plug In bundles. If you've used those on a Mac or PC, you know what you're getting.


    I know it's a lot of stuff any comments would be helpful as I can see you have a high level of expertise.

    regards,

    raregroove in NYC



    Thanks for your kind words. Sorry it took so long to answer this - I have not checked this thread for a while. I hope I answered everything okay, but if you have any additional questions, please feel free to ask!
     
  20. Raticus

    Raticus Guest

    Sorry to intrude...

    I am intersted in the 4416.. how good are the converters a/d? and in the case of being a controller will the faders react to the automation of Nuendo?

    Raticus
     

Share This Page