Anyway.... Now that MOTU seems to be such a laughing stock among so many people, I kind of decided its a bad business decision to put that in my studio... which is a shame... because it seemed like a good unit... and I'm going to have to go with something else.

i know this one producer that use to work at the hit factory . when i went to his house he strongly recommended his MOTU ada to me and told me the importance of having an ada of such high quality. after hearing that i was convinved that this was a better piece of converter than my tascam fw1084, then i went back in my room and forgot all about it until now.

You gotta know that specs aren't everything. At best they could be made up and who's to question it? Are you going to do all the tests to confirm the specs? At any rate. I know at least two people who use or have used MOTU interfaces without complaint. In the end it's not the gear anyway, it's the ears behind the console. As far as recording at 192kHz sample rate, buy a large hard drive. Make that several large removeable hard drives.

It took me less than 5 minutes to contact an Apogee tech. It took me 4 day to get a MOTU tech. The darn phone was busy for 3.5 days. Good grief.

Did I pay an extra $500 to get a faster tech call, maybe, but it wasn't because there was a problem with my Apogee interface. Just a question about a feature.

I agree - MOTU's tech support isn't great, but their gear is fine...no...better than fine. It's quite good. Personally, I could give 2 sh*ts about specs. They're largely meaningless unless they tell you exactly how they derived those specs and even then, they're mildly suspect. (Some specs are useful, such as off-axis response of live-microphones, etc.)

BTW - the converters in the RADAR vs. the Alesis...two completely different beasts! The RADARS mop the floor with the Alesis and I comfortably say that as a proud owner of the Alesis.

In any case - if all other factors and variables are taken into consideration...mics, preamps, cables, room acoustics, monitoring....the converters are such a small factor (personally I feel as though they represent the last 3% of the sound...the icing on the cake if you will) that personally, I could virtually care less which ones were used.

I've listened to recordings which I have thought were magnificent and they went through Alesis ADAT Blackface converters or Tascam DA38 converters.

Moral of the story - buy what you can afford and be happy with it. If you MUST have a Lavry - save up. Otherwise, pick what makes you and your wallet happy.

J.

Cucco wrote:

BTW - the converters in the RADAR vs. the Alesis...two completely different beasts! The RADARS mop the floor with the Alesis and I comfortably say that as a proud owner of the Alesis.

J.

Obviously, the RADAR is the superior product no doubt.

However, to my recollection, one of the "reputable" people, either on this form or maybe it was another mentioned in several of neverending "Alesis HD24XR versus RADAR - which is better for the money" type of message threads threads... that the units use the same actual converters chips.

Supposedly, the big debate is always that its not just what converter chip is being used.... but its all in how design the circuit around those chip(s) Just like the same is true of preamps. A lot of competing preamps use identical op-camps, but they may sound quite different and have different noise and distortion specs because its all in how you hook up the associated circuitry.

Again.... dont know if they used the same AD/DA converters... but thats what I recall one of the reputable big shots saying. The units of course, sound differently because they do use different associated hardware including op-amps, coupling capacitors or whatever else the case may be.

Anyone else here recall whether the Alesis HD24XR and the RADAR multitrack HDR's use the same converter chips? if so, do you know which one?

The question of what manufacturers chip is being used is really quite moot.

You want to put together a decent 24 track home project studio so do the smart electrical engineering thing to do. Purchase an actual 24 track digital audio recorder like the Alesis HD 24 or if you want to get really fancy the HD 24XR. That instead of some kind of computer add-on is much more impressive.

Bottom line is, I hear a lot of rock-and-roll recording being made on older ProTools mix plus systems that run at 48kHz 24-bit. Some even have the higher resolution ProTools systems but have opted to use their older ProTools mix plus system since their plug-ins won't work in their higher resolution system. They figure that the sonic integrity they can create with their lesser system and plug-ins is better sounding than their higher resolution system without their plug-ins.

So, with that recorder, you can concentrate on better microphone preamps for your front-end that would provide you with a totally bitchin' system. You would still be making lovely recordings with that crappy compromise of a digital recorder that I love using. Since API and Neve preamps make it sound pretty decent to me.

Make sure you purchase an antique windup Victrola acoustic phonograph and tell them that you Master disks with it. Tell them that your digital recordings sound more organic when you use a cactus needle for playback.

Always thinking about thinking
Ms. Remy Ann David

That's our Ol' School Remy!

I would LOVE to have a 24 track studio with an Alesis HD24 and a mixing console with automation. I would completely and totally ditch the computer and live happily ever after. I think the industry is heading in the other direction though. I'm constantly reading about this and that famous producer or engineer who gave up their SSL-G and moved to a Mac IBook...it's insane!

Cucco wrote: That's our Ol' School Remy!

I would LOVE to have a 24 track studio with an Alesis HD24 and a mixing console with automation. I would completely and totally ditch the computer and live happily ever after. I think the industry is heading in the other direction though. I'm constantly reading about this and that famous producer or engineer who gave up their SSL-G and moved to a Mac IBook...it's insane!

Pffftt. Yeah, but how do you edit things then without the computer?

I dig doing things the 'old fashioned way' to some extent... I do like analog consoles and I prefer high quality outboard gear to crappy or even average or decent computer plug-ins... but I dont see how you do serious editing in such a manner to produce a polished song.

Most of those outboard hard drive recorders like the Alesis HD24XR, Mackie and Fostex probably have some primitive editing capabilities, but I think it was only the Mackie outboard HD recorder which allowed for "real" editing because it had an attachable computer monitor to the Mackie unit with a built in editing program, but even that was probably simplified editing capabilities at best.

I dont see how you could possibly do any kind of advanced editing on these things.... like doing sophisticated panning and cross fading, or whatever else that software programs lets you do.

I'm not that 'old school'when it comes to recording, so I kind of don't have the perspective to see how certain things were even done before computers. The very fact that people even spliced tape manually still blows my mind.

The only way I can see producing a finished song using strictly an outboard HD recorder and a mixer is by 'mixing down'. Running the multitracks you previously recorded into the mixer... and then doing all the panning and necessary volume control of each track there, and then taking that mix-down and recording it stereo for your final mix. But that sucks! Thats primitive at best, because if you needed to make even one itsy bitsy change, then you have to go and do the whole entire mix down over again....because you cant just go and change one little part like you can on computer DAW software.

Cucco wrote: I would LOVE to have a 24 track studio with an Alesis HD24 and a mixing console with automation. I would completely and totally ditch the computer and live happily ever after. I think the industry is heading in the other direction though. I'm constantly reading about this and that famous producer or engineer who gave up their SSL-G and moved to a Mac IBook...it's insane!

Insane, I agree. But it leaves the field wider open for the rest of us who do have a 24/48 track studio with HD24s and a mixing console with automation! How many of the problems with modern recordings are due to the performers struggling to deal with computer-induced latency issues, or the engineer carefully crafting a DAW-Eq'd sound from an instrument that then sits badly in the rest of the mix? Too many engineers I encounter love to wallow in their comfort zone of plugin driving plugin driving plugin to make a manufactured sound that is so far removed from the original that you often wonder what was being played in the studio.

Believe me, I'm from the older days. I have cut so much tape! There's almost nothing you can't do if you are imaginative, creative, talented enough and understand how to use your tools like any professional does. But I have synchronized numerous recorders together without time code, without sprocket holes, just a real flange and my finger! Here you can have my finger! Not that finger!! That's my editing finger.

Computers make other things easier and keep the cost of tape down substantially. But who cares about the cost of tape if you had a $40,000 budget? Nobody, right!

Doing the double whammy of combining both analog and digital will continue for quite some time ad infinitum, until a truly high-quality actual digital microphone, that is affordable, is created. But I think it will have to utilize lasers and how many people want to point lasers at their vocal cords, nose and eyes? I mean it sounds and looks like many have?? Do you suppose that the lasers would burn holes in the drumheads? Or perhaps burn holes through the soundboard on the Steinway? It could certainly helped to give you that Jimi Hendrix sound by burning holes through your guitar amplifier speakers! And I know everybody wants that!

Zaaapppppppp hey! I just got rid of that unwanted hair!
Ms. Remy Ann David

oh remy, so witty. i think conversion is important, not necessarily using 192kHz bit sampling, 96 is fine and most everything you have heard has been done on it. you could just get small stereo converters if you are interested in saving money, since that is what most of your signal paths are going to be comprised of anyways.

you don't want to be at the mercy of a BS little interface's noiser and relatively shitter conversion. most everything in this realm is a matter of nuance, but think about everytime you do outboard dynamic processing, you are at the mercy of the interface

Cucco wrote: That's our Ol' School Remy!

I would LOVE to have a 24 track studio with an Alesis HD24 and a mixing console with automation. I would completely and totally ditch the computer and live happily ever after. I think the industry is heading in the other direction though. I'm constantly reading about this and that famous producer or engineer who gave up their SSL-G and moved to a Mac IBook...it's insane!

The industry has no clue whatsoever where they are heading other than where their noses lead them where they can smell money. There is no gameplan. Its all a random crap shoot. They are abandoning the SSL because market demand cannot justify it anymore. Too much mantenance overhead. They now think that God sent his only begotten son to earth aka - 'Duende the Savior' - to replace the 4000 E/G console. Yeah dream on ...

The HD24XR is a fine machine and huge bang for the buck but fraught with peril and has a MFG that has closed out its product life cycle for all practical purposes. If you go this route, join the yahoo hd24 group and find out what you should do, what you should not do, what to buy interms of hd's and how to not get caught in the pitfalls that are real showstoppers -- like file size, inadvertent power offs etc. Huge bang for the buck, but get Jim Williams to do the mods he does and you'll not need a RADAR.

I've been using these for some time in mobile units, and these sumbiches take a lot of beating. Would I crate up my RADARs in a shock rack and tout the world as we do with the Alesis stuff. Hell no. These RADARs are for fixed facilities even though I have mine in shock racks and cocasionally move them around CONUS but not OCONUS..

The AKM converters in most MDMs are the same crap everybody else is using. The rest of the circuit makes the diff. The Nyquist and S-Nyquist are very sweet, in fact even at 44 & 44 on the S-Nyquist nobody comes close as being so musical. I record everything now at 24/88.2 or 24/96 as I found this to be my zone. 24.192 is just too much data for the computer, and even though most of my work is OTB thru mixers and analog outboard, the files are still too much data and have to be thinned out if you will. A nightmare for ITB heads out there.

I am thinking of upgrading my HD24XRs (8 of them deployed ready for retirement) and getting 8 new ones and get Jim to mod 4 with Burr Browns and the other 4 with the $100 more mod for classical recording. The only thing holding me back is the Tascam X48. I had a meeting with my crews in Dec and they all advised me to wait. Its been a year and Im still waiting on these folks. Maybe it will worth the wait after all maybe not. I saw their video and was not impressed on their lack of enthusiasm of their own product. (See: http://tascamforums.com/index.php?s=9be326dbae086e8b1efbd7d3aa5c1cb8&showtopic=15069&pid=99380&st=0&#entry99380 )

I dunno. MOTU is ok for a small laptop getupandgo config. RME IMO is great and very well engineered and has a gerat software interface. Lynx and Apogee and and Mytek and Lavry and all the rest are at the top of the heap so they say. I dunno. I don't record anything directly to a desktop computer -- thats retarded but people do it evceryday. But I do use RME products for playback from the computer when I do do ITB Nuendo and Logic stuff in lieu of crappy soundcards. What makes these better than the others I guess is the engineering and components. But then you read what Fletcher said at: ( http://tascamforums.com/index.php?s=9be326dbae086e8b1efbd7d3aa5c1cb8&showtopic=15069&pid=99380&st=0&#entry99380 ) to which I have to concur, and one asks why would anybody record on anything else in a fixed facility? Money? Sure. But folks like us who need an analog tape player archetype at our fingertips because that is the way we work we just cannot live without MDMs.

How people work ITB and work one track at a time and sit in fron of a computer monitor all day long and sit there and tweak digital parameters and say they are making music is beyond me. I and they are obviously from different planets.

And how about this promised Mackie D1200F coming soon? This might throw a bloody tampon into the converters mix market for everybody to grab the string with their teeth and jerk it out and suck on foir a while huh? TDIF, AES, ADAT, 12 channels of Onyx grade mic preamps @24/96 and if these work duplex can be a very nice duplex ad/da -- da/ad conversion back and forth as a front end into existing DAWs, MDM, Yamaha Mixers, etc

I like analog boards, analog mixes and analog mixdown and mastering. As much as ITB will ever emerge and evolve, that will always be my preference. Don't think for a minute that OTB mixes are ever going away. Folks are abandoning the ITB world daily for forever when they come out and do a mix in realtime and hear the diff and say to themselves "OMF God! what was I thinkng all this time?"

Well. What the hell were we talking about again? Oh yeah ...

Its all good. Life is hard and then we all die. Hopefully when we all get to heaven, St Pete'll have a MegaStudio for us all to get into to record mix and master the heavenly choir. Will it be ITB or OTB? Live or Memorex? Time will tell ...

~skygod~

skygod wrote: The only thing holding me back is the Tascam X48. I had a meeting with my crews in Dec and they all advised me to wait. Its been a year and Im still waiting on these folks. Maybe it will worth the wait after all maybe not. I saw their video and was not impressed on their lack of enthusiasm of their own product. (See: http://tascamforums.com/index.php?s=9be326dbae086e8b1efbd7d3aa5c1cb8&showtopic=15069&pid=99380&st=0&#entry99380 )

~skygod~

Don't hold your breath waiting on that mythical TASCAM X-48.

TASCAM has got to be one of the most pathetic god awful disreputable companies of all timein the audio market.

Not because their products are not good... but just because they are the archetypical example of a megaconglomo business model who operates on a "cut our losses and abandon the product" type philosophy.

If the product didnt generate X Dollars as they projected.... they just abandon the product line. They did that to all their DAW controllers, and they'll probably do it to the X48.

Tascam is your classic example of an uber efficient company that is run by "bean counters" who have no loyalty whatsoever to their customers and do only for themselves.

They introduce products (or claim to introduce mythical products). They string customers along for years on end with vile lies they know to be not true, making false promises [X-48] about release dates, and then when and if they do actually manage top release the products... they seem to abandon them as quickly as they release them. They "hang their customers out to dry".

The way I see it, when a company like TASCAM strings potential customers along for years on end, by making knowingly flase claims of release dates, they are essentially screwing customers over. They are costing people money, a potentially tortable offense which wouldprobably stand up in civil court. They are screwing studio owners over who have made major life altering choices which affect that studios 'bottom line'. A great many studios have been waiting for this mythical X-48, and they have forstalled other gear purchases in expctation for the X48's release. TASCAM is thus hurting studios by knowingly lying about their mythical products release date.

I would not be the least bit surprised if they ever do release the mythical X-48 albatross, that it was not abandoned within 2 years.

Mark my words. Remember what I am saying now. They will abandon that product within about 2 years time, just like they have done with every single DAW controller they have released within the last few years.

The X48 may be a great useable product even if they do abandon it.... but still.... the fact that they dont stand behind their products long term shows you what a disreputable company they are. It illustrates what kind of an anti-customer bean-counting business model they operate on... Screw the customers or supporting customers who dropped 7 grande on their products. Wham bam thanks alot mam'. Thanks for your 7 grand...now your on your own because we're no longer supporting that product.

Back to your original question, Mises: It's gear-snobbery, paranoia, envy, insecurity and misinformation, just like so many other things out there. For what you're doing right now, the MOTU is a great deal on every level; performance, cost, etc.

Do you want to make a living (or supplement the one you have), or do you want to be a gear slut? Who are you buying this for, the tweak-head in your competing studio down the street, or your clients? How many people will actually LOOK at the unit, and (pretending to know even HALF of what you already know about audio) and make any kind of informed comment? Will this REALLy affect your bottom line? (It will if you stand around wringing your hands and pointing out the thing. Treat it like any other vital - but unflashy - piece of gear (like your heater or airconditioning) and get back to the business of making and recording music.

I'm with Jeremy on this....it's usually the last 3% (or less) in sound quality anyway, and until you're at the point where you can afford something insanely cool and high end, why waste the $ on things that won't directly impact your bottom line anyway?

I have a MOTU 896 that I use for all of my Fostex LV2424 transfers (8 tracks at a time, over to PC-based HD for ITB editing), and while I admit it's not being used for the same stuff you mention, it's more than adequate for the task: digital ADAT transfer from one platform to another. Before it got retired to that task, it was often used as a second or third-string live preamp device, going directly into my laptop (Yeah, I'm RETARDED, ok?) for many classical and Jazz recordings.

I'll tell you something else: NO ONE, not one single client really gives a shite about gear beyond the obvious stuff. If you ARE having clients that snobbish, they can either pay for rental of whatever exotic gear they desire, or they can go somewhere else.

Good gear is fine, but paralysis on something this simple - while you're starting out - is costing you precious time and resources while you're getting up and running. Get the thing for now, and if it really bothers you enough further down the road (and if you really CAN hear a difference - I'm betting you wont), get something better.

As for Beringher, that's another story, if you haven't heard it already. Many folks, myself included have avoided them for their well-documented unethical business practices a decade or so ago. I've heard they've cleaned up their act since, but I'm not interested, and would never spend a dime on their stuff. That's not gear-snobbery, IMHO, that's ethics. Big difference.

MOTU, on the other hand, has made some fine products for the tweener-crowd, and I'm fine with that.

JoeH wrote:

I'll tell you something else: NO ONE, not one single client really gives a shite about gear beyond the obvious stuff. If you ARE having clients that snobbish, they can either pay for rental of whatever exotic gear they desire, or they can go somewhere else.

While I realize that most clients probably don't know a whole lot about the equipment being used in studios; they wouldnt know a botique brand from a Presonus probably... but I'm sure some small percentage of customers must be at least mildly informed.

I defer to the opinion of others with more experience in this matter and would like to know what their opinion is on the issue of whether "fancy gear" is a necessity part of running the a commercial studio.... but I tend to look at it from a business perspective, as the owner pf several other business. It's about marketability.

I know a bit about business in general as I have run many kinds of business in many fields... and one thing I do know is that image counts for a lot. Maybe image is overrated to some extent Some customers could give a crap less, they just want the job done... but sometimes image counts. Kind of depends on teh customer.

What does a customer look at when they walk into a studio?

They look at the ambiance. How the place is decorated. Whether it gives off a good vibe, or whether the place looks like an industrial building with cement block walls and a lounge that has a "cold uninviting feeling".

Then theres the equipment in the studio. What impresses a client about the control room?

The mixing console. Thats the centerpiece of the whole room. You can have a crappy little studio in your basement, but if it has a decent console, people will take you more seriously than a "real" recording studio in a commercial facility which is using a Mackie 32x8. According to "The Studio Business Book", the console is the focal point of the studio which the client looks at.

Now, aside from the console... what other kinds of equipment the clients look at??... I dont really know... Maybe they dont really give a damned about compressors or preamps... maybe they do just look at the largest object in the room which has the most pretty colored blinkey lights (the console)... but I'm sure some small percentage is not ignorant of such things.

I've had very few customers who would know a Presonus from Grace... but I'm sure at least some small percentage would know a few vintage or botique pieces of gear if they saw it... and it would make them feel better. The question is, does the business have enough customers walking in the door who do know the difference such that it justifies purchasing botique equipment just to show a little "bling" in your studio for image purposes.

I therefore submit that this just isn't an issue of "can you hear the difference?", but its an issue of marketability and image.

nothing says Wow like a fancy Neve console.

well, I was under the impression the original question was about MOTU A/D/A equipment and what some people think about it. Now we've switched to studio bling and marketability. Ok, alright then.

FWIW, i'd never buy a console or a piece of gear solely on what everyone else thinks about it, or how much it stimulates their egos and naughty bits. It's fun, but too expensive a hobby to have, at least from where I sit. Never followed trends, don't plan to start any time soon. I'm not selling my gear per se; I'm selling my skills.

I'll admit, though, this is oftentimes a business that's based on "Mine's bigger (faster, more expensive, hotter, etc.) than yours". It's sad but true, and all too often people choose gear that way, based on the flavor of the month, or which way the current wind is blowing.

Of course, we ALL love gear, though, and it's a natural part of the appeal in what we do. The trick is knowing what you NEED to buy, vs. what you WISH you could buy. Unless you've won the lottery, I still think you've got to choose wisely.

And I still maintain that really high end gear is only worth it if you've got the work to support it, not the other way round. If you're buying just to impress, you've got a long hard fall ahead of you.

As always, YMMV.

blaumph2cool wrote: nothing says Wow like a fancy Neve console.

There are very few left in the world and fewer people who are qualified much less, capable of servicing one.

I'm one of a handful of people I know who've actually seen a Rupert Neve console. I hardly had enough time to really appreciate it. The studio sold it for a newer more serviceable SSL.

Old school Rocks!!! Having been on both sides of the aisle...Analog vs Digital....MOTU vs ProTools etc......I am a firm beliver in making do with what you can afford! The best sounding stuff sometimes has nothing to do with what you spent! Its all in how you use it! Don't fall into gear slutdom for the sake of the next new thing. MOTU gear is cool! I too ahd an 896 interface currently have a digi 002 and at one time a Roland vs1680. Just get the best stuff you can afford...In time then worry about upgrading....Boy do I remember cutting tape!!!

---double post---

JoeH wrote: As for Beringher, that's another story, if you haven't heard it already. Many folks, myself included have avoided them for their well-documented unethical business practices a decade or so ago. I've heard they've cleaned up their act since, but I'm not interested, and would never spend a dime on their stuff. That's not gear-snobbery, IMHO, that's ethics. Big difference.

I guess I'm a liitle new to the business to know what happened with Behr----- 10 years ago, but ever since my first experience with one of their smaller mixers I have been avoiding their stuff. This was years ago, the only equipment I had experience (or knowledge) about were two-turntables, a mixer and windows sound recorder. We spent a day using one for fx processing, and I have hated them since. Maybe it was a fluke, but it was the first time I had heard a piece of equipment degrade the quality of the sound considerably (besides clipped-ass mixtapes we used to make... thank God for metering). There is some wiggle-room in that some people can't hear the difference, and some people don't have enough money to care. But photocopying other mfg's blatantly and then replacing all the good stuff with the cheapest possible components (so cheap that some aren't even legal!)... that's starting to sound like dishonesty to me. OT again...

I use an 896 predominantly. I do not think I could have found a better solution for $500 second-hand price-tag. I know the pre's aren't up to my standards because I rent a Grace 801 all of the time, and until I try two channels of that sonic bliss through a ADC-1 to AES, I'll never complain about the conversion in this unit. The accurate metering is also a huge plus in my book... how else can I teach vocalists to ride the mic properly. HUGE time saver and take saver. And now that I learned how to properly wire the balanced monitor outs into my unbalanced amp, it is quieter than the really quiet Audigy it replaced. I would really like the HD so that I could actually create USEFUL real-time headphone mixes, but not having this capacity has forced me to create wonderfully confusing routings and try new things that otherwise would have been over looked. If you still doubt it's abilities in the professional department, I should tell you that it was previously owned by Chris Randall, who created numerous albums through this thing before he went to Lynx.

Hey I drool over RME and Prism too, but until I can consistently hear why I need it, I just can't justify the cost. I'm renting out my parent's basement for crying out loud... :oops:

But photocopying other mfg's blatantly and then replacing all the good stuff with the cheapest possible components (so cheap that some aren't even legal!)... that's starting to sound like dishonesty to me.

You're right, James, and this is just part of the story. Behringer was notorious for "reverse engineering" their stuff, and it came to a head with lawsuits from Mackie back in the 90's. There was a time when you could put a Mackie mixer side by side with a Behringer and easily confuse them at first glance. The similarities were more than coincidence, they were outright theft. (I remember calling Mackie and asking them if they were selling their stuff as off-brand or black-market to Behringer. They laughed and said: No WAY is that their stuff...just listen to it!)

I also recall reading interviews with the head of Behringer who admitted they do just that: take a good design and simply copy it. No R&D, just cribbing the stuff from other manufacturers and designers who went through all the trouble first.

Add to that the fact that they're just a D-team player in the grand scheme of things, I'm just not interested in their stuff.

JoeH wrote: But photocopying other mfg's blatantly and then replacing all the good stuff with the cheapest possible components (so cheap that some aren't even legal!)... that's starting to sound like dishonesty to me.

You're right, James, and this is just part of the story. Behringer was notorious for "reverse engineering" their stuff, and it came to a head with lawsuits from Mackie back in the 90's. There was a time when you could put a Mackie mixer side by side with a Behringer and easily confuse them at first glance. The similarities were more than coincidence, they were outright theft. (I remember calling Mackie and asking them if they were selling their stuff as off-brand or black-market to Behringer. They laughed and said: No WAY is that their stuff...just listen to it!)

I also recall reading interviews with the head of Behringer who admitted they do just that: take a good design and simply copy it. No R&D, just cribbing the stuff from other manufacturers and designers who went through all the trouble first.

Add to that the fact that they're just a D-team player in the grand scheme of things, I'm just not interested in their stuff.

I noticed this about Behringer even before I had gotten 'into' audio and heard about it from others just by examining the looks of some of their products.... though at the beginning I wasn't sure if it was a case of company X ripping of Behringer, or Behringer ripping of company X, or maybe it was a simple case of smaller companies buying the product rights to a certain product and then putting their own label on it.

First product I ever noticed where something was 'funny' was the Behringer 5 band and the Nady 5 band parametric EQ. Identical. I mean, aubso' tutelutey' identical right down to the dial markings on the face plate and the same eqact frequency range marked for each 5 bands, same filter bandwidths, same gains for all 5 bands; plus more or less identical switches. No way thats coincidence of design. Impossible. I though maybe Nady was having Behringer manufacture the stuff and then put it in their own package though.

I have to cut and paste the photo of the two faceplates if I can find a plaste to host the images... The Nady versus the Behringer PEQ.... its hilarious. Total rip off.[/img]

Hey Joe -

Good points. I wouldn't say that B***inger is out of the woods yet as far as their unethical business practices. Case in point - the new "Xenyx" mixer...Uhhh, like that's not an obvious rip off of the "Onyx" mixer. With B***inger's "British EQ and British Preamps..."

Anyway...to some degree I understand the necessity to own some things based on name. I don't LIKE that fact, but I do understand it.

I just did 3 remotes at the same time this weekend which put my Mackie Onyx 800R out on a gig by itself with the Alesis HD24. While I personally know that this is a KILLER combination (especially for the HS choir I was using it on), I still felt like I was "cheaping" out on them by using Mackie gear instead of my normal Grace or Millennia stuff.

I even commented to my assistant that I wish I could take the "Grace" nameplate off of my other pres and put it over the mackie...(If only Grace *used* a stick on nameplate.....dangit!!)

Anyway, owning certain gear can automatically lend you a little credibility. Of course... here's the catch.

If you don't know how to use it properly, the right gear or not, you will LOSE the client because they will figure out that you don't know how to use it.

Anywho...back to work now.

J

Diverging hands-on X48 reviews

duplicate

Very useful X48 reviews to date:

Very useful reviews to date:

Neither review hopeful for me anyway. Tascam also seems inaccessible. I think I'll stick with HD24XRs for live/remote recordings into the near future. Look out Jim Williams, here I come. These puppies seem the only real game in town left where these can be shockproofed easily in a rack and go and get the job done! So I'll have to live w/12 ch loss at 4/88-96 Oh well...

BTW non-related - rec'd an interesting email the other day, but don't know if this is true or not. The jist was that Fox news did a national telephonic survey to get the folks' feedback on the out-of-control immigration issue impacting the nation -- large population sample called.

Apparently 26 percent of the respondents said "There definitely exists a national crisis and demands the central government step up to the plate and fix it NOW!"

Then the remaining 74 percent responded with "No es una prolema in Estados Unidos!"

Whether true or not, I thought it was humorous regardless lol.

Remember the Alamo - :)

~skygod~

I hate to limit myself to hardware like the HD24.
I use a PC with sonar-6 produce edition
spec it out here
cdrecordingsoftware.com/sonar3pe.html

It has unlimited recording and tracking and editing

I use the 64 bit version of sonar and the motu 828 mkll 64 bit installed drivers (now there are some freaking tempermental drivers)

All in all...... unlimited, It has OMFI & Broadcast Wave import/export for collaboration with Digital Performer, Logic, Nuendo, and Pro Tools studios
but I like to just say I can swap files with
the others.

I LOVE my MOTU 8pre. Build quality is ACE, flexibility is very good, sound quality is very good.
I gave away my old USB unit when i got my 8pre. Figured i would NEVER use it again.
I like the 8pre more than presonus firepod.

Although inconvenient the engineering way is to do a fair test. That would be done by recording the right hand piano keys above middle 'c' and comparing the time smear from the a/d.
At 192khz 5 microseconds is possible but less than 10us is good,
The test can be done by just listening if you know what to listen for.
The HD has a great reputation if used with a good. Rendering engine where ProTools is the undisputed leader. Comparing unlike interfaces or drivers is uncertain and in fact the use of FireWire is also rumored to be an orphaned interface all by itself. The fact that Tascam only made an internal card for DM24 for six months is one reason why.

Debunker not sure if you realise that you have bumped a thread that is 8 years old (not that theres' anything wrong with that), so some of the earlier posts in this thread may be somewhat dated with how quick technology moves forward today;)

Don't confuse change with progress. point: XP is still widely tauted as the best operating system in the world in polls by IT managers; hearsay perhaps but worth noting. 2nd this new usb-C can stream two 4K signals with audio, but you need a 64 bit operating system, and those bios chips won't run 32 bit XP, so that means only old laptops have the ports all there and thankfully you can upgrade from 2.0 usb (that uses usb 1 as a sampling rate) to 3.0 or 3.1 that can do 192Khz. This thread may be old but its still the case where no downloads except CD special codec 192Khz are buyable online. That leaves this thread really of interest only to recording studio folks. And for those folks the progress you point to is just making already miserable market trending even worse. Note what I mean partly is that at 192k rate, the 10us is 'good' and that means that really you get effectively half that rate so the USB 2.0 (90-100) khz interface likewise if it is likewise prone to playback at twice the time smear is really an effective 44 to 52 Khz resolution for certain instruments like the piano or other loud sources (drums?). It depends upon your point of view.
If you are trying to buy medical grade glass optical ADA cable, it's no longer buy online ready. Hardly possible to get glass which is the only 192khz capable cable in the Toslink connector - and with 8 years of DVD and HD video too!

interesting. I didn't understand how that refers to today but it sounded pretty damn impressive. So are you saying that I should stick with XP a bit longer?

Ha! If you do not keep a copy of both 64 and 32 XP with a copy of service pack 3 AND remember never to install a more recent verizon of windows then if you use laptops to dj / record / remix you will be sorry especially when 192khz of NOT codec but raw file steaming becomes the audio standard. Why? Similar to DOS THE MICROSOFT SYSTEMS ATE TRIJAN HORSEF TO DESTROY ALL PRIOR DISKS OD DOS, in XP' case they chose to rewrite the bios chip so you will never be able to uninstall the newer operating system much less have a chance at reinstall action of XP on that chipset. Jeez we have to get you guys on recording.org up to speed, newbies. What a pain in my ass.

Debunker, post: 434477, member: 49593 wrote: What a pain in my ass.

I'm sure there are plenty of other sites that are not as painful for you...

-Why don't you try any one of these, Professor Know-it-all....

You are the only pain-in-the-arse around here:ROFLMAO:

Debunker, post: 434477, member: 49593 wrote: Ha! If you do not keep a copy of both 64 and 32 XP with a copy of service pack 3 AND remember never to install a more recent verizon of windows then if you use laptops to dj / record / remix you will be sorry especially when 192khz of NOT codec but raw file steaming becomes the audio standard. Why? Similar to DOS THE MICROSOFT SYSTEMS ATE TRIJAN HORSEF TO DESTROY ALL PRIOR DISKS OD DOS, in XP' case they chose to rewrite the bios chip so you will never be able to uninstall the newer operating system much less have a chance at reinstall action of XP on that chipset. Jeez we have to get you guys on recording.org up to speed, newbies. What a pain in my ass.

I don't know... I'm still not seeing your rational. Most of us move along with progress. As an example, I can't use the preferred DAW system on XP, nor would I want to. Its old now.
Living in some dark corner so you can keep the 20th century still alive in your box might seem like a wise and noble thing for you but to anyone else progressing along in this business would disagree. Why? I'm pretty certain I'll still be working and learning how to adapt while guys like you are coming on forums like this trying to convince people you no wtf you are talking about.
Why would I care to stay in a dated OS where there is no business or culture? Sounds like you are one of those guys who worries about the wrong things.

We move in the direction of the ADC.

I never said I was a know it all. I get my information from a demonstration of the speed of older laptops versus they hyped up newer ones and then I could see for myself - seeing is believing. Fine, you like new smaller electronics. Just tell me how I can interface with a Slammer or Active Passive compressor using a USB. Hell this post is requesting information about setting up a SEMI pro studio. I suppose you will say that old hardware compressors don't hold up to the new software stuff or that semi-pro recording or non-live multi channel tracking is too big a project. Well if you can afford the one track only plug ins from Avid, maybe you can trump my comments with deep pockets. But I posted because I am a shopper presently also trying to buy well and finding big differences in VST channel license cost versus small project cost and I am trying to pass that on along with many other considerations. We haven't even touched on hardware channels yet and that's the biggest plus for the Mark Of The Unicorn's budget A/D/A DACs. The same system Im trying to set up used to cost 80,000 US dollars so , yeah it's going to sound like Im a mad man about what most playback or artists would consider kind of air headed tech speak. But if I'm selling to that artist or remastering a botched job from some other studio or lab, it is not me or my source, it's IF the buyer WANTS the service. I can't sell ice to Eskimos, which is what I keep getting as comebacks as I post this debunker's thoughts.

Debunker, post: 434488, member: 49593 wrote: I never said I was a know it all. I get my information from a demonstration of the speed of older laptops versus they hyped up newer ones and then I could see for myself - seeing is believing. Fine, you like new smaller electronics. Just tell me how I can interface with a Slammer or Active Passive compressor using a USB. Hell this post is requesting information about setting up a SEMI pro studio. I suppose you will say that old hardware compressors don't hold up to the new software stuff or that semi-pro recording or non-live multi channel tracking is too big a project. Well if you can afford the one track only plug ins from Avid, maybe you can trump my comments with deep pockets. But I posted because I am a shopper presently also trying to buy well and finding big differences in VST channel license cost versus small project cost and I am trying to pass that on along with many other considerations. We haven't even touched on hardware channels yet and that's the biggest plus for the Mark Of The Unicorn's budget A/D/A DACs. The same system Im trying to set up used to cost 80,000 US dollars so , yeah it's going to sound like Im a mad man about what most playback or artists would consider kind of air headed tech speak. But if I'm selling to that artist or remastering a botched job from some other studio or lab, it is not me or my source, it's IF the buyer WANTS the service. I can't sell ice to Eskimos, which is what I keep getting as comebacks as I post this debunker's thoughts.

ROTF!
The OP is from 2007!!!!!!!!!!! WTF are you on pal? I can see you now, all slippery in a corner with a party hat on smoking crack lol.

Sorry, I cannot resist. Your lack of qualifying when something was published and continued comments after are very disrespectful towards a group of men that could put circles around you. You are so blind sided from your intent to impress us that you forgot to look at the date. Looking at your website, you are clearly in the wrong area of town. You are actually with a group that uses products you probably don't even know exist.
Have a good day.

Debunker ...I'll debunk something for you.....

- The notion that you actually know what you are talking about

Debunker, post: 434488, member: 49593 wrote: But I posted because I am a shopper presently also trying to buy well and finding big differences in VST channel license cost versus small project cost and I am trying to pass that on along with many other considerations.

- If you came onto this forum and asked the right questions without the attitude that you are somehow superior to everybody else, there are members here who are experts in their fields, not just in all things audio, but some in the world of computing, who would be willing to share their knowledge and expertise with you.
Thats what RO is about, a medium where knowledge and information is openly shared with learning being the key aspect.
It appears that the only thing you need to learn are some manners. Most people refer to your type as trolls...you give me the impression you are just that.

As Chris audiokid has already stated, there are guys on this forum that would run rings around you.

Debunker, post: 434488, member: 49593 wrote: The same system Im trying to set up used to cost 80,000 US dollars so , yeah it's going to sound like Im a mad man about what most playback or artists would consider kind of air headed tech speak. But if I'm selling to that artist or remastering a botched job from some other studio or lab, it is not me or my source, it's IF the buyer WANTS the service. I can't sell ice to Eskimos, which is what I keep getting as comebacks as I post this debunker's thoughts.

And as for your posts above, they do appear as the rantings of a mad man. They are all over the place and no more than puffery disguised as techspeak.

I have seen your type before, they like to join forums and make posts just like yours to try to impress people and have people believe they know more or are more than they are not. I'll give you some free advice, it has the opposite effect rather than the desired one.....people only think you are a massive dick.

But I see right through you, see through you like a piece of seran wrap.

You really need to go back to your doctor, and tell him the medication is not working for you.

Maybe then your delusions, both of your superior intellect and those of grandeur, may cease.