For more than two channels, I don't go beyond 96KHz. I would be worried that 16 channels at 192KHz could easily turn into a nightmare..

As for latency, I tend to think of it as a system property rather than due to any one piece of gear. If live monitoring is done in the front-end hardware, studio tracking work and effect loops can be latency-compensated, so that the actual millisecond figure has less importance.

The Apollo 16 is pretty nice. With built-in effects it allows very low latency monitoring with eq, reverb etc. that use the on board optimized processing instead of going through the CPU.

The antelope OrionHD catches my eye due to high channel count, impresseive advertised specs, and the ability to load dsp pluggins directly into your session on MacOS. It ticks alot of boxes.

The burl mothership is also something cool, with a variety of sonic choices, and mix and match modules. Alot of people seem to like it. I've not seen latency specs on it for any of the connections.

Those would be my top two intersts as far as audio quality.

If price/performance were the main objective apollo 16 is tough to beat. Although latency is dependant on which dsp plugs your using.

As far as latency goes i like the idea of sub 3ms, although i *think* up to 10ms RTL isn't a problem for me ive never truly measured.

I hate to say it, but for commercial studio tracking id probably go HDX if i recall they have like .7ms latency. Tho i am uncertain if its roundtrip.

Since all the units have little to no vsti on dsp, i would assume a slave pc for that with VEP, which can be set to add no additional buffer to the session buffer.

RME HD MADI pcie 32 interface card (there are a few choices)
A Fast PC
16 channel MADI converter with tascam Dsub I/O

To accomplish speed, dependability and low latency.. the pcie card is just as important. When I got that part right, the converters I had, rocked as expected.

My advise would to consider a converter that goes well with known interface cards.

Anyone into Radar still or has the shipped sailed?

Radar caught the last ship for the moon :).

Link555, post: 464883, member: 31690 wrote: Anyone into Radar still or has the shipped sailed?

I wouldn’t bother. Belongs (in the grave) along with the Antelope Audio 10m archives

i see a lot of Radar systems for sale in Nashville. i suppose storage is the culprit for their becoming outdated. if they were to update them to run on flash cards or usb sticks they would still be popular. are the hard drives they use getting difficult to source? i personally love the concept. a stand alone digital multi track that needs no computer.

Kurt Foster, post: 464886, member: 7836 wrote: i personally love the concept. a stand alone digital multi track that needs no computer

To my understanding Radar is still a computer on Windows platform. It's a pre-configured, very dated (no disrespect intended) and totally ridiculous system for those either not interested or able to figure out how to build a modern rig that would smoke a Radar system for much less $.
I don't believe you can update software without glitching stability very easily, and you likely would never sell it for anywhere near what you paid or pay for it. I'm amazed its use has lasted this long.
Mixerman and Radar shills pushed it on RO years ago like it was some special DAW for the elete hoping and predicting it would rival Pro Tools (aka Alsihad > All he had) :rolleyes: .
Don't waste a dime on it.

Kurt Foster, post: 464886, member: 7836 wrote: i see a lot of Radar systems for sale in Nashville. i suppose storage is the culprit for their becoming outdated. if they were to update them to run on flash cards or usb sticks they would still be popular. are the hard drives they use getting difficult to source? i personally love the concept. a stand alone digital multi track that needs no computer.

How does the number of Radar boxes you see for sale compare with the number of Alesis HD24s? The disk drives for the HD24 are not really a problem to obtain (yet), but may become so as solid-state drives completely replace rotating drives in desktop PCs, having already done so in laptops.

Boswell, post: 464888, member: 29034 wrote: How does the number of Radar boxes you see for sale compare with the number of Alesis HD24s? The disk drives for the HD24 are not really a problem to obtain (yet), but may become so as solid-state drives completely replace rotating drives in desktop PCs, having already done so in laptops.

it's seems to be about the same. i confess my ignorance. are the hard drives same or different types on Radars and Alesis? i'm pretty sure Alesis uses IDE drives.

Link555, post: 464883, member: 31690 wrote: Anyone into Radar still or has the shipped sailed?

It seems the system is not so popular anymore, but interestingly (to me at least) people still talk about liking the sound of the conversion in interviews i see till this day.

I venture to guess that the need for project sharing is probably the biggest reason for its fading usage.

kmetal, post: 464890, member: 37533 wrote: It seems the system is not so popular anymore, but interestingly (to me at least) people still talk about liking the sound of the conversion in interviews i see till this day.

I venture to guess that the need for project sharing is probably the biggest reason for its fading usage.

that's a good point. what about file formats? if they were to implement flash card or usb ports it would be a simple thing to move files provided the files are compatible. a pro standard for all recording applications would be nice. i know Alesis has a proprietary file format. it would be nice if everything were WAVE files just to make it simple. after all, storage is not the issue it was in the past.

Kurt Foster, post: 464891, member: 7836 wrote: that's a good point. what about file formats? if they were to implement flash card or usb ports it would be a simple thing to move files provided the files are compatible. a pro standard for all recording applications would be nice. i know Alesis has a proprietary file format. it would be nice if everything were WAVE files just to make it simple. after all, storage is not the issue it was in the past.

Im not sure which format radar uses. Im pretty sure that The Black Keys 'Brothers' album was recorded on a Radar system the engineer brought into Muscle Shoals for the sessions. Then Tchad Blake mixed it in Pro Tools. This was in like 2010.

So my guess would be it records to .wav

Alot of times mixers like Andrew Scheps, will take the Pro Tools session from the client and work directly off that, instead of importing the audio into his own template.

Plus there's a thing now called 'vocal producer' where a producer will be hired exclusively to produce vocals. I discovered this in a Pensado's Place episode with a member of Maroon 5.

In the new Lady Gaga album they rented 2 rooms in the studio (henson?) And one engineer mixed the music, the other the vocals only... They bounced back and forth until it was done.

I agree it would be great to have a unifying session format. It gets tough tho when samplitude has a feature like object based editing, and PTHdx has the dsp, apollo requires hardware too for the dsp.

OMF i think its called is the closest we have to exporting session data across various daws, but i was told it wasn't uber reliable back in '09 or so.

I guess there could be an option to 'print' all settings not available in the destination daw. So Samplitude would print the object based settings when exporting, or PT would print the dsp or swap to its native version of the effect.

Backing up the session, raw audio, effects printed audio, and at both unity and mix levels seems to be the safest way i have thought of to do long term archives.

kmetal, post: 464892, member: 37533 wrote: Plus there's a thing now called 'vocal producer' where a producer will be hired exclusively to produce vocals. I discovered this in a Pensado's Place episode with a member of Maroon 5.

To specialize in producing vocals (female) bass and drums has always been my desire. It was my intention to do this with my last two-daw rig. I think its a brilliant concept likely to grow.

you think on a different track than i do Kyle. you're line of thought is including plug ins incorporated into session files while my thinking is plain raw data sans any plugs. i don't like plugs. i think they have short shelf life and are too dependent on the update cycles in the systems they were originated on. i want something that can run sessions i did 20 years ago if i need. for me legacy is a consideration. the older one becomes, the more important long term use becomes. i prefer using hardware. all i want a recording system to do is record and edit. i want to mix on a sled with dedicated outboard. i just feel that has the sustainability and most important the sound i like.

audiokid, post: 464893, member: 1 wrote: To specialize in producing vocals (female) bass and drums has always been my desire. It was my intention to do this with my last two-daw rig. I think its a brilliant concept likely to grow.

Yea its interesting the niche's that are developing with portable setups and remote mixing. I've always felt i captured good, emotional takes and sonics for vocals, but lack a real true sense of harmony and melody, to be a top notch vocal producer. Im more of a singer's assistant in that regard. Tossing out ideas or watever.

Its funny that editing in PT was a niche for a time. Some of my albums from the early 2000's have PT editor as a credited position.

It will be interesting to see if this collaboration ability increases homogeneity, or promotes unique things. I suspect both.

Kurt Foster, post: 464894, member: 7836 wrote: you think on a different track than i do Kyle. you're line of thought is including plug ins incorporated into session files while my thinking is plain raw data sans any plugs. i don't like plugs. i think they have short shelf life and are too dependent on the update cycles in the systems they were originated on. i want something that can run sessions i did 20 years ago if i need. for me legacy is a consideration. the older one becomes, the more important long term use becomes. i prefer using hardware. all i want a recording system to do is record and edit. i want to mix on a sled with dedicated outboard. i just feel that has the sustainability and most important the sound i like.

Yeah i think 2 ways. Long term, and during project duration. I think the fast changing nature of things requires diligent backup, and saving in a variety of forms/states.

What's intersting about cheap storage, is you can save the outtakes, and go back later and construct parts from them.

If i had money and room for a mixer id go with the Harrison fully recallable one. I mixed on a digital mixer for a few years and loved the immediacy and recall.

I binged on plugs because i have the opportunity to get everything i want. I pretty much fufilled that. I will slowly bleed away that collection, to a few favorites, or move to just stock.

I feel i may one day be unable to afford anything, and can picture a switch to reaper, stock plugs, and watever samples i have that make it that far.

Legacy became important to me when some of my work is vanished, and i have 15 years of stuff scattered across various hdds, studios, and daws. Some of which require pro tools hardware to work. At least the wav files (should be) there to start a new mix with. Ive got a couple hundred records, couple hundred tapes, and few hundred CDs, that all need to be transferred to hard disk. Ive learned its critical to keep archiving as you go, so things remain accessible and fluid.

My ideal right now is actually no desk. No rack. Nothing but a small keyboard tray for the key/mouse. I love the idea of an un-impeaded pathway for sound between ear and speaker. I like digitally controlled analog, tho not the price. Normandy never sounded better than when the control room was fully treated, but empty. It was life changing for me.

Its somewhat of a compromise no tactile mixer, but clearer sound path. No free lunch.

My hiatus has allowed me to get in touch with music listening for fun again, and to cater my gear desires to personal taste.

kmetal, post: 464895, member: 37533 wrote: My hiatus has allowed me to get in touch with music listening for fun again, and to cater my gear desires to personal taste.

+1

Kurt Foster, post: 464889, member: 7836 wrote: ..are the hard drives same or different types on Radars and Alesis? i'm pretty sure Alesis uses IDE drives.

Yes, the HD24 was designed around IDE (or PATA) drives. I believe the Radar system used similar drives (since it was basically a PC inside, from around the same vintage).

These days, you can get SATA caddies for the HD24, and they work well. They can even take solid-state drives, as long as you are very careful about the model of drive you put in them.

Boswell, post: 464897, member: 29034 wrote: Yes, the HD24 was designed around IDE (or PATA) drives. I believe the Radar system used similar drives (since it was basically a PC inside, from around the same vintage).

These days, you can get SATA caddies for the HD24, and they work well. They can even take solid-state drives, as long as you are very careful about the model of drive you put in them.

Its pretty remarkable how long of a tenure the HD24 has.

so, did Radar go out of business?

Kurt Foster, post: 464899, member: 7836 wrote: so, did Radar go out of business?

Looks like its still
The finest recording system in the world
http://www.izcorp.com/products/radar/

looks like they've done all the improvements i mentioned earlier. i don't care about it running PT, although i am curious if you can mix itb with Radar? i would just get an old Trident 24 and some outboard. as long as i can do punch ins and fly stuff around i'm good. i'm not interested in "fixing things" or lining stuff to a grid or autotuning. if it needs any of that i'd rather just re record it.

Archiving is a whole nother business these days. Accessing archived material and enabling artists who have moved their personal systems past the ability to even open their own old sessions is a part of my business model. I have retained my PTHD 10 license just for that. Since I don't need to actually transfer data, only provide a template with an older stamp, it works well for all involved and I don't need to keep any of the PT hardware....only the license. I can open sessions back to PT4 which is like dino days for some. It never ceases to amaze me what some folks want from these older sessions.....A clarinet part from some piece....

Some systems simply sound better than others. They may not even spec out as superior in any way shape of form but at the end of the day it's simply better fitted to listen to. Much like the difference between large format consoles as opposed to tabletop mixers. But that's another discussion.

The fidelity has gotten so good that a skilled engineer can make ITB sound like it was tape worked over till it shed. LOL

Good to hear from you,Dave! How are things in your neck of the woods?

Bos

Hey Bos! Having so much fun these days! (sarcastic wit).....Dealing with medical issues cause I'm old...Retired from retiring...Updating the studio...Making records..Spent a LOT of time during the last four months going through all of my archives resurrecting and completing projects that never got done. Remixing some tracks for the streaming service I will launch advertising Drool'nDogg Records.....Hows things in Jolly Olde with you?

Good to hear from you, Dave!

Nice to see ya here Dave! Glad your livin it up

Hi guys!
The Radar stuff simply 'sounds' great. Like a well maintained tape machine. It's like the converters in the Alesis adats and HD24's...They sound really good. WAY above their pay grade. I know a couple of people who still use their ADATS as converters only.

I ran my early PT from my HD24 before I was able to buy PT hardware. The was PT7/8 days with the 003 surface thingy. Plus I had a mixer still at that point. Everything was analog in through the Alesis. Lightpipe into the box. Done.

Every now and again I get out the old pics from when that was all in the same room.....The Ghost....The Toft....The vast array of racks to house every stinking rack-mount device I could find....MOST of which never saw electrical current LOL

And now when I upgrade it's more about making my job easier. Better computer for control of editing programs. Stable operation of PT HDX. Enough gazintas and gazoutas to track a whole 6 or seven piece idiot orchestra. Fast and reliable net access for those long distance projects. The LAST thing you want is to get a project and they ask about some guitar part and after three hours you realize it wasn't in the folder.......A huge library of plug ins....HUGE! Why? Because sometimes you get sent things that have their set of plugs in place and if you are cross-platform you might not hear the imagery as the client intended....so having a bunch is a good idea for matching. Usually PT throws out the ones it doesn't agree with and you negotiate something for that. I'd rather they just let me do my thing which is why I got hired to begin with but tell them to mute out their plugs if they aren't confident in the raw tracks can be a project killer.

Ramble-n sorry

Davedog, post: 464922, member: 4495 wrote: Hey Bos! Having so much fun these days! (sarcastic wit).....Dealing with medical issues cause I'm old...Retired from retiring...Updating the studio...Making records..Spent a LOT of time during the last four months going through all of my archives resurrecting and completing projects that never got done. Remixing some tracks for the streaming service I will launch advertising Drool'nDogg Records.....Hows things in Jolly Olde with you?

Things are going OK, thanks, despite the lockdowns.

I too am having some fun re-mixing some old HD24 recordings, several of the mixes being done using a Harrison Mixbus 32c DAW. The Harrison AVA set of plugins are in a class above a lot of the others I have tried.