MORE ON MAC, FIREWIRE, MIXERS AND INTERFACES

Correction to my earlier post.......

First, I meant the Tascam fw1882
http://www.tascam.com/Products/fw1082.html

Not the 1884

Which is a firewire piece of hardware with mixer...the best of both worlds since I am an analog person at heart and like doing the mix in real time on a piece of hardware.

Which is why I thought EITHER--> selling my M-Audio and getting the Tascam fw1082 as a stand alone product, OR getting a regular mixer and KEEPING my current M-audio.

ON THE GARGEBAND FORUM I GOT SOME HELP

I quote and add my further questions:

Thomas--->"you could get a mixer, but you do not need one--do not forget digi 002 and 002r--lately i hear alot good about RMEyou could get a mixer, but you do not need one--do not forget digi 002 and 002r--lately i hear alot good about RME"

ME-->
Yes, they look good, that is another way....
Does the Pro Audio Digi 002 lock you into Pro-tools, or can you use it with Garage Band?

Ed State--->
TRY "http://www.edirol.c…"

ME-->
This looks very much like my current M-Audio Firewire 410. I can't see how you can have more than 2 microphones....it seems to say two MIC INPUTS, yet I see a third microphone.

But maybe I am misunderstanding.

I note they have a product in Japan which is like the M-Audio 410 but which seems to handle even more inputs....perhaps that is the one I should get--->
http://www.edirol.com/products/info/fa101.html

BUT IT IS NOT CLEAR EITHER IF IT CAN HANDLE MORE THAN 3 MIC INPUTS...May also be most line inputs.....

In any case, it seems my options are--->

(1) keep firewire410
http://www.m-audio.com

and ADD MIXER (Which one is another question? I was told by someone in a music store to go for a Mackie rather than a cheaper Yamaha, but not sure I need a 500 dollar mixer)

(2) Get rid of the firewire 410 and replace with

a) fw1882 (Tascam)--a combo mixer and firewire interface

OR

b) digi 002 and 002r (which seem to be something like the TAscam in functionality), if they are available in Japan.
http://

BUT I SEE THE RACK VERSION, iS VERY EXPENSIVE....

OR

c)Edirol FA66
http://www.edirol.com/products/info/fa66.html

Which seems to be unclear about how many mic sources I can plug in

OR

d) Edirol fa 101
http://www.edirol.com/products/info/fa101.html
Which seems to be a competitopr with my M-audio firewire and yet offrer (maybe?) more mic inputs.

IN any case, I am leaning toward either the Pro-tools or Tascam simply because I think I can do the mixing on the machine with real faders...but not sure.

Would be interested in more opinions.

Thanks,

Paul

what model mac do you have? is it at least a G4, running os X? That will determine much of what you can and can not use as OS X is the great divide...

I don't know how far garage band can take you- If you want pro results you should get one the the pro daws, such as digital performer, logic, etc. Of course, for playing around garage band might be just fine...

maintiger wrote: what model mac do you have? is it at least a G4, running os X? That will determine much of what you can and can not use as OS X is the great divide...

I don't know how far garage band can take you- If you want pro results you should get one the the pro daws, such as digital performer, logic, etc. Of course, for playing around garage band might be just fine...

Thanks for the reply. Have been in SPain, UK, Denmark and Iceland.....back home (Japan) next week. So did not see this message.

I have the latest powerbook G¤ Osx...Heard that GB has a new version that handles multiple tracks at the same time.....meaning I guess that one does not have to premix down to one or two channels or left and right (a la the Tascam product I was referring to) before ghetting sound into the computer. But point t aken about a better program. Am looking for one that is technophobe friendly.....

So that is one question....which may or may not be independent of the main question---what firewire product to get that will allow more than two micorphone inputs as well as multiple line inputs.

And then, whether to do the mixing within the program or, as in the case of the Tascam, in the mixer, effctively recording two channels )or or two tracks) at a time. I only lean toward that because I feel most comfortable with an external mixer, a that is what I used in the old reel to reel days when I had a Tascam 4 channel tape recorder and used a patch bay so that the two channel mixer I was using could record two channels at a time, then used that to play back and mix again into the mixer and a second taperecorder....

Thanks

paul

more on digital performer

Hi again...took a look at Digital Performer and it looked familiar---about 5 years ago I used a midi prodcut of their called Free style, which I found easy to learn, though Midi is not my strong point or main interest. I liked how it compenated (to a degree) for bad timing on the part of the performer. So you have me interested.

The thing I have troubleunderstanding is..if I am recording multiple inputs at a time (a few mics--possibly 3) plus stereo keyboard, etc., do I want to record into the computer and keep those tracks separate or mix them down from the beginning? It seems the main point of the tascam is that it allows you to premix all the sounds (well up to the maximum amount of inputs), so in theory you get the same two outputs as in days of old for home recording.)

Otherwise, why the mixer-like interface design?

http://www.sejus.com/earth2willi/forums/viewtopic.php?t=446
SEVERAL comptering products shown here.

TASCAM HERE
http://www.tascam.com/Products/fw1082.html

MACKIE
http://www.mackie.com/products/mackiecontrol/

I like the mixer interface...but am wondering....if I already have the firewire 410 with its limit of two mics, why not just get a regular audio mixer and mix down into the wirewire, or is there some
reason to get an firewire device that looks like a mixer if all I want to do is get a final two channels of audio....this is all very confusing.

Thanks.

paul

To Maintiger

I have re-read all the posts (mine and your response) and THINK I understand why one would have a firewire interface that looks like a mixer......Let me see if I am getting closer...

If one wants to have the convenience of the old time mixers, then we plug into the various inputs, and connect the computer to it. The computer display, I guess (if using a product like Digital Performer or perhaps the latest version of Garage Band) will simply mirror the tracks, so I do not have to use the mixer interface to mix down to 2 tracks..That can take place after I have the song on the computer. Am I getting it?

I saw that the Machie described above has some issues with Midi on OSX, and I guess I want to have Midi.

I really like the familiarity óf the Tascam, and from the pictures, the Digidesign, the Mackie.....and--assuming I can use any of these to input simultaneously, say 3 mics (none need phamtom power)--two for voice and one for guitar, 2 keyboard line outputs, possibly a guitar line output and midi, and do it mostly using the mixer interface, then mix down to two channels on the computer (can we still use the mixer controls for that if we want???), I will be happy.

Hope my understanding is getting closer.

Pleasze let me know any suggestions on which interface, cavetas, etc. I tend to be a ptechnophobe who learns best by exploring and feel most comfortable with the traditional mixers. Do not care if effects are in the mixer or in the software.

I only use digital delay (echo) for the most part to add presenceto music, which is acoustic. So Iwill not need all sorts of returns and patchs and things like that....

For me, simple is best.

Thanks in advance.

Paul

PS