Skip to main content

Fostex D2424 or Alesis HD24 ?

Member for

21 years 2 months
Hi all, I am getting ready to go the rack mount HD recorder route & am looking the Fostex & Alesis Models (Mackie's is simply outta range $$$).

From what I can see so far on Alesis's site, I like the HD24.
But, I have heard people mention that the Fostex D2424 series are really good bang for the buck & sound superior.
Not sure if it's the Fostex D2424 or the D2424LV.
I am also not really sure what the difference between the 2 models is other than the LV is a lower cost (maybe less options?) model.

I'd like something that lets me transfer files between it & my PC easily & that can be controlled via computer or possibly an external digital mixer (i.e. maybe an O1v).

So anyhow any opinions on either unit?

Comments

Member for

20 years 9 months

AudioGaff Sat, 12/27/2003 - 21:18
I'd say the HD24 is the better unit. Having both ADAT I/O and ADAT sync make it more compatible with more digital gear than the Fostex. The HD24 also has the built in ETHERNET port that can accessed by a PC or with the new Alesis Fireport firewire interface. The HD24 can be controlled by the older Alesis ADAT BRC and a new remote for it that has been long overdue is to be debuted at NAMM in Jan. I know several users of the HD24 that are very statisfied with them. The HD24 can also be controlled by digital mixers or PC recording software via MIDI with MMC commands.

Member for

21 years 2 months

archived member Sat, 12/27/2003 - 21:59
Yeah I am currently leaning towards an HD24...
But it is my understanding the Fostex has an Ethernet port as well, at least the brochure shows that it does.
Maybe thats only available on the D2424 (not the LV model).
One things for sure, Fostex's website sucks, not a whole lot on either unit is listed on fostex.com & some of the links are broken, makes me wonder, hmmm....

Alesis's website has nice big hi-res photos of the front & rear of the HD24, plus all the info is right there.

Member for

21 years 2 months

archived member Sat, 12/27/2003 - 23:31
Fostex have always been slack with their website.

I have been using the earlier D160 without a hitch for some time now. The guys I'm acquanted with using the later models are mainly in the US, but they all seem to be satisfied. As I can't post links to other BBS here I can't direct you to places to contact these people.

:cool:

Member for

19 years 8 months

sdevino Sun, 12/28/2003 - 17:40
I would checkout the manuals to see which one you understand best (in addition to the recommendations above). I had a Fostex D-90 for a while, I finally gave up trying to do anything fancy cause I just did not understand the manual at all (translated Japanese to english).

Member for

19 years

Warhead Sun, 12/28/2003 - 18:56
I used the D160 until recently, no problems and I thought the manual was "ok". It certainly wasn't the worst ever, but yeah it's not real good at teaching you how to edit etc. without being real nervous when you hit the ENTER key! :eek: Even cut and paste actions were not real sure things.

Very nice machine though, 100% stable.

Warren

Member for

21 years 2 months

archived member Mon, 12/29/2003 - 05:40
Hi JG.

A friend of me compared the D2424LV and the HD24. He bought the fostex after the HD24 was defective.
He liked the fostex more than the alesis. The only disadvantage is that the fostex needs a short break after recording a track, that could be disruptive.
I own a fostex D2424LV too. Nice gear for the price. I'd paid 1700€ incl. HD.

With the adat connection i can play directly in the computer if i want to.

I like to record analog on a tape 1" machine, copy everything over the fostex to the computer and record the vocals there over the fostex. After editing i play back over the fostex to an analog desk. So i can use digital editing, plugins and analog gear and a console where i can put my hand on

Regards,
Frank.

i like my fostex

Member for

21 years 3 months

JeffreyMajeau Tue, 12/30/2003 - 10:47
I too was looking at the D2424LV for location recording - mainly TV/Film work. I didn't need that many tracks. I picked up a D108 that is in brand-new condition. It's an easy unit to operate, sounds very good (especially considering the application that I'll be using it in, camera audio circuits are very poor), and is easy to use.

The machine looks to have been built in 1998 some time. The manual's not so bad, a little weird translation here and there, but the deck itself's pretty straightforward.

It's really slick that I can transfer via SCSI or lightpipe to my digital rig. SCSI allows faster than realtime transfers, I think. Not sure if the 2424 has this feature. I've been using the lightpipe into my 002Rack. I sync the 002 to the lightpipe while I record the tracks into PT.

Since the machine has optical digital connectors, you can, at a later date, add external A/D/D/A converters for better sound. You could pick up, say, an Apogee 8channel and have a really nice rig. The older units like this 108 are 16-bit, though. If you're not willing to go there, you're looking at a newer machine.

Dan Roth
Otitis Media
otitis-media.net

Member for

19 years 10 months

henryrobinett Wed, 12/31/2003 - 12:30
There used to be a Fostex D2424 at the studio. I never used it except as a lightpipe device to go into the MOTU. But it seemed to be a good unit. No complaints from the other engineers who DID use it. The only problem seemed to be, to me, and I don't know whether or not they all have this issue -- you have to put in a different hard drive if you need to do a different sample rate. So you can't have 48k and 44.1 on the same disk.

Member for

17 years 11 months

jonyoung Mon, 01/05/2004 - 13:53
I'll second cominginsecond....I've been using the Mackie SDR 24/96 for almost a year now, and no glitches or burps so far. It records in broadcast wave format, so I fly tracks via an external drive and a firewire case into Sonar for mixing and editing. Rendering needs to be done in Sonar, but that's not a huge issue. It will also support a 2 teragig drive, that's alota tracks & takes! It's very intuitive to use, and while the converters may not sound as good as the HDR24/96 or RADAR, no one's complained yet :)
x