anonymous
11 June 2001
Hi everyone...
I'm currently trying to make the decision on the hard disk platform I want to acquire and have appreciated the comments in this room...
Larry - you made some outstanding points describing your decision to move from the 1680 to the Mackie. I'm curious what you're perspective is on the new 2480. Obviously, importing 3rd party effects is going to still be an issue - but how do you feel they've addressed some of your other issues? Everyone, please feel free to chime in!
Thanks...
Topic Tags
Comments
Randy, I can't remember where I posted my rationale for going Ma
Randy, I can't remember where I posted my rationale for going Mackie...got any pointers? Was it my post on RADAR/TASCAM/MACKIE?
Anyhow, from what I read on the VS Planet BBS which was in March the only place the 2480 was being discussed, let me see if I can compare/contrast.
I was a happy 1680 user, although I was hitting the limitations of the machine, esp. the use of aoutboard gear. I was not really thrilled with the onboard EQ.
To overcome the preamp situation on the 1680 (BTW I haven't heard the 2480 pres but have seen that they are much improved), and my dissaatisfaction with the digital EQ in the 1680, I bought a used DDA DMR12 console. Now I used the DDA pres as my generic pres, and using the direct outs form the 1680 was bale to mix down 16 channels analog with full, easy access to my outboard verbs, comps, etc. I don;t believe that Roland's EQ algorithms are substantially improved form the 1680, although I didn't have access to one to hear in March.
File interchange with PROTOOLS studios was my other big considerataion. The Mackie stores files in Broadcast Wave , and with the removable drive, file transfer to PT is very straightforward.
Finally, I like knobs to tweak. The all in one approach was nice, but I missed my knobs.
Since the 2480 wasn't really available, I never gave it serious consideration.
Maybe Curve Dominant will post his views here.