1. Dear Guest, if you haven't already... enter to WIN Samplitude Pro X4!
    Dismiss Notice

Tascam Us-1800?

Discussion in 'Microphones (live or studio)' started by DrummerDan, Apr 13, 2011.

  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

  1. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    Um, not Reaper now? You need to look into Protools compatibility with the 1800. I remember reading somewhere that because of the way the interface deals with latency settings, that it cannot be used by Protools. I don't remember which PT version they were talking about.
     
  2. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    yea i will use Reaper for now... but PT is a definete thing down the road. i use it at school, and im willing to bet if i used my ID to get it from Sweetwater, I could buy it for like 250$
     
  3. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    I don't know much about Protools. I have heard that it can get really expensive having to purchase protools specific hardware when upgrading. I think there is a newer version that is more flexible. I am definitely the one to ask about Protools so don't quote me on any statements. I'm a Cubase guy.

    Be sure to thoroughly research anything you plan on purchasing now and in the future.

    Jimmy
     
  4. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    believe me i do! i spent almost a year researching before i bought my drums. so yea im a waffler.

    yes and i do know for a fact PT9 is incredibly flexable and its standalone or with ANY interface. However, I believe the Tascam isnt compatible bc of the way it shows itself, as i believe it misrepresents its buffer size or something like that, so PT cant use it correctly. thats just what ive gathered
     
  5. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Location:
    currently Billings
    PT9 is perfectly adequate. Incredibly flexible is not accurate since it is no more flexible than most DAWs and less flexible than many.

    And no, the Tascam is NOT compatible with any version of PT.
     
  6. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    Thank you for the clarification John. I just gave my opinion based on what I have read. Not by experience.
    I am curious why a company would setup their drivers/firmware to not be useable by the most professionally used software (Protools). Obviously there is a Tascam/Steinberg/Yamaha connection there, but limiting an interfaces 'interfacing' capability seems like a self kick in the ass to me. I suppose before Avid went with an open interface version of their program, this was not an option anyway. But still, seems like an under sight.
     
  7. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Location:
    currently Billings
    Low end Tascam is not professional by any means. The HS-P82 is another story.
     
  8. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    also, if i was to use the computer headphone mixer, can i just route my kick and the song i want to play along to my ears? And not send back like 6 channels to me, only the 2. Could doing this reduce latency?

    OFFTOPIC{also, before i was looking at the Saffire Pro 40, which has the software monitoring, but one thing ive heard is that for Windows 7 their FireWire Drivers kinda blow. And they dont always work. When i get my computer built IT IS going to have 2 FireWire ports, but they will be directly connected to the motherboard, which will be a "Gigabyte GA-870A-UD3 -- AMD 870 w/ 2x PCI-E 2.0 x16 " Would that work?
     
  9. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    Hmm.....Well latency is not caused by multiple instances of audio channels. It is the time it takes for you DAW/interface to send audio going through it, back to your monitoring. Adding an effect in say Cubase, Protools, or Reaper, will add to the time it takes to process the signal before you hear it back. The performance of your computer has a huge part in this as well. That being said, I can play back 30 tracks at a low latency setting on my 1641, add one (only one) reverb plug for monitoring for a singer, and record his track with less than 10ms of delay (latency). This is very acceptable for my particular purposes. I am not educated on interfaces with their own direct monitoring/DSP effects but I hear that can be a great advantage. I find that I really don't need that in my situation as of yet. Though I must say that it was impossible for me to create good monitor mixes without purchasing a monitor amp with AUX inputs.

    Someone will probably call me out for this, but I hear that firewire has pretty much lived it's life and is not the best investment these days. Usb 3.0 will support 2.0, but firewire will be completely replaced in the near future by thunderbolt. I am just relaying what I have heard here, I may be completely wrong, but firewire is being installed less now on newly built computers because of this change coming.

    Any interface that does not have Win7 support drivers by now, is obviously outdated and probably has no potential to be relevant ever. Hell even Microsoft has abandoned XP support of their own dated software as have software manufacturers such as Steinberg (Cubase 6).

    Keep in mind what you will want to work with in the future as well as now.
     
  10. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    yea the computer being built is going have an AMD Phenom X6 1100T Six-Core 3.3GHz, 8GB Ram, the aformentioned MotherBoard, and Win7 Premium. Would that be sufficient to run a low latency headphone mix?
     
  11. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    Well, considering my results using the computer with specs presented in my sig, you have around twice the power I use on a daily basis with good results. However, if your system is setup for gaming, it will suck ass at recording. Any system must be optimized for audio recording. I don't believe the is a PC or MAC made yet that will do everything without compromizing something. In fact it 'is' the software and services running on a comp that makes 'everything' convenient, that destroys the ability for it to run one program efficiently.
     
  12. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    then you are suggesting that i go out of the box for monitoring?
     
  13. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    Well, I am just saying that unless you get an interface that has its own direct monitoring mixing ability, you may want to use an outboard monitor amp. Especially for drums. The headphone output on my 1641 is not loud enough on its own to hear well when playing drums. Direct monitoring anyway. And if you are tracking with another player, a guitar player for instance, the mix that he will want will be different than that of the drummer. An outboard monitor amp with AUX inputs solves this problem for me. I can create a send in Cubase to an output that I feed to the HP amp AUX in with more guitar for the drummer. I use a HA4700 that I got off Craigslist for $50. Works perfectly for this.
     
  14. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    What i was planning on doing, was using either a Behringer RX1202FX, or 2 Behringer MIC2200 Ultragain Pro's as the actually "Preamps" for the 8 line ins of the 18i6. Then inside ITB, just send back the kick, and with my little 2 channel mixer i got i could mix in my ipod and what im playing.
     
  15. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    That sounds like it will do the trick.
     
  16. DrummerDan

    DrummerDan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    Parma Ohio
    yea also i do have mics now, that i could double mic the kick, one for monitoring and the other for actually recording. since im going to use a kelly shu mount, i would just mic the outerhead with the cheapo mic and see how that works.
     
  17. orlandoe

    orlandoe Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Location:
    Arezzo, Italy
     
  18. orlandoe

    orlandoe Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Location:
    Arezzo, Italy
    How many channels can you record at the same time while monitoring via Cubase with a good result?
     
  19. jimmys69

    jimmys69 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Location:
    Arvada Colorado
    16 possible with the US 1800. Latency will increase with adding plug-ins while monitoring. I have under 8ms of latency tracking 14 mics with one instance of Roomworks SE. I'm sure I could add more with the i7 I am running but haven't seen the need as yet. Your processor speed will determine how many effects you can monitor while tracking without latency.
     
  20. x_25

    x_25 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Location:
    northwest nj
    Just monitor in hardware (the mix you get is based on the input volume from the sources). That said, using the tascam drivers (kinda iffy, id reccomend asio4all) I get 3ms in and 12ms out latency on a computer with identical specs. Asio4all has a tad more latency but works better overall.
     
  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice