Adat Hd24

What kinds of digital instruments are we talkin about here? If you mean physical synths and things, if they have analog outputs, you can run em into the HD24 through the analog inputs, and it will work fine.

As for recording and monitoring with a physical mixing console, there are advantages and disadvantages. With a console with 24 mono channels and decent pres, you can record 24 tracks at one time. You would at that point either mix down in analog on the console to some sort of stereo recorder (the laptop would work, as it does in my situation), or transfer tracks to the PC to mix in your multitrack recording software.

I like the "Best of both worlds" approach - get a decent console, one you can use the pre's on; one that you can also mix down on. However, you can import tracks into the computer via the ethernet on the HD24, edit them on the PC, and then send em right back. Works wonderfully.
 
I got the ADAT HD24 for under $500 - I figured it was a bargain at the time. Didn't really stop to consider the extra costs.

Using Roland HP557R digital piano and Roland X7 Synth/Workstation and guitar.

What do you think of the Fostex VF160EX mixer? It's ADAT compatible. Are the Mackie mixers compatible or do I need an ADAT card?

Is there any point in buying the Masterlink to link to the ADAT HD24 or would it be a waste of money? (ie. Masterlink vs. a Mackie mixer)?
 
You would still need a mixer between the Masterlink and the HD24 to mix down to, since you would have to change levels and the whatnot before mixing 24 tracks down to 2.

As for mixers, I'm not sure, since I go back out of the HD24 to analog, and mix that way. On that front, sorry for the lack of help. Sweet deal on the HD24 - where'd ya pick it up? Hell - if ya end up goin with another system, I'll buy it from ya for that price, depending on the age and use, etc... heh
 
mark merton said:
I got the ADAT HD24 for under $500 - I figured it was a bargain at the time. Didn't really stop to consider the extra costs.

Using Roland HP557R digital piano and Roland X7 Synth/Workstation and guitar.

What do you think of the Fostex VF160EX mixer? It's ADAT compatible. Are the Mackie mixers compatible or do I need an ADAT card?

Is there any point in buying the Masterlink to link to the ADAT HD24 or would it be a waste of money? (ie. Masterlink vs. a Mackie mixer)?
Click to expand...

It was a bargain, regardless of extra costs.
You don't need any specific "ADAT compatibility" in a mixer. You don't need a mixer with an "ADAT card". Certainly you can get such things, but you really don't need them.

The ADAT has its own A to D and D to A converters. If you use any analog mixer that has decent preamps with direct channel outputs, you're good to go. You can plug balanced line gear directly into the ADAT HD24 without any preamp at all.

I got the HD24XR, which can do 12 channels at 96KHz. I've used it with as little as a simple M-Audio 2-channel mic preamp for live stereo classical piano recordings, or with a Mackie Onyx 1620, to provide 8 mic preamps and additional line inputs. The Mackie can connect to the HD24's inputs using the Recording Outs D-shell outputs using a $50 snake from D-shell to balanced TRS plugs, plus you can monitor the input channels using the Mackie while recording. (There is no headphone output for channel-listen on the ADAT HD24!)

If you don't need 24 mic inputs, I think the Mackie Onyx 1620 is a great mixer to combine with the ADAT HD24. Especially with the XR model, where you only get 12 channels at 96KHz anyway.

For an extra quick (and inexpensive!) eight mic channels, add a Behringer ADA8000, although it has no headphone channel monitoring, and the inputs plug into the front and get in the way of the channel gain pot. Use an optical cable to plug the ADA8000 into the ADAT HD24, and save yourself money on XLR-to-balanced TRS phone plug cables.

But I prefer the Onyx 1620 over the ADA8000 for a preamp just because I can monitor each mic channel while recording, and do a lot more mixing too.

I use a computer for multichannel mixdown, no analog mixer required! (Get the Firepod, save yourself time over using ethernet FTP.)
 
Fishmed_Returns said:
Go with the Mackie 1604-VLZ3. Set your keyboard up to CH 1 & 2 of the mixer and use the direct outs to go to the inputs of tracks 1 & 2 of the HD24. Set your HD24 to read all inputs from the 1 & 2 inputs. Hook up your outputs from the HD24 to 3 - 16 to line inputs of the Mackie's channels 3 - 16. If you find yourself needing the extra two tracks, you can then patch tracks 1 & 2 back into the Mackie. Set your songs on your HD24 to 16 tracks when initalizing them.
Click to expand...


This is excellent advice. Your timing is good, as Mackie's VLZ3 preamps are new, approach the ONYX for sound quality and are way better than the last generation (VLZ2).

A Behringer mixer looks great and competitive in the showroom, but in the studio it'll look great and cool next to the mixer you found you had to buy to replace it. Just save time and skip Behringer.
 
Gotta be a Mackie

So this is the score folks: I'm going for a SoundCraft or a Mackie 16-channel mixer; was just on their website and now have to make up my mind re. (ONYX 1620 or 1640); OR: (VLZ3 1604 or 1642). Big price difference between the 2 and 4 bus mixers. Is it really worth the difference and which is superior sound-wise the ONYX or VLZ3?
:confused:
 
Last edited:
Is there anywhere you can hear them side by side? The reason I say this is that, at the end of the day, it should be your own ears, not someone's bias that dictates. Mentioning Behringer on this forum is like throwing a carcass into a pirahna pool: I know of two instances where a broken Mackie had to be replaced (one in a home studio, the other a live house) and in both cases, the replacement Berry filled the Mackies shoes adequately.

Did anyone mention that the EQ on a VLZ is total shit, has sucky sliders and doesn't even give you XLR main outs?

Uli B
 
robin watson said:
The reason I say this is that, at the end of the day, it should be your own ears, not someone's bias that dictates.
Click to expand...

What is a forum but a collection of people's experiences? We all have a bias. Group everyone's biases together, look for trends, and something close to the truth will likely appear.
 
To identify HD24 Model

Fishmed_Returns said:
What version of HD24 did you buy?
Click to expand...

How would I be able to identify whether it's a standard HD24 or the XR model. I assumed it was the standard model but as it's second-hand it may have been upgraded. What should I look out for?
 
mark merton said:
How would I be able to identify whether it's a standard HD24 or the XR model. I assumed it was the standard model but as it's second-hand it may have been upgraded. What should I look out for?
Click to expand...


It says XR on the front panel.

-or-

If it's a true "upgraded" model, pop the top and look at the analog boards. If they're labeled EC-2, then it's got the XR analog stage in it.

You should also be able to record at 96kHz via analog (the standard HD24 will do 96k via digital, but not via analog).
 
Beyond the HD24

2 more questions:

Which 16-channel mixer would you recommend? It's definitely gotta be a Mackie but should i go ONYX or go for one of the relatively new VLZ3 models?

What other equipment do I need to get started in quality sound recording - I won't be using singers, just guitars and piano/synth, etc. Do I need an outboard effects unit, etc?
 
Final Analysis

Well, after much soul searching and extreme frustration I've decided to go for either the Korg D888 or Edirol UA-101 or UA-25. The ADAT HD24 isn't necessary where I'm recording single instruments and layering each track in sequence. Maybe when I get more proficient I might invest in something more expensive. I was going for the MBOX2 (ProTools) option but PT is not compatible with the Celeron processor on my laptop; the Mackie 16 Channel would have been a waste of money also. What would you recommend from the final three: Korg D888, Edirol UA-101 or UA-25?
Thanks
Mark

'
 
mark merton said:
Well, after much soul searching and extreme frustration I've decided to go for either the Korg D888 or Edirol UA-101 or UA-25. The ADAT HD24 isn't necessary where I'm recording single instruments and layering each track in sequence. Maybe when I get more proficient I might invest in something more expensive. I was going for the MBOX2 (ProTools) option but PT is not compatible with the Celeron processor on my laptop; the Mackie 16 Channel would have been a waste of money also. What would you recommend from the final three: Korg D888, Edirol UA-101 or UA-25?
Thanks
Mark

'
Click to expand...

Have you considered the Yamaha AW1600? It will do 24 bit recording for roughly the same money as the D888 which is only 16. 24 bit can give you a lower noise floor and more dynamic range.
 
Zoom HD16 vs Yamaha AW1600

Zoom have a 16-track recorder (relatively new so it's hard to get a thorough critique) - it only does 16-bit; yes the Yamaha looks good but it's much more expensive; in Europe the Zoom goes for €800 (I think) whereas the AW1600 is around €1400. I was thinking of buying the Zoom HD16 and an Edirol UA-25 - about €260 - (for high-resolution recording); the two devices come to around €1000 still way below the Yamaha price (depending on where you shop); I need to verify with one more reseller regarding Yamaha pricing; I also havn't ruled out the Korg D888 (around €870) though I can get 16-channels with a Zoom for less than that price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top