No, I do not want to do PC recording. I'm on a computer enough at work and do not want to share the computer with my family at home. Having a hard time choosing a stand alone multitrack. I've read some decent reviews on the Boss 1600 multi-track even though the vocals sounded thin and "tinny" on the demo I heard at the music store. Have not been able to read any reviews, good , bad or otherwise on the Zoom MRS-1608 which is the other multi-track I'm considering. Am also considering the Yamaha AW16GCD. Does anyone own or has worked with this model Zoom? 50 drum kit sounds and 475 pre-set patterns is pretty impressive. Please help.
Multitracks/stand alone
- Thread starter Rico
- Start date
futurestar
New member
The Korg D1600 MKII is a cool machine, (I have the D16):
http://www.korg.com/gear/info.asp?A_PROD_NO=D1600MKII
http://www.korg.com/gear/info.asp?A_PROD_NO=D1600MKII
The Boss machines often use data compression. The Fostex VF160ex($899.) is a great machine, very stable, that will give you 8 at once track recording right out of the box. The Yamaha aw16G($999.) is very well liked, and has it's own forum. Same with the Korg D1600mkII ($1300). The Korg has a fairly easy learning curve, as does the Fostex. I should imagine the Korg's manual is better written than the Fostex's. The aw16's learning curve is more involved. The Fostex and Yamaha are full 16bit machines, with no data compression. The Korg offers the possibility of 24bit, but with fewer tracks at once recording (and possibly playback).
the Korg uses an internal fan that can add ambient noise, the Fostex does not, and I don't think the Yamaha does either. The Fostex's drive is easy to swap out, and there are a range of drives that will easily work with it. The Korg uses a neat touch screen to activate some steps. The screen on the Fostex is the smallest of the group -- though perfectly adequate. The Fostex operating system may be the best of the group. It saves as you go, so that in the unlikely event of a system freeze, your data is still intact. In a year and a half of using the VF160, I've NEVER lost data, ever. The only way I think you can is by yanking the plug during a recording, which is not something I do often.
The Yamaha offers a bigger range of effects and eq options. The Korg and Fostex each have a full 16 mono tracks, the Yamaha reaches 16 by using at least one stereo pair.
Overall, whichever you choose, you can make great recordings, and you'll bond with the nuances and techniques germane to each machine. You could almost flip a coin and do well.
the Korg uses an internal fan that can add ambient noise, the Fostex does not, and I don't think the Yamaha does either. The Fostex's drive is easy to swap out, and there are a range of drives that will easily work with it. The Korg uses a neat touch screen to activate some steps. The screen on the Fostex is the smallest of the group -- though perfectly adequate. The Fostex operating system may be the best of the group. It saves as you go, so that in the unlikely event of a system freeze, your data is still intact. In a year and a half of using the VF160, I've NEVER lost data, ever. The only way I think you can is by yanking the plug during a recording, which is not something I do often.
The Yamaha offers a bigger range of effects and eq options. The Korg and Fostex each have a full 16 mono tracks, the Yamaha reaches 16 by using at least one stereo pair.
Overall, whichever you choose, you can make great recordings, and you'll bond with the nuances and techniques germane to each machine. You could almost flip a coin and do well.
Garry Sharp
Lost Cause
In fact the AW16G uses 4 stereo pairs, although that's not as limiting as it seems if you don't need more than 8 simultaneous inputs (hello Bill - been a while). Its silent.
You mentioned the Zoom's drumkits - if you need this you'd probably be better off with a separate drum machine. It's really a case of figuring out exactly what you need. If you are going to do the entire process in the box then the AW16G offers the most facilities at the price - unless you need 16 simultaneous ins, or 24 bit, in which case, Fostex or Korg. The AW16G has some - limited - sampling / looping facilities.
Personally I'd avoid Zoom, or anything which uses compression, but otherwise agree with Bill's point that they are all good.
You mentioned the Zoom's drumkits - if you need this you'd probably be better off with a separate drum machine. It's really a case of figuring out exactly what you need. If you are going to do the entire process in the box then the AW16G offers the most facilities at the price - unless you need 16 simultaneous ins, or 24 bit, in which case, Fostex or Korg. The AW16G has some - limited - sampling / looping facilities.
Personally I'd avoid Zoom, or anything which uses compression, but otherwise agree with Bill's point that they are all good.
futurestar
New member
A friend of mine has the Yamaha, and is happy with the results. I'v heard mixed reviews about the Fostex units (mostly good though), and mixed reviews about the Zoom units. If you want absolutely everything in one box, the Zoom may work for you, but I would assume that the A/D/A convertors are better in the other models mentioned here. I believe the Fostex unit also offers ADAT Optical ins which can be used to add 8 additional inputs for tracking if you need (With a Behringer ADA8000 mic pre for example). Anyway, I'm happy with my old Korg D16, which can be found on Ebay now for about $450. Good luck. 
Rico said:
I agree with Garry (hi!) on the Zoom. I have a Zoom 123 drum machine that I think is great. It seems very well made and the sounds are excellent. But I don't see having a built-in drum machine as an advantage. My bias is towards a unit that's essentially designed to do one thing really well. I also wouldn't like to be tapping out a beat on a machine with a harddrive inside whirring away storing data... I think the Zoom units are full 16bit. But I don't see much about them in forums, which makes it hard to get a good sense of how they really are in practice. They could be phenomenal. I think I'd definitely go with a Zoom over a Boss though.
Thanks
Hey, I appreciate all your responses. I think I have finally made a decision and it's a machine that I did not bring up on my original posting. The Tascam 2488 24 Track. Specs sound good,Tascam makes a great product and the price is amazing, especially for 24 tracks! I agree Billisa in getting a unit designed to do one thing really well and also have not been able to find any reviews in any forums on the Zoom. The Boss data compression bothers me. Korg for some reason doen't get me too excited. I've always had good luck with Fostex. Even owned that X-14 cassete 4 track (remember that?) I used that baby for 10 years, it was a work horse. The problem I have with the Fostex VF160EX is that of those 8 inputs only 2 are XLR. Besided that, my last two multitracks were Fostex and would like to try something else. So that leaves the YamahaAW16G. Sounds solid and have not heard any negative feedback except for the learning curve on it, but that I can deal with. Unless anyone has any negative comments on the Tascam 2488, I'm going for that one. If I hate it, I'll return it within 30 days and get the Yamaha.
Hey, I appreciate all your responses. I think I have finally made a decision and it's a machine that I did not bring up on my original posting. The Tascam 2488 24 Track. Specs sound good,Tascam makes a great product and the price is amazing, especially for 24 tracks! I agree Billisa in getting a unit designed to do one thing really well and also have not been able to find any reviews in any forums on the Zoom. The Boss data compression bothers me. Korg for some reason doen't get me too excited. I've always had good luck with Fostex. Even owned that X-14 cassete 4 track (remember that?) I used that baby for 10 years, it was a work horse. The problem I have with the Fostex VF160EX is that of those 8 inputs only 2 are XLR. Besided that, my last two multitracks were Fostex and would like to try something else. So that leaves the YamahaAW16G. Sounds solid and have not heard any negative feedback except for the learning curve on it, but that I can deal with. Unless anyone has any negative comments on the Tascam 2488, I'm going for that one. If I hate it, I'll return it within 30 days and get the Yamaha.
Yo, Rico. I don't think you can go wrong with either machine, but I'd offer two last-minute tips:
* if possible, get your hands on these two machines, and see if one feels better (more comfortable, intuitive) in some ways.
* check out the support forums for each machine. I've been involved in the yamaha 16g site since its inception 18 months ago ( www.aw16g.com ), and I've seen how helpful such support can be, particularly during the first crucial year of learning. (Every digital machine has a learning curve, especially if you're coming from analog.) It makes quite a difference when everyone writing is using the same DAW--note the extra dose of comraderie present. I have no idea about such Tascam forums and whether or not they can match our 16g forum, but I'd recommend doing some searching before buying unless you don't expect to need such support.
Good luck. I'm sure either machine will be a great tool--I have great respect for Tascam since I've used other Tascam machines, and I can only praise the
"fabulous combination of price and features of the Yamaha 16G" (to quote SOS mag). IMHO, you've picked two great DAWs to consider.
Best,
J.
* if possible, get your hands on these two machines, and see if one feels better (more comfortable, intuitive) in some ways.
* check out the support forums for each machine. I've been involved in the yamaha 16g site since its inception 18 months ago ( www.aw16g.com ), and I've seen how helpful such support can be, particularly during the first crucial year of learning. (Every digital machine has a learning curve, especially if you're coming from analog.) It makes quite a difference when everyone writing is using the same DAW--note the extra dose of comraderie present. I have no idea about such Tascam forums and whether or not they can match our 16g forum, but I'd recommend doing some searching before buying unless you don't expect to need such support.
Good luck. I'm sure either machine will be a great tool--I have great respect for Tascam since I've used other Tascam machines, and I can only praise the
"fabulous combination of price and features of the Yamaha 16G" (to quote SOS mag). IMHO, you've picked two great DAWs to consider.
Best,
J.
futurestar
New member
The 2488 looks like a good choice - this is the link to the forum:
http://www.tascamforums.com/
http://www.tascamforums.com/
robin watson
New member
Zoom 123
The Zoom 123 is a great little drum machine, which allows you 4 tracks of recording, including some useful bass sounds that you can also program in along with your drum patterns. I'm not sure about the sounds, having not owned that many drum machines, but I think I prefer it to the previous Boss (660), which tended to be a bit 'digital' sounding. The Zoom is nice and easy to use, too.
The Zoom 123 manual is downloadable from their website (or at least it was a fewmonths ago). Taking a look at should give you an idea of what it's like.
The Zoom 123 is a great little drum machine, which allows you 4 tracks of recording, including some useful bass sounds that you can also program in along with your drum patterns. I'm not sure about the sounds, having not owned that many drum machines, but I think I prefer it to the previous Boss (660), which tended to be a bit 'digital' sounding. The Zoom is nice and easy to use, too.
The Zoom 123 manual is downloadable from their website (or at least it was a fewmonths ago). Taking a look at should give you an idea of what it's like.
Rico,
I stopped by my local music shop to check out the new Tascam, and it's pretty impressive for the price, overall. On the downside, though, are the small viewing screen (I can't understand why Tascam would keep it so small) and the single effects processor (even many cheaper units offer two processors). I guess there are always trade-offs, which is why you really should get on down to take a look at these machinces before deciding.
I have to admit that I was more impressed in some ways by the 24-bit Roland 1824, which the store is selling for $1200--about the same price as the Tascam. The Roland has a huge screen, which dwarves anything in that price range, and a more comfortable surface (for me). On the downside, it has only 10GB pf memory--compared to 40 (I think) for the Tascam--although it may be possible to upgrade it. The Roland reminded me of how competitive this price point is these days--and how many choices are out there for buyers willing to do some research before choosing.
Happy choosing,
J.
(In the 16-bit realm, I've looked at quite a few machines in the past year but still haven't seen anything that matches the Yamaha 16G as a very solid basic recorder in the sub-$1K range.)
I stopped by my local music shop to check out the new Tascam, and it's pretty impressive for the price, overall. On the downside, though, are the small viewing screen (I can't understand why Tascam would keep it so small) and the single effects processor (even many cheaper units offer two processors). I guess there are always trade-offs, which is why you really should get on down to take a look at these machinces before deciding.
I have to admit that I was more impressed in some ways by the 24-bit Roland 1824, which the store is selling for $1200--about the same price as the Tascam. The Roland has a huge screen, which dwarves anything in that price range, and a more comfortable surface (for me). On the downside, it has only 10GB pf memory--compared to 40 (I think) for the Tascam--although it may be possible to upgrade it. The Roland reminded me of how competitive this price point is these days--and how many choices are out there for buyers willing to do some research before choosing.
Happy choosing,
J.
(In the 16-bit realm, I've looked at quite a few machines in the past year but still haven't seen anything that matches the Yamaha 16G as a very solid basic recorder in the sub-$1K range.)
Outlaws
New member
I have a Roland VS 1680. I have music on my website that was recorded with it if that matters to you at all. I think the machine is build well and nicer overal than anything else I have seen. The faders come to mind because all the other machines I have seen...including the new ones from Roland...seem to have skipped on that part and made things feel "cheap". But when I feel like upgrading, I will probably stick with a Roland because it does almost everything I can think of, and for digital EFX Roland is second to none IMO.
I can't really see any need to upgrade anytime soon other than a 24 bit outboard A/D converter as my 1680 supports 24 bit.
-Just another item for you to look at.
I can't really see any need to upgrade anytime soon other than a 24 bit outboard A/D converter as my 1680 supports 24 bit.
-Just another item for you to look at.
futurestar
New member
I have to agree about the Yamaha AW16G. I think it's the most complete all in one unit for the price - especially with dynamics and 4 band parametric on every channel. The 2488 is 24 bit, but it looks more designed for tracking. If you have a pc rig in tandem - you're set. Then again, if you have a good computer rig, you don't really need a stand alone like the 2488, except maybe for mobile recording. Having said that, the Yamaha excels here as well, because it can be used as a controller for Cubase, etc. The only downfall is that you can't record 24 bit files. You can't have it all I guess ...
Check out the MV8000, it is one bad machine, a complete production machine..check out mvnation.com and you will see a bunch of happy owners...Rico said:
futurestar said:
The key phrase here is definetly "all in one unit" and I'd also use the computer term WYSIWYG to describe the AW16G. What you see is what you get, nothing more, nothing less. Having previously owned the Foxtex VF16 for couple of years and thinking about getting another one I think the Fostex is better choice if you plan (or even suspect that you'll ever might want) to use external gear with it. With external gear I mean stuff like external ad/da converters for extra or better coverters and preamps, a computer DAW for final editing, mixing and mastering etc.
If you want to mix the best of both worlds, standalone and computer DAWs, the Fostex is IMHO hard to beat value for money. I must concratulate those truly visionary engineers at Fostex who created the original VF concept five years ago and were far sighted enough to include the ADAT i/o as stadard feature even when there was no inexpensive external ad/da converters (like the Behringer ADA8000) available at that time. Without the ADAT i/o Fostex would have been just one of the numerous WYSIWYG multitrackers and I certainly I would have forgotten all about it after I sold my VF16 (a major mistake, BTW) last year to buy a Yamaha AW4416. But now I really miss that little box that used to be so easy to carry along and setup for hassle free location recording, and that's something that I can't say about my current computer based rig nor the AW4416, either. Unless Fostex comes up soon with an upgraded model with 24bit recording I'm pretty sure I'll grab the next reasonably priced used VF16 that comes along.
Boss BR-1180CD
Hey.
I have the Boss BR-1180CD, and I just love it.
It's portable, feature-rich, and has a decent sized hard disk.
It has been fantastic little unit for me. (And yes, it is very "tweakable".)
Julia
Hey.
I have the Boss BR-1180CD, and I just love it.
It's portable, feature-rich, and has a decent sized hard disk.
It has been fantastic little unit for me. (And yes, it is very "tweakable".)
Julia
I'm a big fan of fostex, so I would recommend one of the VF-series of course, unless you can get your hands on the D-series, you may check out reviews from www.soundonsound.com they do alot of reviews, and most of the time there really good at it.
bubbleboy
New member
Twitch said:
after reading the board the past few days, you all have seriously made me reconsider the VF160ex. I was pretty much set on either the AW16G or the Korg D1600mkII....but now more thinking. As for the tascam 2488, there was another thread and someone compiled a brief dossier of tons of negative quotes pulled straight from that box's user forum...anyway:
i got an online esubscription to SOS just so i could read the May 04 review of the Tascam 2488 and I'd have to say the only negative thing they said was that the effects were sub par but not a big deal since you'll probably use external crap anyway. they also complained about lack of motorized faders (can anyone tell me why SOS harps on this? or what the big advantage is--all i'm used to is old skool portastudios). They said it looked 'plasticky' at first, but was actually quite sturdy, and was completely quiet. But it's the user comments that really have got me questioning this one.
Does anyone know if the VF160ex has a USB port or you have to burn wavs to the cd to transfer to your pc? i can't tell from their site
futurestar
New member
You should be able to burn wavs and export to a pc with any of the recorders mentioned. As far as usb goes, I believe at this time only the Korg and the 2488 are set up for that. I've looked at the Fostex and Yamaha manuals - I don't recall seeing a usb port. (Correct me if I'm wrong)!
It really comes down to what you need.
Regarding the little complaints here and there you've heard (and I've heard), about the 2488, most should be addressed in the upcoming software update. The only thing ... which is a major one in my books, is eq. I believe having 4 band parametric eq on every strip is one of the most overlooked features on stand alone units by manufacturers. As far as I can see, the Yamaha is the only recorder with this feature in the ballpark price range. That was one of the two main reasons I made the upgrade to pc recording recently ... the other was true 24 bit recording on 24 or more tracks. Tascam has this covered now, but only 3 band eq per strip, and it's fairly weak on effects for mixing.
My opinion, after looking at all the units currently available is this: if you have a decent pc, a software program like N-Tracks, etc, (or better), I'd go with the 2488. If you don't, and need an all in one unit that is portable, I'd say it's a toss up between the Yamaha, Korg and Fostex. (The Korg and Yamaha at the top of my list unless you need 16 ins at once and have an ADAT optical mic pre like the Behringer ADA800). However, if you have Cubase ... the Yamaha would be my top choice. Man ... now you've got ME confused .... and I'm not even looking for a stand alone recorder anymore!!
It really comes down to what you need.
Regarding the little complaints here and there you've heard (and I've heard), about the 2488, most should be addressed in the upcoming software update. The only thing ... which is a major one in my books, is eq. I believe having 4 band parametric eq on every strip is one of the most overlooked features on stand alone units by manufacturers. As far as I can see, the Yamaha is the only recorder with this feature in the ballpark price range. That was one of the two main reasons I made the upgrade to pc recording recently ... the other was true 24 bit recording on 24 or more tracks. Tascam has this covered now, but only 3 band eq per strip, and it's fairly weak on effects for mixing.
My opinion, after looking at all the units currently available is this: if you have a decent pc, a software program like N-Tracks, etc, (or better), I'd go with the 2488. If you don't, and need an all in one unit that is portable, I'd say it's a toss up between the Yamaha, Korg and Fostex. (The Korg and Yamaha at the top of my list unless you need 16 ins at once and have an ADAT optical mic pre like the Behringer ADA800). However, if you have Cubase ... the Yamaha would be my top choice. Man ... now you've got ME confused .... and I'm not even looking for a stand alone recorder anymore!!