Any Fostex FD-8 users lurking?
- Thread starter Titanship
- Start date
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
FD-4, here.
It sounds really bright and good clarity, but I'm less than thrilled with it's design and features.
The A/B AUX OUTs, [either/or configuration] are rather lame, as compared to an actual dual Aux Out.
The INPUT/TRK MONITOR, [either/or configuration], is less desirable than other cue monitors I've seen.
I don't like the FD-4's backlit LCD display, as much as other designs.
I don't like as much being on an external disc setup, Syquest EZ-Flyer 230, with no internal disc [factory installed upgrade], but somehow I prefer removable media, anyway.
I wish the FD-4 might have had a cartridge drive/removable media embedded in it, like the Tascam 564 and Yamaha MD-4, 'cept not ATRAC encoded Minidisc.
I'd envision the Fostex to need something like Iomega or Syquest 1Gb uncompressed/pc format discs, removable media.
Of course, if they geared Minidisc to record 16/44.1, uncompressed pc-format data, then MD would be acceptable too. I estimate the raw MD data space to be capable of holding about 14 minutes per disc, at uncompressed 16/44.1, for the 140mb Minidisc. Of course, that development will never occur.
I've scoped the inside of the FD-4, hoping for a quick & easy internal hard disc upgrade, but it turns out the connector is not even on the board. I'd have to get the right connector & solder it on myself, before the FD-4 would accept an internal disc. Or, have Fostex do the HDD upgrade.
Overall, it's a clean, functional unit, the features of which I'm not 100% pleased with, but just based on sound quality, I am very pleased. It's as easy to use as any portastudio-like clone should be.
Ditto, the MTC sync. Although I've not done sync with two Fostexes, I've synced the Fostex FD-4 to the Tascam 564. Using the handy master/slave function of MTC on these units is a low-budget way of doubling your soundtrack capacity. Plus, if you really like the FD- series, you'll have twice the fun with two of them!
It's a really great sounding recorder, and features are good, but not topnotch like Tascam's. However, for the price, you can't beat it.
FD-4 & FD-8, alike.
Rock on!
PS: Catch my two FD4-recorded covers, over at:
http://www.nowhereradio.com/davemania/singles
... as well as lots of non-FD4 stuff. Thanx!
It sounds really bright and good clarity, but I'm less than thrilled with it's design and features.
The A/B AUX OUTs, [either/or configuration] are rather lame, as compared to an actual dual Aux Out.
The INPUT/TRK MONITOR, [either/or configuration], is less desirable than other cue monitors I've seen.
I don't like the FD-4's backlit LCD display, as much as other designs.
I don't like as much being on an external disc setup, Syquest EZ-Flyer 230, with no internal disc [factory installed upgrade], but somehow I prefer removable media, anyway.
I wish the FD-4 might have had a cartridge drive/removable media embedded in it, like the Tascam 564 and Yamaha MD-4, 'cept not ATRAC encoded Minidisc.
I'd envision the Fostex to need something like Iomega or Syquest 1Gb uncompressed/pc format discs, removable media.
Of course, if they geared Minidisc to record 16/44.1, uncompressed pc-format data, then MD would be acceptable too. I estimate the raw MD data space to be capable of holding about 14 minutes per disc, at uncompressed 16/44.1, for the 140mb Minidisc. Of course, that development will never occur.
I've scoped the inside of the FD-4, hoping for a quick & easy internal hard disc upgrade, but it turns out the connector is not even on the board. I'd have to get the right connector & solder it on myself, before the FD-4 would accept an internal disc. Or, have Fostex do the HDD upgrade.
Overall, it's a clean, functional unit, the features of which I'm not 100% pleased with, but just based on sound quality, I am very pleased. It's as easy to use as any portastudio-like clone should be.
Ditto, the MTC sync. Although I've not done sync with two Fostexes, I've synced the Fostex FD-4 to the Tascam 564. Using the handy master/slave function of MTC on these units is a low-budget way of doubling your soundtrack capacity. Plus, if you really like the FD- series, you'll have twice the fun with two of them!
It's a really great sounding recorder, and features are good, but not topnotch like Tascam's. However, for the price, you can't beat it.
FD-4 & FD-8, alike.
Rock on!
PS: Catch my two FD4-recorded covers, over at:
http://www.nowhereradio.com/davemania/singles
... as well as lots of non-FD4 stuff. Thanx!
Last edited:
JR#97
New member
Titanship said:
Yup. I bought one last year used off of Ebay as a quick and easy mobile recorder. Then I picked up the Fostex VM200 digital mixer so I could record 8 tracks at a time via the ADAT optical. I also use the VM200 as a hardware controller for my PC. Be sure to post any tunes you record.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
Yeah, that's cool.
WTG JR#97, on getting the VM200, to use the FD-8 to its fullest utility. As I've said before, I've scoped out & contemplated getting an FD-8, on many occasions.
In general, 2-simul-max record function is enough for me, most of the time, so the FD-'s standard 2-simul-max is fine for most things. If I were to need more than 2-simul-record, then I have other recorders,... you may have heard.
I'll say again, that the FD-4/8 are really clean & functional units, with excellent sound quality, & portastudio-like ease of use. They're both going for reasonable bids, and are a great value in a recorder/portastudio-like device. Features are good, not topnotch, but for the money you can hardly beat 'em.
WTG JR#97, on getting the VM200, to use the FD-8 to its fullest utility. As I've said before, I've scoped out & contemplated getting an FD-8, on many occasions.
In general, 2-simul-max record function is enough for me, most of the time, so the FD-'s standard 2-simul-max is fine for most things. If I were to need more than 2-simul-record, then I have other recorders,... you may have heard.
I'll say again, that the FD-4/8 are really clean & functional units, with excellent sound quality, & portastudio-like ease of use. They're both going for reasonable bids, and are a great value in a recorder/portastudio-like device. Features are good, not topnotch, but for the money you can hardly beat 'em.
JR#97
New member
Re: Yeah, that's cool.
I agree, Dave. I think had they made the FD8 with onboard storage at first, they would have had more success. For beginners, I think the FD series is a lot better than the MR8. An analog mixer section is a lot easier to learn on for the beginner. And for doing live work, it's a lot quicker to reach up and tweak a knob than it is to try and go through a few menues.
A Reel Person said:WTG JR#97, on getting the VM200, to use the FD-8 to its fullest utility. As I've said before, I've scoped out & contemplated getting an FD-8, on many occasions.
In general, 2-simul-max record function is enough for me, most of the time, so the FD-'s standard 2-simul-max is fine for most things. If I were to need more than 2-simul-record, then I have other recorders,... you may have heard.
I'll say again, that the FD-4/8 are really clean & functional units, with excellent sound quality, & portastudio-like ease of use. They're both going for reasonable bids, and are a great value in a recorder/portastudio-like device. Features are good, not topnotch, but for the money you can hardly beat 'em.
I agree, Dave. I think had they made the FD8 with onboard storage at first, they would have had more success. For beginners, I think the FD series is a lot better than the MR8. An analog mixer section is a lot easier to learn on for the beginner. And for doing live work, it's a lot quicker to reach up and tweak a knob than it is to try and go through a few menues.
turntablist
New member
The mr-8 is most definetley not for live mixing.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
HINT: You don't get a digital mix, digital summing, or anything.
Your digitally recorded tracks are mixed down through an analog-style mixer. Period. That's why they class this type of unit at "hybrids". Digital recorder/analog mixer.
Your digitally recorded tracks are mixed down through an analog-style mixer. Period. That's why they class this type of unit at "hybrids". Digital recorder/analog mixer.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
Sorry, guess I misunderstood you, & I forgot the other part of the question.
In the case of linking up two machines with MTC, you'd simply patch the OUT's of one machine to the IN's of the other machine , and link the L/R BUSS/LINE OUTs and MONITOR sections that way.
Bridge the functions & outputs of the two units with RCA cables. The signals are then "summed" the old fashioned way, in the analog domain. One mixer will serve as master [fader] to the outside world for both units, when linked.
That's the answer you were looking for, I think.
In the case of linking up two machines with MTC, you'd simply patch the OUT's of one machine to the IN's of the other machine , and link the L/R BUSS/LINE OUTs and MONITOR sections that way.
Bridge the functions & outputs of the two units with RCA cables. The signals are then "summed" the old fashioned way, in the analog domain. One mixer will serve as master [fader] to the outside world for both units, when linked.
That's the answer you were looking for, I think.