Billisa - have to tell you this

[Garry Sharp]

If you're still thinking about a 16 track....

We used the AW16G for the first time last night. Not for serious recording, but just as an aid to arranging a couple of new songs. Anyway, we were absolutely blown away by the playback quality. I thought the VF80 was good but this was definitely a big improvement; subjectively we all felt it sounded exactly the same on playback as it did when we played it live. There was a sort of transparency to the sound. Big grins all round.

If the VF160 uses the same recording equipment as the 80, then I'd have to say the Yammie is a clear winner.

Apologies for talking about a Yammie on a Fostex forum but thought it might be of interest.

 

[billisa]

That's an interesting comparison... Did you all perform live to the Yamaha or was it track by track?

 

[Garry Sharp]

Well, live, three of us at the same time Very convenient. But it was only to help with arrangements.

 

[billisa]

Sounds like you're having a lot of fun with the G, and anytime a machine can do that, it's got to be good. I get a hint of gloating coming through! But that's OK because we Fostex people are a hardy lot. I do wonder though if the ability to record as a band, as opposed to track by track, gives an added sense of realism on playback. I say this because on the VF80, my son never gets to hear the whole song together with all the components, until after it's done track by track. So it's hard to know what it would have sounded like altogether "live".

Even so, it sounds like you're having a blast with the G. How's the learning curve?

 

[Garry Sharp]

Not gloating at all Learning curve's a bitch, which is also an appropriate adjective for what Yamaha call a manual.

Definitely hot on recording as a band (though 8 tracks still means vox have to be overdubbed; we are looking at 5 trax for drums, 2 - mic'd and DI - for guitar and 1 for bass).

All of which would work also for the VF160, which has the advantage of being a true 16 tracker; the G is 8 mono plus 4 stereo, which ain't quite the same. But the whole point of starting this thread, as I know you were toying with an upgrade, is how taken we were with the sound. Somehow gave us the feeling we were moving a distinct step upwards in kit quality.

 

[billisa]

Somehow gave us the feeling we were moving a distinct step upwards in kit quality.

I've always thought everything Yamaha made was excellent. I wonder though, in this case, is it the machine, or is it that you are now playing, recording, then hearing yourselves as a band for the first time... If you had done the same thing on a VF160, I am guessing the new experience of playing/recording as a band would have boosted the sense of sound quality with that machine as well. Perhaps not. It must be great though working with all the extra tracks!

Bill Keane

 

[glynb]

Not a fair comparison?

I understand that the yamaha you had a play with is the competitor machine to the vf160, so it's not really a fair comparison with the yamie and vf80.

On other 'comparison' threads I've read they come out kind of even in that each has features which are missing from the other.

On one threasd someone said the Yamie locks up more often than the vf160 (which from my experience is rock solid). But the yamie comes with more 'mastering' facilities apparently than the vf160 which some people like.

 

[Garry Sharp]

Glyn - that's definitely true with regard to the number of tracks, but I was making it on the basis of (our perception of) recording quality, on the basis that the VF80 and the 160 are the same in that regard.

Actually the point of the thread was really to share our delight at the results we got from the Yammie. On the other hand we won't be using the on-board mastering, so that's a waste, and of course the Yammie is not a true 16 tracker like the VF160 - it's 8 mono plus 4 stereo.

It would take somebody considerably more experienced than I am to produce a definitive comparison.

Cheers

G