confused: analog or digital?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Giganova
  • Start date Start date
Giganova

Giganova

gimmi your mic!
hi guys --

I am having a rather humble computer interface right now, the Roland VM3100Pro. I am using it to produce dance music/DnB with a bunch of outboard synth and drum boxes. Since the VM3100 only has 8 channels, I am having a simultaneous 8 in/out setup in combination with my Roland RPC-1 sound card, operating at 24/44.1. I am running out of channels right now and need to upgrade to 16 channels. My next investment will therefore be a 16 channel recording setup.

I spoke to a guy at Samash in NYC yesterday and he said that I needed something like the Yamaha O1v96 plus ADAT lightpipe interface plus a Hammerfall 16 channel soundcard. Alternatively, he said I should get a MOTU 24i/o or NUENDO 96/52 DSP.

Now that's an investment of 3000 buxx or so! The guy also said that I needed the 96kHz "to get tight beats, which is important for DnB" and to make the tracks sound "smoother" when down-dithering from 24/96 to 16/44.1. He said that this is an important sonic improvement for (digital = harsh) electronic music. Not a very convincing argumentm is it?

I am confused now:

since I produce electronic music, I don't need 16 channels simultaneously. Wouldn't I be better advised to get an analog mixer and a soundcard with, say, 4 in/out or so? I was thinking about a Behringer UB2442FX (300 buxx) and an M-Audio Delta 410 (200 buxx). Now we are talking about an investment of only $500 instead of $3000!

So, what's the benefit of a digital setup that he suggested (apart from onboard fx)? Is it such a sonic improvement compared to an analog setup? How about if I would get a decent 16 channel mixer to hook up my gear and use 4 subgroups with a 4in sound card?
 
If you don't need any more simultaneous inputs why not just keep what you got?

If you need more connectivity just get a patchbay.
 
96khz for dance music? What a crock of shit. Most (if not all)samples are only 44.1khz so there really is no benefit. That salesman was trying to take you for a ride.

I don't understand why you need any new interface. Just record the synth tracks 8 at a time and mix it on the computer.
 
TexRoadkill is, as usual, spot on.

Grrrrrr. I hate to hear these stories when salesmen feed folks such bullshit as that. He just smelled some monry and tried to get you to part with tons of it.
 
No offence, but you're only making dance music, so the O1V96 is far too serious a bit of kit for your needs imo.

Ask yourself

1) do I need that many simulataneous inputs ? i.e. is there some reason you choose to have all your midi instruments playing live instead of recording them to audio one part a time?

2) If not could your IO issue not be solved by buying a 4 bus analogue mixer and putting it's 8 ouptuts into the 8 inputs of your soundcards.

3) If you really need a shedload of IO for some bizarre reason, then the MOTU 24IO wouldn't be a bad idea. But to be honest, I suspect you don't need that many inputs at the same time.


Who needs that much IO? Well, for example me. That amount of IO is designed often for people who actually want to use a PC but mix externally. For example, 24 outs on your soundcard into a large analogue mixer and mix on that with your analogue outboard gear. I was going to buy the O1V96 and a Hammerfall with three ADAT, because I was going to run every track on my sequencer out to a separate channel on the 01V and mix in that.


I seriously doubt you need such a hard-core setup. Look into one of the Mackie VLZ Pro mixers.
 
thanks a lot for your replies. No offence taken, of course, and you are right that I don't need so many inputs. You've convinved me that the sales guy just tried to talk me into something I don't really need.

Even though I have 8ins, I only sontimes use 2 simultaneous tracks when I play the programmed beats from two drum boxes at the same time. I don't even need the 8 ins/out that I have right now. And I find mixing inside Logic more convenient anyway. However, I have more than 8 pieces of outboard gear, plus two channels for my vocal recordings.

That's why I thought a 16 channel mixet and a 4in sound card might be a good idea. I totally agree that something like the MOTU 24io or the O1v96 is over the top and I wouldn't need it. Unfortunately my sound card has this weird Roland-propriety connector (R-bus) so I can't hook it up to anything else than a stupid Roland mixer. If I'd get a 16 channel mixer I also needed a new sound card. A patchbay is an alternative, but it looks so amateurish! :p
 
Giganova said:
A patchbay is an alternative, but it looks so amateurish! :p
Click to expand...

:confused: All pro studios use patchbays. It's the studios without PBs that look amateurish.

If you just want more inputs for keys you might also consider a line level mixer. They are usually only a few rack spaces high and can accomodate pretty big keyboard rigs. There are a bunch out there and I think there were some threads about them in the Keyboard forum.
 
cool that you mentioned line mixers, TexRoad. Never thought about it before.

I just saw that my local music store has a slightly used Mackie LM-3204 for $199.-. That's rediculously cheap, given that it used to be $1200.- when it was still in production. Some music stores still have a new unit for around $800. I think I'll get this mixer to hook up all my gear.
 
Nothing looks more amatuerish than a dude crawling around on hands and knees trying to get stuf patched in the middle of a session.

I've never even seen a pro studio without a huge patchbay.
 
I agree that patchbays can come in handy.

In fact, I have a 48 channel patch bay and I was joking when I mentioned that a patch bay looks amateurish. Patchbays rule!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top