Fw-1884

  • Thread starter Thread starter Booda
  • Start date Start date
Booda

Booda

Master of the Obvious
Why is there no talk of this unit? I have searched the internet like a mad man and have only come up w/ a few threads w/ really not much info...

I'd really like to know of what level the Converters are on... Delta 1010/Aark Q10, RME/Lynx, Or Lucid/Apogee.

I found one guy who sold one on Ebay... he told me he had to get the Digi 002 for work but in comparison he said the FW-1884 sounded better than the Digi002.

I've also read that the Preamps are even a little better than the ones in the DM24... would those rank w/ a DMP3 or RNP or...

Anyone have any info on this unit. Please no links to the Tascam site w/ a specs sheet. I've read every spec sheet on the net :)

Thanks,
B.
 
Booda said:
Why is there no talk of this unit? I have searched the internet like a mad man and have only come up w/ a few threads w/ really not much info...

I'd really like to know of what level the Converters are on... Delta 1010/Aark Q10, RME/Lynx, Or Lucid/Apogee.

I found one guy who sold one on Ebay... he told me he had to get the Digi 002 for work but in comparison he said the FW-1884 sounded better than the Digi002.

I've also read that the Preamps are even a little better than the ones in the DM24... would those rank w/ a DMP3 or RNP or...

Anyone have any info on this unit. Please no links to the Tascam site w/ a specs sheet. I've read every spec sheet on the net :)

Thanks,
B.
Click to expand...



I spoke with someone yesterday who was very knowledgable with the DM24 and newer Tascam digital gear. He told me that the problems with the trim pots on the older DM24s was corrected with the newer models as well as the power supply problems. As for micpre quality he states that the newer DM24s have the same micpres as the huge SX-1. Also I asked him how would the micpres on a new DM24 compare to those like the DMP3 or VTB-1 and he states that the difference would not be worth the money invested. But something like the Grace 101 or a RNP would be a definite difference in quality.

So you would have to up your micpre budget to really get better micpres.

Malcolm
 
it looks SUPER nice. Im buying it for my studio, it it recommended?
 
Booda said:


I'd really like to know of what level the Converters are on... Delta 1010/Aark Q10, RME/Lynx, Or Lucid/Apogee.

************************************

I've also read that the Preamps are even a little better than the ones in the DM24... would those rank w/ a DMP3 or RNP or...


Thanks,
B.
Click to expand...

I use a Lucid AD9624 for my 2 "golden channels" along with an RNP and a Great River m2p.

As far as the FW-1884 converters. To my ears they are ok. There is a slight improvement when I use the Lucid and go directly into the 1884 digital ADAT configured as S/PIDF, but the 1884's converters are decent "general purpose" converters. I think the slightly better sound can be attributed to the Lucid Genx96 clock, as well as the AD9624. I think the clock makes as much difference as the converters do.

The mic pre's on the other hand are a different story. I use a RNP and Great River m2p. They blow the 1884 pre's away. Not even a contest.

I recorded a drum set mic'd up with 7 mics directly to the 1884 pre's. Sound was ok. But when I added the horn and vocal tracks recorded using the RNP and Great River mic pre's, it created a bit of a mix down problem, in getting the horns and vocals to sit well in the mix with the drums. Those horn and vocal tracks were just that much better.

Needless to say I'm now searching for additional mic pre's to support the drum tracking.
I couldn't get the gain I needed from the 1884 pre's without clipping. I'm going to mess with it a little more, but I'm thinking I like out board mic pre's way more the the 1884 pre's.

just my 2 pennies
John
 
How do you guys think the mic pres on the 1884 would compare to a Mackie CFX-16? We (my band) are about to purchase a 1884 and I was just curious as to which pre would be better. I will probably just have to experiment with it. The CFX could be better, but having to use an insert that is not balanced into the 1884 could defeat the difference. Just curious. :) Thanks!

Brandon <><
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top