Phantom Power

[moresound]

Kids these days! And he is still at it! Think he may be moving on to the rap/hiphop forum - where they will tear him apart.

 

[JimmyS1969]

That's almost worth watching!

 

[moresound]

He can find it!

 

[arcadeko]

I have to disagree with arcadeko-I think you are a bit dated. Rapidly, the computer interface and the standalone recorder can be *the same thing*. Namely:
Zoom R16 |

That system does not have DAW multi track recording.

from the manufacturers website:
"Eight input channels and two output channels can be used simultaneously. "

So while it may record 8 tracks to its internal SD card you would still have to import each track separately into your DAW which = Pain in the ass. If you want true multi-track recording you need an interface that has 8 in/ 8 out or 16/ in 16 out

The old USB versions of the multimix were also 8 in 2 out - as are the cheap Beringer boards.

So I will stand by my recommendation -

but I think the Zoom R16 is a cool product and would be awesome for on location recording especially at the $400 price point. I wouldn't use it in a home studio though.

 

[moresound]

That system does not have DAW multi track recording.

from the manufacturers website:
"Eight input channels and two output channels can be used simultaneously. "

So while it may record 8 tracks to its internal SD card you would still have to import each track separately into your DAW which = Pain in the ass. If you want true multi-track recording you need an interface that has 8 in/ 8 out or 16/ in 16 out

The old USB versions of the multimix were also 8 in 2 out - as are the cheap Beringer boards.

So I will stand by my recommendation -

but I think the Zoom R16 is a cool product and would be awesome for on location recording especially at the $400 price point. I wouldn't use it in a home studio though.

I lot of people I know use it and end up with sterling results!

 

[arcadeko]

I lot of people I know use it and end up with sterling results!

It looks like a fine piece of equipment, I'm sure it can produce good results - I just prefer spending my time recording and mixing and not copying files. I don't think there is much quality difference in the sub $1000 price range - I think it's just a matter of features.

And as far as the $1000+ price range I really have no idea since I can't afford that stuff

 

[Richard Monroe]

That system does not have DAW multi track recording.

from the manufacturers website:
"Eight input channels and two output channels can be used simultaneously. "

So while it may record 8 tracks to its internal SD card you would still have to import each track separately into your DAW which = Pain in the ass. If you want true multi-track recording you need an interface that has 8 in/ 8 out or 16/ in 16 out

The old USB versions of the multimix were also 8 in 2 out - as are the cheap Beringer boards.

So I will stand by my recommendation -

but I think the Zoom R16 is a cool product and would be awesome for on location recording especially at the $400 price point. I wouldn't use it in a home studio though.

Incorrect- That's 2 out *analog*. By USB, it can dump all recorded tracks simultaneously as WAV. files into the DAW of your choice. Or- you can use it as a controller to record straight to the DAW. The upload takes a couple of minutes, and it's not a pain in the ass. No manual track-synching in the DAW is required. What you say may be true if you try to use a card reader, either internal or external, but that's the limitations of the card reader, not the Zoom platform. I still think your impressions are dated.-Richie

 

[arcadeko]

Incorrect- That's 2 out *analog*. By USB, it can dump all recorded tracks simultaneously as WAV. files into the DAW of your choice. Or- you can use it as a controller to record straight to the DAW. The upload takes a couple of minutes, and it's not a pain in the ass. No manual track-synching in the DAW is required. What you say may be true if you try to use a card reader, either internal or external, but that's the limitations of the card reader, not the Zoom platform. I still think your impressions are dated.-Richie

If the Zoom R16 really does record straight to the DAW with multiple tracks then I stand corrected. I can not find it clearly stated on their website or after reading the manual, although it does seem to imply that it will record multi-track. If thats the case then it would be a great candidate for this user.

I like that the R16 can act as a control surface, but for the price (Alesis Multimix 8 USB2 new = $260) versus $400 for the Zoom R16 (which also records the same 8 tracks) I don't see what the extra $140 is paying for except portability with SD recording (which is definitely worth the price difference - don't get me wrong). So if you wanted portability the extra $140 would certainly be worth it. This person in particular wanted something for home use and wasn't planning on traveling. So why spend the extra money?

But if my impressions are outdated I would like to know whats new in the arena? I read over the documentation for the R16 and I don't really see anything new or groundbreaking. I do like the fact that it works as a control surface, although I am not sure I would be able to implement that in my studio very easily and haven't really felt the need for a control surface, my DAW works just fine with my mouse.

The product I suggested is a current product offered by Alesis, and I did all the research in buying my mixer over the past 6 months - so what am I missing and why are my impressions outdated?

 

[Richard Monroe]

Sorry if I seemed condescending- it wasn't my intent. You raise an iteresting point. I note in Zoom's promos that they say the R24 does 8 in/2 out "by USB". Now I know my H4n can track to 4 simultaneous tracks in Cubase as a controller, so I think it's the description that's flawed. As far as what's new, it's the concept of combining a standalone recorder and a DAW interface into a single unit. What you also get is a pair of onboard mics. I don't know how good the ones in the R16 are, but the ones in the H4n are quite usable, but they're no Neumanns or DPA's. As far as what's dated, it's the idea that a standalone automatically requires dumping tracks by USB or even S/PDIF, 2 at a time, and then manually synching them. On the flip side, the H4n was preceded by the H4, a cheaper unit that did everything the H4n does- rather badly. I think Samson/Zoom overeached itself, and tried to build the unit too cheap, resulting in fragile build quality, cheap suicidal buttons/switches, and an unstable platform that became well know for freezes and dropped data. Worst of all, the signal chain was inherently flawed, as the compressor/limiter was placed after the preamp in the signal chain, so engaging the compressor on loud sources resulted in quieter clipping! The H4n was a response to complaints by end users, and corrected all of the above, resulting in a stable, much more robust unit. The R16 and R24 are expansions of the H4n platform. One weakness of the R16- only 2 of the XLR inputs produce phantom power, which I think is more a function of bus power than a cost-saving maneuver. I think that the R24 has to have external or battery power to operate as a controller, because one USB cannot feed phantom power to 6 inputs. I will have to do some more research, but I'll admit you've raised an interesting point. It doesn't make sense that the 4 tracker can dump 4 simultaneous synched tracks as WAV. files to cubase by USB, or can record 4 simultaneous tracks to Cubase directly, but the 16 tracker can only do 2 at a time. If I get an answer from Samson tech support, I'll post it up. Until then, I can't state for a fact that you are wrong.-Richie

 

[Richard Monroe]

I wanted to share with y'all the answer I got from samsontech support. My questions are below the answer:

Mr. Monroe,

When there is mention of "8x2" it means that, you can there are 8 available inputs, and 2 available outputs (Left and Right). That being said, when recording in interface mode, the R24 or R16 can be used to record eight tracks simultaneously. Hopefully, that clears up some of the confusion.

As for transferring tracks to a computer, the units have the functionality of a card reader, much like your H4n. Once in card reader mode, transferring files is handled the same way you manage your files with your OS (click and drag, copy and paste, etc.). You can move as many from your SD card as you'd like. Transferring the files into your DAW is handled through importing the audio files onto a new session, which is completed differently for each program. Many programs offer drag and drop functionality, and assuming your recorded tracks are in synch on your R16/24 then they should be in synch when you transfer them over. Assuming they all start at the same time, i.e., moved all the way to beginning of the track.

In terms of your question relating the USB functionality of the devices, these answers apply to both systems.



Please feel free to get back to me with any additional questions or concerns. I'm here to help!

Thank you,

Greg Orrigo
800.372.6766
Samson Technologies Corp.



-----Original Message-----
From: Richard C. Monroe [mailto:richard_monroe@earthlink.net]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 6:25 PM
To: zoom@samsontech.com
Subject: R16 and R24 features

I've got a 3 questions no one seems able to answer regarding the Zoom R16 and R24:

The product description says the R16 handles "8 in and 2 out by USB". So- the 3 related questions are:

1. If you have a number of tracks recorded in the R16 and you want to dump them as WAV. Files into a PC by USB for post-production processing, can you upload all recorded tracks simultaneously, or do you have to transfer them 2 at a time by separate operations? Also, if you do have to dump them 2 at a time, does this require synching them manually in the DAW of choice, or will they be synched automagically?

2. If you are using the R16 as a computer controller and recording straight to a DAW, can you record 8 simultaneous tracks, or does the USB output limit you to 2 at a time?

3. Do your answers above also apply to the R24, or is there a practical difference in the platforms?

If you find the time to answer these questions, you can reach me at:

Richie Monroe
Bardwire Productions
richie@bardwire.com

P.S. I love the H4n as a sketchbook and mobile stereo recorder, and I'm considering adding one of the above units to the studio equipment list. The answers to the above questions will be instrumental in determining whether I do that or not. Thanks in advance for your time.-Richie

So- yes- the Zoom R16 and R24 platforms do indeed act as controllers up to the limit of their simultaneous inputs, and the "2 out" only applies to the analog output. WAV. file transfer is accomplished by "drag and drop", and is limited only by the speed of your processor. If my experience with the H4n holds true, no manual time synch'ing is required, and the entire operation can be completed in seconds.-Richie

 

[arcadeko]

You would think they would be more inclined to make this clear on their marketing! Since it is so important when recording music.
Way to get to the bottom of things Richard! Glad we got the accurate info now.

 

[IreSeven]

Thanks for all the help, people. This is enough to go by I think, and I see that most people who have messed around with both DAWs and internal recorders tend to prefer the former rather than the latter. Great!

 

[grimtraveller]

I just prefer spending my time recording and mixing and not copying files.

This is the key phrase in this thread for me ~ "I just prefer".
The advice and opinions from all sides of this thread have been really useful and important. As a standalone DAW user though, I have to say that I can see where the OP was coming from. Speed of file transfer and superior firepower when it comes to editing, mixing and EQ are largely irrelevant when it comes down to preference. It's a bit like trying to get people to stop driving and to take the train and bus. You can make conditions as hard for drivers as you like, make public transport dirt cheap and parking and congestion charges high ~ but many will put up with it because to travel in the comfort of their vehicle is their preference. And so it is with recording. What you prefer, you'll go with and to each, their own. Until you decide to try something else, all the good sense, persuation, convenience and promises will mean nothing. And neither should they. They're just another way.
On the other hand, it's good to hear the arguments. They can act like seeds that take a while to germinate.......

 

[Richard Monroe]

And personally, I use a DAW, and 2 standalones, which work together in peace and harmony. And, come to think of it, I often use the interface, a Digi002, as a standalone digital mixer, and the H4n standalone as a computer controller. That's why I'm considering adding an R16 or R24 to the mix, to replace an older, obsolete standalone that won't talk to the computer. What I prefer is a machine that does both of the above. All I really want them to do is build a machine like the R24 with top shelf pres and A-D conversion, *and* has an onboard CD-R drive. That's the biggest issue for me with the Zoom units. If I want to end up with a CD, I need to patch to a computer. With a CD-R drive, you can record in the field, and hand a copy of the raw tracks to the choir director, which is very cool. I believe the H4n/R16/R24 platform is the beginning of the end of the big debate between computer interfaces and standalones. There is no reason the machine can't do both. The two types of machines share a ton of components in common-preamps, mic inputs, A-D conversion, phantom power supplies, etc. All you need is to add a display screen and some options as to where the data will be stored. It may be the beginning of the end, but it is a technology that is in it's infancy. What it needs now is for the thing to be built at a higher price, with higher end components. First, I expect Fostex and Boss will come out with mid-priced versions, and then some startup will build a boutique version with Great River preamps and Lucid A-D convertors. Now I'm dreaming, but I wouldn't have a problem shelling out several thousand for the dual purpose recording netbook from Hell.-Richie

 

[arcadeko]

I usually find that with swiss army knife hardware it never excels at any one particular thing. The more features they pack in, the more mediocre the overall quality - like those printer/scanner/fax/copier/coffee machines - the coffee just taste like toner mixed with lukewarm water.

They start to sacrifice quality for quantity of features. But I have never used a Zoom product so it may be an excellent piece of hardware. From my experience with other tech I am usually disappointed. and if it breaks your out of luck for any recording. If I had to break down my home mixer to take it somewhere to record it would just be a pita - I would totally pick up a little multi-track portable of I wanted to do that. - but thats just my personal preference.

I'm sure it would be a great answer for many people. integrated CD-R would be handy for that like those boss machines.

 

[Richard Monroe]

Well I think that's just the point. Standalones and computer interfaces share so many components in common that you don't have to add much to either one to make it do what the other one does also. However, I appreciate your point of view. The H4 I referenced above made exactly the mistake that you describe above. It tried to do too much for too small a price, and ended up failing to perform in multiple areas, It's successor, the H4n, was an obvious response to end-user complaints about the H4. The H4n costs half again as much as an H4, or more, and doesn't do anything the H4 doesn't do- on paper. In the real world, the difference is that the H4n actually does it, and doesn't screw it up. The real deal, I think, is that a computer interface and a standalone recorder each do about 90% of what the other one does. The marriage of the two is an inevitability. Samsontech was just the first to actually build it. In time, I think, competitors will build machines that will do it-better.-Richie