I am about to jump into digital recording. I really wanted to get the Omnistudio because I understand that it sounds great and computer based recording is supposed to be the way to go for flexibility, features, expandability and sound quality. The problem is that all the conflicts and problems I hear about computer based recording scare me to death. It makes me want to just deal with an all-in-one box because at least that way there are no conflicts an a kazillion setup problems. What concerns me with this is that I have heard others say that the 880 is just another computer and not that easy to operate. I simply want to get a quality of sound that I would be proud to let anyone hear(record labels, local radio station play, local club play), even though I know it won't have quite the dynamic sound of a major label release. Can you guys tellme if you believe the Roland boxes can honestly deliver a qaulity as good as some of the better quality soundcards and software setups(ie. omnistudio,aardvark, delta 1010)? I know some of the Roland bxes like the br-8 and 535 are supposed to be easier to use but do they sound as good as the 880, 1680 and up? Also, would the 880 or 1680 video manual make things a lot easier if I chose to get one of those? I know ther is always a learning curve to anything and I don't mind studying to get things right, but I just want to know if I get an all-in-one box that I won't be sacrificing much overall sound quality and regret it later. Give me some feedback ya'll!!
roland or computer setup? what's better?
- Thread starter buddyC
- Start date
It all depends on what you want and for both computer and workstation set ups there will be a learning curve. The important thing to remember is that its not always the recording medium (hard disk, tape, etc..) but what goes into the recording (good mics, compressoers, efx, and so on). Cause some poeple might have protools and and it sound like progarbage while some could use a 4track cassete and make their mix sound Amazing.
I personally use now the Roland VS-880EX and i have to say i am pleased with the results but thats after studying and refining craft. (hell Im still studying my craft)
thats just my 2 cents
I personally use now the Roland VS-880EX and i have to say i am pleased with the results but thats after studying and refining craft. (hell Im still studying my craft)
thats just my 2 cents
Do you find the 880ex as hard to get used to as some say? Did you use the video manual? Has the quality been such that you would feel confident releasing your work on cd for the world to hear? Also, What outboard gear such as comressors, pres, and effects boxes do you use? What do you think about the mastering kit on the 880ex, do you find it can add significant tone and overall dynamics to your recordings? Thanks for responding!
vulcanofga
New member
I have a Roland 1880 and it came with Logic-VS software.which I have upgraded to Logic Silver.My computer is weak but it runs the program well.I love the 1880 but it did take me a while to learn my way around.The sound quality is very good but I would factor in the cost of a good pre-amp, I went the the ART tube and it is a very good setup for my aplication (Blues & Rock) with a little midi using my JV-1010.
WARNING!
The effects cards are great but don't count on the "mastering room" compressors or the compressors on the inputs.They will snap and pop.I have found that if I set the threshhold to -1db to -4 db, it won't pop or snap but be warned it is a real problem.
Monty Neese,
WARNING!
The effects cards are great but don't count on the "mastering room" compressors or the compressors on the inputs.They will snap and pop.I have found that if I set the threshhold to -1db to -4 db, it won't pop or snap but be warned it is a real problem.
Monty Neese,
BBB
Member
Ditto Molekular.
I also have the VS-880 (Expanded). I was recording tracks within the first hour of opening the box four years ago. I still love it and people are constantly impressed with my mixes.
However, to get really deep into some of the cool stuff can take a bit of a learning curve. That being said, you can lay down quality tracks right away and get into editing, sync'ing, and effects tweaking later down the line.
Regarding the on-board compressors: I personally don't use them often (especially because I have a Finalizer Plus), but I have heard that they are decent if they are tweaked correctly.
Regarding PC vs. dedicated: I also have Cubase and Cakewalk. I prefer the VS.
Matt
I also have the VS-880 (Expanded). I was recording tracks within the first hour of opening the box four years ago. I still love it and people are constantly impressed with my mixes.
However, to get really deep into some of the cool stuff can take a bit of a learning curve. That being said, you can lay down quality tracks right away and get into editing, sync'ing, and effects tweaking later down the line.
Regarding the on-board compressors: I personally don't use them often (especially because I have a Finalizer Plus), but I have heard that they are decent if they are tweaked correctly.
Regarding PC vs. dedicated: I also have Cubase and Cakewalk. I prefer the VS.
Matt
Replies
Buddy C:
Yes I have to say the learning curve was a pain and sometimes it still is, hell I bought my 880EX in May and now I'm really using it. They say the main reason for the "CURVE" is because the material was translated from Japanese to English.
As far as outboard gear I just use an ART MPStudio Preamp, I use the compressors on the 880EX I'll use a ratio of 2:1 no more than 4:1, as for my music my ASR-10 has a compressor effect that I use and it does me justice. The mastering kit I havent used yet but if You get a good level into the 880EX the music should be dynamic.
Personally I'd rather get my music at a professional mastering facility, because right now my listening skills aren't mature enough to "Master" music other than making CD master to sent out to be mastered.
Hope it helps
Buddy C:
Yes I have to say the learning curve was a pain and sometimes it still is, hell I bought my 880EX in May and now I'm really using it. They say the main reason for the "CURVE" is because the material was translated from Japanese to English.
As far as outboard gear I just use an ART MPStudio Preamp, I use the compressors on the 880EX I'll use a ratio of 2:1 no more than 4:1, as for my music my ASR-10 has a compressor effect that I use and it does me justice. The mastering kit I havent used yet but if You get a good level into the 880EX the music should be dynamic.
Personally I'd rather get my music at a professional mastering facility, because right now my listening skills aren't mature enough to "Master" music other than making CD master to sent out to be mastered.
Hope it helps
Alchemist3k
New member
Hi, the VS workstations are all of a high quality. They are very easy to operate. If you get a training video it is even easier as you can see exactly what is going on quickly. They all have good "getting started" type manuals too and the FX boards(should you have them on your VS) are of a high standard. Also you get that reassurance of using external hardware. it may seem a minor point a lot of us like real hardware farders and pan controls etc!
If you go for a PC setup be prepared to get very confused by terminology often associated with mixers and sound cards e.g. do you know what SPDIF is? ADAT? a buss group? latency?
Downsides: if you are used to using a PC type sequencer it may not seem as point and click as a PC. Mic pres on the VSs are that wonderful but an external mic pre can be bought real cheap.
I learned how to record on my VS and it was great. It has helped me through the early stages and can be used right up to a very high level and the sound quality is excellent.
I am actually trying to sell my VS 1680EX right now if you're interested as I will be leaving the country shortly. email me if you like or have any questions about VS type stuff in general jordaneil@hotmail.com
If you go for a PC setup be prepared to get very confused by terminology often associated with mixers and sound cards e.g. do you know what SPDIF is? ADAT? a buss group? latency?
Downsides: if you are used to using a PC type sequencer it may not seem as point and click as a PC. Mic pres on the VSs are that wonderful but an external mic pre can be bought real cheap.
I learned how to record on my VS and it was great. It has helped me through the early stages and can be used right up to a very high level and the sound quality is excellent.
I am actually trying to sell my VS 1680EX right now if you're interested as I will be leaving the country shortly. email me if you like or have any questions about VS type stuff in general jordaneil@hotmail.com
I'd go with the Roland
I know people who have both kinds of setups, and the Roland machines are more stable, and can produce really good stuff--if your engineering/productions skills are up to snuff. I have the 880 EX, and have never had the problem with pops, etc., that a few people have mentioned about the 1880.
that having been said, both kinds of platforms involve a significant learning curve, and that is one reason internet resources like this and others exist. I just got Cubase to supplement my 8 tracks and the manual makes me cross-eyed and sleepy.
YMMV,
Mike.
I know people who have both kinds of setups, and the Roland machines are more stable, and can produce really good stuff--if your engineering/productions skills are up to snuff. I have the 880 EX, and have never had the problem with pops, etc., that a few people have mentioned about the 1880.
that having been said, both kinds of platforms involve a significant learning curve, and that is one reason internet resources like this and others exist. I just got Cubase to supplement my 8 tracks and the manual makes me cross-eyed and sleepy.
YMMV,
Mike.
Oh yeah
I would look into getting a used 1680 with both FX cards. These are going relatively cheaply on eBay, but I would do your homework first. I have heard a lot of stuff made with these machines (even the 840 can sound fantastic, but the zip disks are a pain in the ass memory-wise).
Whatever you decide, you will need a decent mic (or two) and mic pre-amp to get decent sounds. It all depends on what your goals are, and how much you can afford. I ain't what you call one of the major gear sluts, so I usually go with best bang for the buck stuff. I have a Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro mixer (has 4 very decent mic pres) and Rode NT-1 and NTK mics. As an external compressor I have a RNC. All of these pieces of gear are excellent quality for the money.
Mike.
I would look into getting a used 1680 with both FX cards. These are going relatively cheaply on eBay, but I would do your homework first. I have heard a lot of stuff made with these machines (even the 840 can sound fantastic, but the zip disks are a pain in the ass memory-wise).
Whatever you decide, you will need a decent mic (or two) and mic pre-amp to get decent sounds. It all depends on what your goals are, and how much you can afford. I ain't what you call one of the major gear sluts, so I usually go with best bang for the buck stuff. I have a Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro mixer (has 4 very decent mic pres) and Rode NT-1 and NTK mics. As an external compressor I have a RNC. All of these pieces of gear are excellent quality for the money.
Mike.
vulcanofga
New member
Mike,
Are you using the RNC as an insert on the Makie board or ar you using a patch bay?I just bought a RNC and all my gear is balanced including the 1880.The manual says not to connect to balanced equipment until you un balance it.I don't know how to unbalance my equipment.I use a balanced patch bay and I connected the RNC to the PB last night with TRS type 1/4 plugs and then out of the patchbay to the 1880 with TRS plugs.It is working and I don't hear any distortion.Do you, or anyone, know if this is going to be ok?
Thanks
Monty,
Are you using the RNC as an insert on the Makie board or ar you using a patch bay?I just bought a RNC and all my gear is balanced including the 1880.The manual says not to connect to balanced equipment until you un balance it.I don't know how to unbalance my equipment.I use a balanced patch bay and I connected the RNC to the PB last night with TRS type 1/4 plugs and then out of the patchbay to the 1880 with TRS plugs.It is working and I don't hear any distortion.Do you, or anyone, know if this is going to be ok?
Thanks
Monty,
Ummm...
I dunno?
I have the mic go into the mackie, and that signal goes out to the RNC, then into my 880-EX. I haven't bothered to go into the routing of the FX sends/returns on the 1202 because the tech stuff makes me cross-eyed and sleepy.
So, I'd have to say:
C) None of the above, though it works for me.
My final answer.
I dunno?
I have the mic go into the mackie, and that signal goes out to the RNC, then into my 880-EX. I haven't bothered to go into the routing of the FX sends/returns on the 1202 because the tech stuff makes me cross-eyed and sleepy.
So, I'd have to say:
C) None of the above, though it works for me.
My final answer.
badgas
New member
I'm not as experienced at most of these other guys, buddy.
I had the same feelings about conflicts as you do.
Still have some.
But I'm using Sonar on my computer, and VS840GX over there,
~ jerks my thumb to my exernal set up ~
I've been expermenting, getting to know Sonar and VS840GX, following the manuals and I've had no problems with either the Sonar or Roland.
I also use the Omni Studio. Setup was a breeze and no problems or conflicts on my machine.
My workstation set up is a Boss Dr Rhythm 770 into a Behringer MX602A then into my 840GX. The sound quality of my messing around is outstanding.
I recommend, before you download software or install hardware, to defrag all your drives and partiions. Read the setup and installation manual/help carefully. The more ya know the better things work.
Good luck.
I had the same feelings about conflicts as you do.
Still have some.
But I'm using Sonar on my computer, and VS840GX over there,
~ jerks my thumb to my exernal set up ~
I've been expermenting, getting to know Sonar and VS840GX, following the manuals and I've had no problems with either the Sonar or Roland.
I also use the Omni Studio. Setup was a breeze and no problems or conflicts on my machine.
My workstation set up is a Boss Dr Rhythm 770 into a Behringer MX602A then into my 840GX. The sound quality of my messing around is outstanding.
I recommend, before you download software or install hardware, to defrag all your drives and partiions. Read the setup and installation manual/help carefully. The more ya know the better things work.
Good luck.
Badgas,
Your setup is very much like mine. I describe down below....
BuddyC,
I think that if I was just getting into it, I'd do just the same as I did the first time. I made sure that I had a good clean solid working computer and buy the software and a decent Pro audio card. Of course, it took a few tries before I got a good solid Sonar/Computer combination. It's far more powerful, and thus far more demanding on the components in that computer. Simple read the Cakewalk newsgroups and see what others are using successfully! I describe my computer below.
Of course, the better choice for you depends on your style. The better choice betwwen the two systems could be the Roland unit first. It really depends on how you wish to use it and how much you wish to spend. If you need the freedom of mobility, then the Roland VS-series is the way to go. If you have a room to dedicate, on the other hand, a computer solution might be a better choice.
I may be a little prejudice, just because I've been Cakewalk since at least v2. That was so long ago...I can't remember if I had v1. However, I think that the software on the computer is easier to use. Just tonight, for my first time, I was at a friend's studio playing with Cubase. It's almost as easy as Sonar and Pro Audio 9.03. Although I prefer Sonar, Cubase worked very similarly and sounded great.
I'm using an Asus motherboard with the VIA chipset, a PIII-700 and 384mb ram....2 hard drives....one for Programs and files, the other for audio only. The 2nd drive (audio) should have at least a 7200 RPM rotation speed. I'm using the Dakota card, but it's digital I/O only. If you don't have a Digital Mixer at this point, and aren't prepared to buy one, you'll want a card with Analog ins and outs on it. For that, after much research, I believe the best choices are Echo's Gina 24 and Layla 24. Figure on around $399 for the Gina and $799 for the Layla.
I bought a used VS-840 off of eBay and replaced it's Zip 100 drive with a 810mb 2.5" laptop drive...plus upgraded it's software to a VS-840ex. I use it wherever...then bring it back into Sonar through the digital connection (S/PDIF).
Look at it this way: If you don't like recording on the PC later, you can always sell the Pro Audio card and software, because so many people seem to be getting into them now...and you'll still have a nice computer.
Well, anyway...the main reason I was interested in getting a Roland unit was portability.
Tom Kemp
Your setup is very much like mine. I describe down below....
BuddyC,
I think that if I was just getting into it, I'd do just the same as I did the first time. I made sure that I had a good clean solid working computer and buy the software and a decent Pro audio card. Of course, it took a few tries before I got a good solid Sonar/Computer combination. It's far more powerful, and thus far more demanding on the components in that computer. Simple read the Cakewalk newsgroups and see what others are using successfully! I describe my computer below.
Of course, the better choice for you depends on your style. The better choice betwwen the two systems could be the Roland unit first. It really depends on how you wish to use it and how much you wish to spend. If you need the freedom of mobility, then the Roland VS-series is the way to go. If you have a room to dedicate, on the other hand, a computer solution might be a better choice.
I may be a little prejudice, just because I've been Cakewalk since at least v2. That was so long ago...I can't remember if I had v1. However, I think that the software on the computer is easier to use. Just tonight, for my first time, I was at a friend's studio playing with Cubase. It's almost as easy as Sonar and Pro Audio 9.03. Although I prefer Sonar, Cubase worked very similarly and sounded great.
I'm using an Asus motherboard with the VIA chipset, a PIII-700 and 384mb ram....2 hard drives....one for Programs and files, the other for audio only. The 2nd drive (audio) should have at least a 7200 RPM rotation speed. I'm using the Dakota card, but it's digital I/O only. If you don't have a Digital Mixer at this point, and aren't prepared to buy one, you'll want a card with Analog ins and outs on it. For that, after much research, I believe the best choices are Echo's Gina 24 and Layla 24. Figure on around $399 for the Gina and $799 for the Layla.
I bought a used VS-840 off of eBay and replaced it's Zip 100 drive with a 810mb 2.5" laptop drive...plus upgraded it's software to a VS-840ex. I use it wherever...then bring it back into Sonar through the digital connection (S/PDIF).
Look at it this way: If you don't like recording on the PC later, you can always sell the Pro Audio card and software, because so many people seem to be getting into them now...and you'll still have a nice computer.
Well, anyway...the main reason I was interested in getting a Roland unit was portability.
Tom Kemp
Hello!
I bought an used VS1680 with 2 effects cards and
a CD-burner one year ago. Before that I had a
VS840EX (I still have it - syncing it with the 1680
gives me 24 channels)...
The first thing I did when I got the 1680 was to update
it with the latest system software (that is available for
free on Roland's website). And I have recently updated it
with a ultra silent 15GB fujitsu drive. I have used this
machine heavily for one year now. Almost every day. And it
has not even ONCE crached or hanged. It's so increadibly
stable! Who with a computer based system can honestly say
the same?
Your comment on that BR-8 should be easier to use than
a 1680... Well, I've never seen a BR-8, but what I've
heard, it's just a VS-840 with a Boss lable on it. Not
exactly so, but about... And I think the VS1680 is
much more simple to use than the VS840EX. Almost everything
is more easy to use (when you have learned it). The
840 is a bit akward to learn and use. And the ZIP disks
are expensive. You don't think you will buy that many,
but I have 19 Zip250-disks. That's about $380. You
can get 3 15GB harddisks for that
About the quality. It's just great. The VS1680 is
a bit better with it's 24bit recording mode and 48kHz.
But it's hard to tell them apart. It's even hard
to tell 16 bits and 24 bits apart. Both the VS1680
and VS840EX has 20bit converters. Newer machines
like the VS1880 has 24bit converters, but I don't
honestly think that anyone can tell the difference
in a blind test. Roland's converters are known
for it's quality. Don't be blinded by budget
computer soundcards specs. It's not sure that a 24bit
card will sound better than the best 16bit cards...
Btw, I bought the VS1680 from an known Swedish
artist who recorded a CD (that he published) on my
machine. I hope that answers your quality question
Kind Regards,
Anders Persson
http://mp3.com/boray
I bought an used VS1680 with 2 effects cards and
a CD-burner one year ago. Before that I had a
VS840EX (I still have it - syncing it with the 1680
gives me 24 channels)...
The first thing I did when I got the 1680 was to update
it with the latest system software (that is available for
free on Roland's website). And I have recently updated it
with a ultra silent 15GB fujitsu drive. I have used this
machine heavily for one year now. Almost every day. And it
has not even ONCE crached or hanged. It's so increadibly
stable! Who with a computer based system can honestly say
the same?
Your comment on that BR-8 should be easier to use than
a 1680... Well, I've never seen a BR-8, but what I've
heard, it's just a VS-840 with a Boss lable on it. Not
exactly so, but about... And I think the VS1680 is
much more simple to use than the VS840EX. Almost everything
is more easy to use (when you have learned it). The
840 is a bit akward to learn and use. And the ZIP disks
are expensive. You don't think you will buy that many,
but I have 19 Zip250-disks. That's about $380. You
can get 3 15GB harddisks for that
About the quality. It's just great. The VS1680 is
a bit better with it's 24bit recording mode and 48kHz.
But it's hard to tell them apart. It's even hard
to tell 16 bits and 24 bits apart. Both the VS1680
and VS840EX has 20bit converters. Newer machines
like the VS1880 has 24bit converters, but I don't
honestly think that anyone can tell the difference
in a blind test. Roland's converters are known
for it's quality. Don't be blinded by budget
computer soundcards specs. It's not sure that a 24bit
card will sound better than the best 16bit cards...
Btw, I bought the VS1680 from an known Swedish
artist who recorded a CD (that he published) on my
machine. I hope that answers your quality question
Kind Regards,
Anders Persson
http://mp3.com/boray
Hiya,
I have used both PC based and Roland VS based recording methods. My current setup consists of 3x VSR-880 and an external Tascam M-2524 24track mixer. (Which has a 'flip' function... w00t!!)
Previously I used Protools or Samplitude on my computer with an AudioWerk 8 I/O card. I must say that the main advantage of the VS recorders over the PC based recording is the reliability...
I mean.. no more funny error messages... no more crashes.
However, I must admit that editing is a breeze with DAW's. Nothing can compare to that. But since I'm mostly recording singer/sonwriters, metal, jazz,rock bands I don't miss the extensive editing functions of computers.
Well... I guess it all has pro's and con's ... Basically it all comes down to the way you want to use it. (Or musical taste)
Just my 2 cents...
Cya,
Stefan
I have used both PC based and Roland VS based recording methods. My current setup consists of 3x VSR-880 and an external Tascam M-2524 24track mixer. (Which has a 'flip' function... w00t!!)
Previously I used Protools or Samplitude on my computer with an AudioWerk 8 I/O card. I must say that the main advantage of the VS recorders over the PC based recording is the reliability...
I mean.. no more funny error messages... no more crashes.
However, I must admit that editing is a breeze with DAW's. Nothing can compare to that. But since I'm mostly recording singer/sonwriters, metal, jazz,rock bands I don't miss the extensive editing functions of computers.
Well... I guess it all has pro's and con's ... Basically it all comes down to the way you want to use it. (Or musical taste
)Just my 2 cents...
Cya,
Stefan