Roland VS-2000CD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chinle Charlie
  • Start date Start date
C

Chinle Charlie

New member
Howdy,

I'm a newbie. I posted a thread in the newbie section asking for advice on building a home studio. Is anyone using a Roland VS-2000CD or the VS-1824CD - and would you be willing to give me a brief review? Is it possible to use this machine to produce a professional CD project from beginning to end? I'm especially looking for clean, warm tones for acoustic guitar and voice - I do contemporary folk music. I realize I need a good microphone as well.

Any help is appreciated,
Thanks,
Chuck Cheesman
www.chuckcheesman.net
 
Yo Charlie! I have good news and bad news, but for what it's worth, I have the answers. most of them anyway. First, I spent the last 2 years producing a commercial release that was tracked on a Roland VS1824CD. That's the good news- it's possible. Before I start with the bad news, let me say this- The VS2000 is the same machine, except most of the biggest pains in the ass of the 1824 have been addressed in the 2000, which makes it a much better machine. More faders, more XLR ins, and much simpler track export.
Now the bad news.- The preamps in the Roland basically suck, its A-D conversion is mediocre, and the EQ section isn't remotely capable of professional mastering. Note that I *tracked* this puppy on an 1824, I didn't mix or master the project myself. The Roland was assisted by a boatload of outboard gear, including Avalon AD2022, Joemeek twinQcs, Lucid AD9624, FMR Audio RNC, DBX386,TC Electronics M300, and POD Pro. The *only* way to bypass the Roland's pres is to use a kickass pre, convert the signal to S/PDIF or optical externally, and go into the Roland with a digital signal. In other words, I used the VS1824CD as a hard drive with an attached mixer, and bypassed its entire front end.
Mixing and mastering was done in Pro Tools, and getting the tracks from the 1824 to Pro Tools was a major pain. The good news? In two years of tracking, the Roland never blew out a button, dropped a track, failed to back up to CD, or failed to recover data from a backup CD. I never blew out the CDR drive, or had any real reliability problem with the machine, which is in and of itself, amazing.
The Roland only does 2 simultaneous digital ins, so I tracked the album one or two tracks at a time. The only exception is drums, where we sent the overheads in digitally, and mic'd the other drums with good outboard pres, generating no gain whatsoever from the Roland's pres. I can honestly say that none of the input levels on my Roland have been turned up from the minimum (line) in more than 2 years! Go figure- Good pres start at $500 per channel. The VS1824 is a $2000 hard disc recorder with editing, effects, a headphone section, LCD display, a mixer, A-D convertor, and a CDR drive with 8 pres. How good can those pres be? But- if you send it a digital signal, it will record very well. Good luck. "From start to finish"? -Not. -Richie

BTW- if you want to hear some of the results, most of the raw, dry, mono tracks are up on www.nowhereradio.com (do a search on Richie Monroe), and you can hear some 2 minute clips of the same stuff after mixing and mastering at www.cdfreedom.com. Again, search Richie Monroe. MP-3's are pretty weak, though. If you want to know what the Roland can do with a hell of a lot of support, buy my CD, "Reunion" (spam off).
 
Hi Richard,

Thanks for your reply and the extensive review. I guess I'm looking for the machine that gets the best sound without the need for a ton of peripherals - and hopefully one that allows me to avoid using my PC.
I need to get professional quality acoustic sounds with a minimum of effects. Based on what you're telling me the Roland VS-2000CD might be too much machine in some respects and not enough in other.

I've still got a lot of research to do.

Thanks again,
Chuck
 
Well, Chuck, I support research completely, but the key is this- Really good preamps cost through the nose, and whether you go with a standalone, computer based system, open reel, or whatever, none of them will have built in top notch preamps, none of them. The same goes for A-D convertors. If you want professional quality sound, use almost any good microphone, from an SM57 to a Neumann U47, plug it into a wicked preamp, and plug the preamp into a wicked A-D convertor (unless you're using that open reel). Then record it on anything you want, and mess with the signal as little as possible. All the FX, compression, EQ, and sonic maximizers in the world will not help if you do not do that first.
If that doesn't work, get a better room, a better instrument, a better musician, and a better song.-Richie
 
Thanks again - I like the idea of minimal effects. There is a steep learning curve here for me. But this is like anything else; with some hard work I can learn to do this. I just have to take my time because I don't intend on blowing a lot of money on unnecessary equipment. I'm basically an acoustic guy who might want to throw in an electric guitar every now and then. Fiddles, mandolin, banjo, and accordian are more likely for me, and all those instruments just require a natural sounding recording.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top