SCSI v. DAT

  • Thread starter Thread starter Double Daddy
  • Start date Start date
D

Double Daddy

New member
Still considering purchase of a VF160. I now focus on the possiblities for output to computer for remix and CD burning. If there is a good and cheap solution I will not get VF160 with the built in CDR. I would like to have all 8 separate tracks through-put to my PC for final edit.

After reading previous posts it appears that the SPDIF only allows output of one or two channels at a time. That seems tedious and time consuming. Similarly, burning each track separately on the built in CDR would seem to take more time.

[By the way, it just occurred to me - is the built in CD burner a CDRW that can handle erasable disks?]

Anyway, the posts indicate that interface thru an ADAT capable sound card permits movement of all tracks at once from VF160 to PC. But, then I surfed for prices of such sound cards! Whoa!! At LEAST $200!!

Has anyone tried through-put form the SCSI port of the VF160 to an external SCSI port on a PC? It looks like a PCI card with external SCSI port can be had for about $25, plus the cost of a suitable cable.

If the SCSI works, I don't think I'd bother with getting the internal CDR.
 
Oops - there is already a thread about SCSI. Yet, there the focus is on going to a SCSI Zip drive. Is it possible to just directly interface the VF160 SCSI posrt to a PC with a SCSI port on a PCI card?
 
No. Both the Fostex and the PC are SCSI bus masters: two masters can't talk to each other. The SCSI bus protocol requires one single master and one or more slaves, which is why you always hear of having a ZIP or other drive in the middle- plugged into one, then unplugged and plugged into the other one.

By far the easiest solution is to buy the ADAT lightpipe soundcard. SCSI isn't going to provide you a zero-outlay solution. You are going to need to spend money, so you might as well spend the right money and get something that will serve you in the long run. Buy it right, or buy it twice... Hope that helps.
 
Thanks, Skippy. Do you have any recommendations re a reasonably priced ADAT-capable sound card?
 
I decided on the RME Hammerfall for my own rig- it's not the cheapest, but it has about the best reputation for reliable operation and good drivers.

There are several others that might fill the bill for you at a lower price point- the Sonorus StudI/O is one. But I've never used anything but the Hammerfall, so I'm not in a position to comment on them. I'd do a search on the Computer Recording and Soundcards forum with the terms "ADAT" and "inexpensive", and see what the results are. There has been a lot of talk about ADAT-compatible cards over the years, and a search ought to get you a lot to go on.

Anybody else have anything to help this gent out with?
 
Event EZ8 $150
Terratec EWS88D $199

Discontinued cards
Korg 1212 i/o
Adat Edit
Adat Edit 2.0
Lexicon Core

Others
Frontier Wave Center
Creamware
Sonorus
Digidesign Digi 001, 002
 
I do want to make one more attempt to put this time
consumption on the SPDIF transfer into context.

Points are:

- It's free, provided you have a soundcard with an RC digi input. You can save your $200 and buy something else with it.
- Yes, it transfers two tracks at a go in real time, hence twelve minutes for an 8 track 3 minute song. What's that as a percentage of the time you spend on a song?
- Once it's started it's automatic - you can listen to each pair through your PC monitors for the first time, or go outside and have a beer and a smoke, whatever.

I appreciate this will not be good enough for the sophisticated recording guys, but for the rest of us it's fine.

Just my 2p worth for the everyday home recordists following this debate, which now seems to be spread across about half this forum!:)
 
Good point. It just shows that even with no money to spend, you can usualy get tracks into your computer for editing. The original poster read the other post about scsi vS adat card. I champion the scsi route for transferring tracks over 16 at a time, all in sync, as fast as a normal hard drive, and you get the option of backing up VF format songs to scsi disks too. All for under a hundred dollars.

Jeff


Garry Sharp said:
I do want to make one more attempt to put this time
consumption on the SPDIF transfer into context.

Points are:

- It's free, provided you have a soundcard with an RC digi input. You can save your $200 and buy something else with it.
- Yes, it transfers two tracks at a go in real time, hence twelve minutes for an 8 track 3 minute song. What's that as a percentage of the time you spend on a song?
- Once it's started it's automatic - you can listen to each pair through your PC monitors for the first time, or go outside and have a beer and a smoke, whatever.

I appreciate this will not be good enough for the sophisticated recording guys, but for the rest of us it's fine.

Just my 2p worth for the everyday home recordists following this debate, which now seems to be spread across about half this forum!:)
 
What if your current soundcard doesn't have S/PDIF? I mean saving is clever but saving in the wrong place is one kind of stupidity also.

I wonder why you guys don't attack people how pay hundreds of dollars for Cubase SX when you can have n-Track for $50 and have most of the basic features of Cubase at a fraction of the cost. The saving is much bigger in this case.
 
PeteHalo said:
What if your current soundcard doesn't have S/PDIF? I mean saving is clever but saving in the wrong place is one kind of stupidity also.

I wonder why you guys don't attack people how pay hundreds of dollars for Cubase SX when you can have n-Track for $50 and have most of the basic features of Cubase at a fraction of the cost. The saving is much bigger in this case.


Yes, and it must have the right kind os s/pdif. Coaxial won't help.

As to comparing Ntrack to Cubase, it's a good analogy to the s/pdif vs adat, because one is just a better, exact, form of the other. It is not, however, a proper analogy between adat and scsi, because scsi clearly does certain things better, and certain things that adat cannot do. That's something Ntrack can't say about cubase.

Jeff
 
Good comparition indeed but you got it a bit wrong. In this case Adat is Cubase and scsi is nTrack. Scsi is only for exchanging files between two machines when Adat is a way of transferring data between them in realtime. A good analogy here is network (Adat) VS. floppy disc (scsi). There wouldn't be much conversation on this board if you had to send your post to others saved on floppy disc.
 
PeteHalo said:
Good comparition indeed but you got it a bit wrong. In this case Adat is Cubase and scsi is nTrack.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This should be interesting.




Scsi is only for exchanging files between two machines when Adat is a way of transferring data between them in realtime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Right. real-time is slower than scsi, not faster. Which means scsi is cubase, not ntrack. With scsi, I can do the transfer faster than you, probably far faster.




A good analogy here is network (Adat) VS. floppy disc (scsi). There wouldn't be much conversation on this board if you had to send your post to others saved on floppy disc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As usual, you seem to make comparisons without backing them up with real situations. You have it backwards. Scsi is faster, so it is the network, and adat is the floppy. And as usual, you again fail to mention that scsi also backs up fostex format song files, while adat can't. Repeat after me.

SCSI BACKS UP FOSTEX SONG FILES FOR LATER WORK, ADAT CAN'T. SCSI DOES SOMETHING THAT ADAT CANNOT!!! SCSI CAN TRANSFER 24 TRACKS OF AUDIO IN ONE SINGLE PASS, ALL IN SYNC, AND SCSI CAN ONLY DO 8 AND DOES EVEN THAT SLOWER THAN SCSI DOES 24 TRACKS, AND THE SCSI 24 TRACKS WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE IN SYNC, WHILE ADAT WOULD HAVE TO USE MIDI CABLE AND HARDWRAE SYNC, AND RECORD THREE TIMES OVER IN REALTIME TO DO WHAT SCSI CAN IN MERELY A QUARTER OF THE TIME OR LESS.

SCSI is Cubase, and adat is ntracks, but in this case, scsi is even cheaper while having numerous advantages over adat. I think you are angry that you went the adat route, and you are trying to justify what you did. Possibly, you didn't do your homework before you purchased, and now you are upset that you did what you did. Now, you are trying to justify it by, what was it, saying that adat lets you use your 16 tracks recorder as a mic preamp? great, but I doubt that 95 percent of the owners of a VF-16 or 160 use their VF's for live recording on the computer. Most want to simply transfer their 16 or 24 tracks over to their computer for mixing and burning, and storage of fostex format song files. (WHICH ADAT CAN"T DO!!!!!!!!!!!!).

have a good day.

Jeff
 
NO NEED TO SHOUT!!!!

Yes, you do have discovered the one and only thing that you can't do with adat and you've milked it to death already. Why is it so hard for you to understand the many useful things you CAN DO with Adat that you SIMPLY CANNOT ACHIEVE WITH SCSI. Now I'm shouting, forgive me.

I'm talking here about INTEGRATING the VF to the computer to get the MOST out of this combo which should interest most people here but you're whining "but you can't save fostex file format" or "it takes 5 minutes more to transfer a song over to computer using Adat" which both has no relevancy in this scenario.

If you would spend a total of 15 minutes per song for editing and mixing then those 5 minutes would have some meaning but if you spend hours or days as most people do mixing one song then the 5 minutes in the beginning doesn't mean anything.

If you do the mixing on computer which we can pretty much take for granted here then you have no real use for backing up songs in Fostex format once the tracks have been transferred to the computer. Why on earth would you even do that? I'd spend those precious moments for backing up the data in the format of the software I use for the editing.

Please, next time you post do come up with new and this time relevant things that you can do with scsi that you can't with adat.
Otherwise this is getting really boring.
 
PeteHalo said:
NO NEED TO SHOUT!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------

On the contrary, there is a need to shout when someone refuses to hear what you are saying. or ignores what you are saying because they have no argument against it.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you do have discovered the one and only thing that you can't do with adat and you've milked it to death already. Why is it so hard for you to understand the many useful things you CAN DO with Adat that you SIMPLY CANNOT ACHIEVE WITH SCSI. Now I'm shouting, forgive me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's just the point. Most people don't use the supposed "useful" things you are speaking of. I have no need in using my $800 dollar recorder as a mic preamp so that I can record on my computer, which I have never gotten even close to the same quality of recording out of, even with 24 bit/96k recording cards. The computer is a noisy machine, and I have to turn mine off while recording in the same room because of the noise.




-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm talking here about INTEGRATING the VF to the computer to get the MOST out of this combo which should interest most people here but you're whining "but you can't save fostex file format" or "it takes 5 minutes more to transfer a song over to computer using Adat" which both has no relevancy in this scenario.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sure it does, because speed and convenience matter. And by the way, if we have a 4 minute song, and 24 tracks, you have to make three seperate passes to keep things in sync. that's 12 minutes of twiddling your thumbs while the tracks slowly record to the computer. With adat, people need use midi cables, learn about dropped frames, and go through menus to set up the slave and master, and don't forget about setting up the offset and such. These things are UNNECESSARY!!

Using your 16 track recorder as a mic preamp for the computer is simply not something that 95 percent of the people using these machines need to do. The VF has 24 tracks that can be sent to the computer for mixing, why on earth would you worry about using it as a mic preamp for the computer?



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you would spend a total of 15 minutes per song for editing and mixing then those 5 minutes would have some meaning but if you spend hours or days as most people do mixing one song then the 5 minutes in the beginning doesn't mean anything.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's 12 minutes for 24 tracks of a 4 minute song, and you are assuming that the offset, dropped frames and menus need not even be fooled with. And using my $800 dollar recorder as a mic preamp is about the last thing in this world that I spent that money for. I need not worry about dropped frames, offset, buying midi cables, or having to switch midi cables from my drum machine to my VF, back and forth, setting up my software to sync, and then finding after I record that I had dropped frames, and that the syn didn't go well. Why put yourself through all that, when with scsi you can simply transfer 24 tracks at once, all in perfect sync, and load them up in Cooledit just as if you are loading wavs from any normal hard drive in your computer, fast and quick.

Yes, I would venture to say that 95 percent of the owners of a VF 16 track recorder record their music tracks on the VF, and simply want an easy way to move their recorded tracks over to the PC for editing, mixing, and burning. You also forget to mention portability. I can take my scsi drive with me on location, and if I need to move a track over for editing on someone else's computer, I can hook right into their printer port and load up a track as a wav on their computer, or even load all the tracks up and use their burner in their PC to make them a cd. this is especially helpful if someone has the vF-16 without the burner it it. This way, you still have a way to burn someone a cd while on location if they have a computer with a burner, which most people have in their computers these days. What are you going to do with your adat, pop your PCI card out and take it with you, and install it into someone else's computer, with drivers and all? PLEASE!!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you do the mixing on computer which we can pretty much take for granted here then you have no real use for backing up songs in Fostex format once the tracks have been transferred to the computer. Why on earth would you even do that?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very simple. Sometimes, days after mixing and burning, I may hear something in the song that I missed, or decide that the eq needs something different. Tell me, why do studios keep master tapes of the recording sessions after the album has already been mixed? I am surprised that you would even ask such a question, and this shows some desperation on your part. Also, have you never had a project that you had half-way done, but knew you weren't going to work on it for a while, maybe because the other musicians weren't going to be able to be back for a while? Maybe you start a song, and then loose your motivation to continue on it, and decide to wait and finish it later, with a new perspective? I may not want to leave this on my VF drive, especially if I have a 5 gig drive in the VF-16. Also, if I have 5 tracks recorded, I might want to move two or three over to the PC for editing, and than bring them back to the VF. I have no need for messing with dropped frames, offset, or master and slave menus, or waiting to move the tracks over in REALTIME. I can move them very fast, just like moving from one drive to another, quick and efficient, edit them in Cooledit, and bring them right back over, fast as moving wav files from one hard drive to another.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please, next time you post do come up with new and this time relevant things that you can do with scsi that you can't with adat.
Otherwise this is getting really boring.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TASK ACCOMPLISHED!!!


Jeff
 
Gentlemen: relax. You are both right. Every situation is different, and different folks will need different solutions.

My personal decision to go with ADAT was based on the nature of my equipment, and my expansion plans for my rig. My studio was destined to be ADAT-based, with external converters and simultaneous tracking to the Fostex and the DAW (for safety reasons). The SCSI solution is not applicable in that case. It is certainly _useful_, but it didn't serve *my* long-term needs. Your mileage will almost certainly vary.

If you see yourself as always working on the standalone unit for tracking, and you don't have any expansion plans, then getting a SCSI drive and sneakernetting it between machines is arguably the best (read: cheapest) solution. However, if your plans change and you decide to expand with outboard converters and other gear, the ADAT soundcard is still very likely to be useful to you: it opens up a tremendous number of expansion possibilities. If you bought the SCSI drive initially to save money, and then decided to expand, you'd end up buying the ADAT card (or something equivalent)_anyway_: thereby spending more money, instead of saving it.

Either approach is valid, either approach works. But do yourself a favor and think through your eventual expansion plans, and decide which hardware will still be serving you in 2-3 years. I speak from experience: too many times I've taken the cheap route at the outset, and in a year's time had to take the more expensive route- and still had the "cheaper" solution sitting on the shelf, holding up dust. Got a SCSI ZIP drive sitting right over there as mute testimony, in fact.

Buy it right, or buy it twice: and only you can determine what your future expansion plans (if any) may be...
 
skippy said:
Gentlemen: relax. You are both right. Every situation is different, and different folks will need different solutions.

I speak from experience: too many times I've taken the cheap route at the outset, and in a year's time had to take the more expensive route- and still had the "cheaper" solution sitting on the shelf, holding up dust. Got a SCSI ZIP drive sitting right over there as mute testimony, in fact.

Buy it right, or buy it twice: and only you can determine what your future expansion plans (if any) may be...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a couple points. You made a reasonable post, and I appreciate it, though I need to correct a couple things. You mention moving a drive from device to another, and then also having to move to adat and having a scsi zip sitting on the shelf. For starters, I purchased an internal scsi jaz drive for my computer, and an external jaz drive for the Fostex. So, i don't have to plug a scsi device first into one, and then into another. I simply take the disk out of the external drive, and pop it into the internal computer drive. That simple. You post implies two false things about the setup that I champion. that was one. the other, is that you used a zip drive, which is not near as fast as a jaz drive. the jaz drives, when hooked to a scsi card in the computer, or to the Fostex, are as fast as a normal computer hard drive. they turn at 5,400 PM, and have seek times as low as ten MS. That's as fast as many normal hard drives. So, had you went that route, and had an internal AND external drive, then I venture to say that they would not now be sitting on a shelf, not if you ever need to transfer 24 tracks to your computer, because your adat card that you have right now cannot touch that setup for that task. Your post attempted to make it look as if I were championing buying a 250 zip and moving the scsi drive from one device to another. Not at all. had you done what I am championing, your scsi devices would not be sitting collecting dust on a shelf.

I paid around 80-90 dollars TOTAL, for a 20 mB per second scsi card, an internal 1 gig jazz drive with cable, and an external 1 gig jaz drive for the fostex with cable, and three 1 gig jaz disks, and all shipping included. I dare say, these won't be sitting on a shelf collecting dust until I figure out a way to transfer 24 tracks all in sync at one time with great speed over to my computer, not to mention better mobility.

Just thought I would clear that up. It was nice of you to post a message to try and calm things down, but I felt you misrepresented my position (or hinted at it), by telling us about your zip drive, and having to move it from device to device. I dare say, I would probably rather have an adat card too than one zip 250 drive. that's not what I have at all.

Jeff
 
Let me tell you a little story, Jeff.

Once there was this US company that was the world biggest cellphone manufacturer at that time. I think the name was Engine.. Motor.. something like that. While the smaller competitors were developing digital phones this company was stubborn and kept making analog phones saying nobody will ever want or need a digital phone. Then along comes this little innovative company from this little country named Finland (what a coincidence) doing all the right moves and all of the sudden this little company called Nokia is not so little any more and is selling 100 million cellphones a year and has 40 per cent market share while that other company's market share has gone from 70 down to 15 per cent.

Sound a lot like what we have here, don't it?
 
PeteHalo said:
Let me tell you a little story, Jeff.

Once there was this US company that was the world biggest cellphone manufacturer at that time. I think the name was Engine.. Motor.. something like that. While the smaller competitors were developing digital phones this company was stubborn and kept making analog phones saying nobody will ever want or need a digital phone. Then along comes this little innovative company from this little country named Finland (what a coincidence) doing all the right moves and all of the sudden this little company called Nokia is not so little any more and is selling 100 million cellphones a year and has 40 per cent market share while that other company's market share has gone from 70 down to 15 per cent.

Sound a lot like what we have here, don't it?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't even know what you are talking about. The VF has 8 adat outputs. That's it's limit. Scsi is better for certain things, and on the VF, it will always remain that way, because the VF is limited when it comes to digital outputs, and it won't have anymore than it has now.

Jeff
 
How come I'm not surprised at all. Pearls before swine..

Good night, I'm off to bed.

PS: It's not neccessary to always quote everything other person have writen.
 
PeteHalo said:
How come I'm not surprised at all. Pearls before swine..


I was not really going to comment on this thread that has far exhausted it's contribution of critical knowledge to anyone...

But Pete, just what does that mean? If I assume that english is not your first language, would it be fair to say that something has been lost in the translation? Alternatively, you are making derogatory comments about what you perceive someones 'intelligence' level to be? Is that it?

Im not entirely certain which one it is, but if it is the inappropriate latter....hmmmm....you know, instead of throwing it back - i could within the next 5 minutes give you enough insight into the physiology, ethology and cognitive capabilites of porcine species that would force you to eat those words.......

Apologies if i interpreted incorrectly, but who do you think your comments are more reflective of, yourself or your intended target?
 
Back
Top