Tascam FW-1082 vs. M-Audio Project Mix

  • Thread starter Thread starter originalblat
  • Start date Start date
O

originalblat

New member
I'm trying to set up a new studio and I'm looking at either the TASCAM FW-1082 or the M-Audio Project Mix I/O. I was set on the Tascam unit because of the price and some positive things I've read on this board, until I spoke to someone today and they didn't have good things to say about their pre-amps. There's a $600 difference between the two products. I can absorb the differenc in my budget if I go with the M-Audio, but it does hurt me a little bit to think I might have to skimp on something else in my setup to do this. Anyone have opinions on which way I should go?

For background, I'll be recording mostly acoustic guitar with vocals and electric bass. Warmth and very high fidelity will be important to me. I also want something that has a goodly amount of inputs, as I plan on recording jam sessions too.

I will probably have an iMac as the computer, if that makes a difference. I'm leaning towards Cubase on the software side.
 
Never used the M-Audio device, but I use the 1082 w/ SONAR Studio 5. I think the pres sound clean and transparent, wouldn't call them "warm" as I think they tried to keep them as uncolored as possible. I know "warm" is the current catch phrase and has a positive connotation when referring to pres, but to me that means colored with some kind of distortion or EQ curve (which can be very pleasant if done correctly). Not sure what you heard negative about them, but I would suggest trying them out and trusting your ears. To me they sound good.

It works wonderfully well with my setup as both an interface and control surface. I really like mixing using a control surface and the motorized faders are a nice touch.

As it was designed as a digital mixer, it has "no latency" monitoring which involves routing the inputs directly to the outputs rather than making a round trip to the PC. That being said, it has a fair deal of latency. What does this mean? This means if you want to monitor plug in effects on your input signal, you will experience something like 32ms of latency minimum. In this usage scenario, there are quite a few devices which perform better. However, I don't use the unit in this fashion so it's not an issue for me so I run the unit at maximum latency (around 2000ms) for guaranteed stable performance and low overhead.

Phantom power is on/off for all 4 pres. While a 57 won't be hurt running on phantom power, some mics might experience damage so you might take this into consideration if you don't have any additional pres for the 4 line inputs (or SPDIF) and want to run condensers along side dynamics or ribbons.

All in all, I think it's a great bargain for the money.
 
m-Audio may be out

Thanks for the information. The latency issue sounds like it's something to watch out for, although I do plan on recording everything dry, you never know when I might want to check out an effect while playing.

It's looking like the Tascam's the way for me to go. I've been doing a lot of research on it, and almost everything I read is very, very positive. Frankly, I can't seem to find much info on the m-Audio unit or a comparison between the two - one difference seems to be that the m-Audio unit support ProTools. Since, I'm planning on using Cubase anyway, I don't see that as an issue. m-Audio also has an LCD display on the unit - kind of helpful, but I'm not sure if I care that much about that.

I'm wondering if I'm missing something big that I'm going to regret later - I'd be interested if anyone has used the m-Audio unit or faced the same decision as I have in front of me.
 
you never know when I might want to check out an effect while playing.

Just to clarify, you can monitor effects on playback of prerecorded tracks without audible latency. The audible latency is only if you monitor effects on your input. Many plugs introduce their own latency so even with a very low latency device, you might have an issue monitoring effects on the input. The area this is most an issue is running amp sims as a plug within your DAW and trying to monitor while tracking. The device just doesn't work well in that application.

m-Audio also has an LCD display on the unit - kind of helpful, but I'm not sure if I care that much about that.

Tascam ships with a program called "soft lcd" which basically emulates a hardware mixer LCD along the bottom of your monitor. However, I don't even use that as if you absolutely get lost, you can hit the track selector button which has the visual effect of mouse clicking on a track instantly letting you know which track your fader is controling. You'll have to get used to the track select button anyway as the EQ/pan controls are shared and only funtion on the currently selected track.

One thing I forgot to mention previously is the ability to run a separate monitor mix versus input gain. What does this mean? You use the input gain knob to control the level into the 1082 and sent to the DAW, however if your running hot against the playback or in relation to other tracks you can switch to monitor mix mode and lower the monitoring level of the input. Basically functioning as 2 mixers (input and output) simultaneously. This may be standard in devices such as these, but it's a life saver and I won't buy a device in the future without this option.
 
It`s a pity Tascam discontinued their 24 fader interface!
Could find it cheap right now, but right now isn`t my time.
Matti
 
ittam said:
It`s a pity Tascam discontinued their 24 fader interface!
Could find it cheap right now, but right now isn`t my time.
Matti
Click to expand...

Do you mean the US-2400? It's not an interface but rather a controller...they're slightly different things...

As for the Tascam vs. M Audio, I love the look of the Project Mix...I've been reading up some on the PM and I think it might be my next step after the Delta 1010...Mostly because I want to move to Pro-Tools M Powered...But that's another story really...

The Project Mix is a more versatile unit, it has the 8 Adat ins and outs, more headphones, line outs, and Mic pres, plus it has that Screen to go along with the rotary encoders... The Tascam is older tech, and only has 60mm faders vs. the PM's 100mm...Big difference when it comes to mixing...

One thing I like about the Tascam is the way they've arranged the four rotary encoders for controlling EQ/Pan and Aux sends, I like the vertical arrangement over the PM's horizontal 8 encoders... It's intuitive on the Tascam and awkward on the PM, but that's my only complaint really.

If it were me, I'd go with the Project Mix,

Jacob
 
Length of faders

`Tascam is older tech, and only has 60mm faders vs. the PM's 100mm...Big difference when it comes to mixing...
Click to expand...

This is an interesting difference, ittam. I can certainly see how the greater sensitivity that extra length would give would be beneficial - especially with the kind of music I hope to be making.

I wonder if there's any way to affect the gradation of the sliders on the Tascam through software if that becomes an issue. I'm not all that familiar with Cubase and certainly not familiar with the Tascam soft LCD display that WBC mentions.

Thanks for your thoughts. I'm going to go check out some online manuals to see if I can get an answer.
 
jkokura said:
The Project Mix is a more versatile unit, it has the 8 Adat ins and outs, more headphones, line outs, and Mic pres, plus it has that Screen to go along with the rotary encoders... The Tascam is older tech, and only has 60mm faders vs. the PM's 100mm...Big difference when it comes to mixing...
Click to expand...

This is true, but at the extra expense, you could have the TASCAM 1884, the big brother to the 1082 which has very similiar specs to the Project Mix.

The benefit of the 1082 over the Project Mix is price/performance ratio.

I sound like I work for TASCAM!!!! Let me assure you I don't, I've just been using their products since my first 4-track cassette recorder and have never been let down.
 
Ah yes, but I've used M Audio for the past couple years and I've never been let down by them! The 1884 would make more of a comparison to the Project Mix, but if you're looking at the two and the Project Mix is overkill than go with the smaler unit...I like the Project Mix better, but that's because it has the numerous features I'm looking for.

Jacob
 
Thanks for all of the great information! I REALLY appreciate it. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top