What is Korg's rep with DAWs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MK-Ultra
  • Start date Start date
M

MK-Ultra

New member
I'm looking at one of these, and I am thinking that it seems too good to be true.

http://www.thomann.de/index.html?partner_id=97926&page=thoiw2_artikel-180671.html

I am just wondering how they can price something like this so cheaply, when something like the Roland 2480 is 3 times the price, without the FX boards. I'd think that the FX would be the weak link? I have an 880 EX, and have found the FX to be quite decent, notwithstanding most of the amp emus.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! I was thinking of going for a VS2400CD, but this has my attention.

Thanks,

MK
 
I don't want to be telling tales out of school, but a I've seen a few people complain lately about the hard drives. I've never owned one - I have a Yamaha AW16g that sounds better than I ever need it to, and the new AW1600 takes care of my list of gripes and needed work-arounds without compromising the basic ease of use. I strongly recommend you look at the AW1600, but can only repeat rumors about the Korg.
 
I had an older model (D1600) and I'd say the weakest link was the builtin mic preamps.
 
Thanks for the replies!

Thing is, I want greater depth in the mixer, and I believe the Yamaha mixer is only 24 bit? I have found that the sound on my 880 EX degrades, somewhat, the more processing I am doing, x number of tracks I am using (since it is an 8 track, there aren't tons). I attribute this, rightly or wrongly, to the fact that the 880's mixer is 24 bit. I would think that there would be some loss of fidelity running 16+ tracks through a 24 bit mixer? Of course, I could be completely wrong about this.

I may go for the new AW2400 that is coming out. I'll probably wait and see what the response is to the D3200 before I leap at it. Hopefully, it won't have the problems I've seen mentioned regarding the Tascam 2488.

Again, thanks for the feedback!

MK
 
I had a D32XD and the mic pres aren't very good. And yes, mine is in the shop for hdd creating some sort of noise. Other than the few complaints, I haven't heard much bad about them and their built in effects are very good.

Unless you have the monitoring/home theater system from hell, recording beyond 24 bits isn't going to make much difference, especially if you don't have the mics and the pres and converters to back it up.
 
Hi,

It isn't that I want to record beyond 24 bits. However, I think mixing 24 bit tracks within a 24 bit mixer is a bit taxing on the mixer, and some bits of information get rounded out of the calculations. I think the D3200 mixer is 64 bit. See, when I bought my VS-880EX 7 years ago, I asked around at the time whether one bounce would affect the sound. Since it is an 8 track, I figured I had to do a fair share of submixing (which I do) and was concerned that all of the bouncing would affect the sound. I was told by just about everybody I talked to that 1 bounce couldn't really be heard. I heard it, though. And since I had to mix down to a master pair for audio burning, I had to do at least one bounce. I rectified that (and freed up two tracks) by buying a standalone burner which yielded better fidelity, although I can still hear some things getting a bit thin when all 8 tracks are playing back.

Anyways, this will probably be my last DAW for a while, so I really want to make the right choice.
 
Keep in mind that alot of the older SIABs used compressed audio and that will be a little more taxing, and is going to create more rounding errors, especially with lossy compression.

On it being taxing on the mixer, I doubt it. I'm sure a lot of the summing is done on a different dsp than for all the effects and stuff. If anything 64-bit processing is more taxing on a system, but the record quality on the D3200 is at 24 bits. Other processing may be done at 64 though. Keep in mind too that if you're using the D3200 at 24-bits, you're track count is getting cut down to 16 simultaneous playback and 12 simultaneous record. I figure you probably read about that though.

If you sample down to 16 bits you're still going to have that last bit rounded either up or down. It doesn't matter what your using. Even if you do an DA at 24bits with perfect converders, then into the burner at 16bit (again with perfect converters), those lower 8 bits are still getting averaged into the signal somewhere.

How are things getting a bit thin when all 8 tracks are going? (I take it that it isn't just a mix issue.)
 
I guess by 'thin' I mean they start to lose resolution (I guess that is a circular statement to support my point). All I can say is they start to sound a bit tinny, and while those tracks were nice and clear and full on their own, mixed in with other stuff, they just lose some 'oomph.'

That's about as objective as I can put it.... ;)

No, it isn't a mixing issue. I've minimized frequency competition, and the pans were set up in various ways with no significant improvement. Could very well have been RDAC, but Roland always asserted that their data compression scheme was 'lossless.' I never believed that, though, especially after hearing the attenuation in presence after one bounce. After two, it was plainly obvious.

Another thing that I am concerned about, working with the 24 bit information, is that there doesn't seem to be a dither algorithm included in the 3200, whereas my humble 880 EX has Mastering Toolkit patches that include dithering.

Also, I am unclear as to what happens with a data backup on the 3200, but my impression is that not all of the song info is stored (like FX settings, etc.).

In any case, I have narrowed things down to this unit (although I'll wait and see if there is a '2488' effect), or the VS2400CD (although, for my own reasons, I'd like to ditch Roland); and either the Yamaha AW1600 or 2400. The AW1600 will only give me 8 tracks 24 bit, but the 2400 will only give me 4 more, and it would cost me about 12oo Euro more than the AW1600. If I do choose the Korg, I am sure that 16 tracks will be enough for most of my applications, given that I've scraped by with an 8 track all these years.

OTOH, I can remember saying that my Mac LCII surpassed my needs with its 80 Meg HD, 4 megs of RAM, and the 16mhz processor......

Cheers!

MK
 
There are a couple of things that could be going on here. One is it could be a summing issue. The other is you're not doing enough to eliminate frequency competition. I'm suspecting both are at play here, mostly because of the age of the box and because you are describing the instruments as clear and full on their own. That will always give you problems. It seems like you've been around long enough to already know that though.

But just in case, whenever I listen to any well produced album, I'm amazed at how much individual instruments don't share space. I mean, really, nothing in at least the basic mix shares space. Maybe a couple of guitars playing basically the same part, but other than that, there is no overlap. Well, it depends on the music really, but except for some of the nu-metal/heavy rock on the radio, that's the common denominator. It's the source really. Everything has it's own space with either no overlap, or at most, just a smidge that is barely audible, and there would be very little need for eq at mix time. That's how everything keeps the oomph while mixed. The only time there is really any overlap is to sort of glue a couple of parts together, like bass to guitar, or bass to kick. Any overlap is going to take away from the clarity of an instrument.

But in all fairness to you I'm sure the summing isn't very good either, and newer ones may be better.

The 3200 does come with a cd burner and according the their lit, you can burn "finished audio cds".

It looks like the data backup works like it did on my D32XD which is a bit of a pain. Big pain really if you have alot to back up. Basically there is a separate partition on the hard drive that you copy the song data to and then from there you download it onto your computer.

In case you haven't found it yet,
The full literature is here.

and
The manual can be found here

I really can't comment a whole lot more on the D3200 because I've never really used it.
 
Well,

Thanks for the links. I still don't get the data backup scheme. On the VS it's as simple as loading a CD-R(W), answering a few prompts, and Bob's yer uncle.

Sheeit, I really don't want to spend 2700 Euro for the VS.

Thanks!

MK
 
Basically, the partition is like a second hard drive that can be read by the computer that I think Korg usually calls the "PC drive". You back up the song on to the "PC drive" inside the Korg. Then hook the Korg up to the computer and you copy the backup to your computer. It's a little wierd, but once you do it once you're fine.

Honestly if you backup pretty consistently, it's not that bad. A song or two here and there isn't really a big deal. I had to backup about 30 Gigs off my system and it took me all day. There's probably going to be too much data to backup a 24-bit 16 track (plus virtuals and masters) song onto a single CD with any system.
 
Hope it is Mac OS9.1 friendly. Thing is, the CD-RW in this here iMac is a bit wonky. It doesn't spit out the CD-Rs very easily anymore, and I suspect that it will stop doing so completely within a year.

Ah well. We shall see. The 3200 isn't available here until the 20th, and then I'll probably wait and see, and lurk at the Korg site for a while.

Thanks, Kryptic!

MK
 
Decided to be impulsive and pre-order the 3200. Delivery is supposedly set for the 20th, and I'll have a month to return it if I don't like it. So, we shall see what we shall see. If this isn't acceptable, I'll have to spend another 1,100 Euro for the Roland.

Will post a review when feasible.

Again, thanks for your input!

PS, I had a good hard look at the Yamaha AW1600, but decided I didn't like the linked tracks and the pretty well non-existent automation. I mean, even my 7 year old 880 EX had pretty good automation, and the 1680 could uncouple its paired tracks. There's no excuse for these shortcomings in a DAW in this day and age, imo.
 
MK-Ultra said:
Hope it is Mac OS9.1 friendly. Thing is, the CD-RW in this here iMac is a bit wonky. It doesn't spit out the CD-Rs very easily anymore, and I suspect that it will stop doing so completely within a year.
Click to expand...

Slot loader? If so, it might just be misaligned with the case. If you can get into the thing far enough (which is a real pain in the backside, if memory serves, so I don't recommend trying it unless you know what you're doing), you might be able to fix that without a lot of effort (getting to the drive notwithstanding).

Alternately, firewire cases and optical drive mechanisms aren't expensive. Just make sure it's a model of optical drive that Apple shipped with Mac OS 9 hardware and you should be okay, AFAIK.
 
MK-ULTRA,

You might want to consider the Roland VS machines. With a VS8F3 card the effects are processed at 56 bit.
 
dgatwood said:
Slot loader? If so, it might just be misaligned with the case. If you can get into the thing far enough (which is a real pain in the backside, if memory serves, so I don't recommend trying it unless you know what you're doing), you might be able to fix that without a lot of effort (getting to the drive notwithstanding).

Alternately, firewire cases and optical drive mechanisms aren't expensive. Just make sure it's a model of optical drive that Apple shipped with Mac OS 9 hardware and you should be okay, AFAIK.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the suggestion, but I think I'd end up making things worse. I'll look into external CD-RWs, I suppose.

PHILANDDON,

The 2480 is 4400 Euros, which is way out of my league. The 2400 is an option, but one I'll probably have to save up for. Also, it has an original 24 bit FX card in it, and what happens when you put in the v3. card with the 24 bit internal FX?

As I said, I'll give the Korg a try. With the Quickstart instructions that these things usually come with, and help from the people over at the Korg site, I'll have a pretty good indication within a month regarding what this thing will do and not do.

Again, many thanks for taking the time to help out!

MK
 
wow, you ordered it already!? Sounds like the (old) me.

I have the D1600 MkII. It's nice, but not perfect. The FX aren't so hot, esp reverb, but delay is ok. the pres are ok, but touchy and high gain is loaded at the top range and hard to adjust, but I don't need to be up there much, I use external pres a lot anyway.

very easy to use and figure interface tho. touch screen is handy, nice compact size, included burner, nicer feeling faders than many, and at least pan pots over them.

also a bummer is the arrangement of the fx, there are only a few, limited ways to apply them without having to bounce with them. You can't have any effect you want on every channel. You have to choose 1 on 8, or 4 stereo on 4, etc. then there are insert fx, master fx, and a final fx. too much structure.

Luckily, I'm doing acoustic solo stuff with few tracks and minmal production so I rarely go over 14 tracks, but I really use the heck out of the virtual tracks, something I never knew I needed until I had them and they really work great.

I read a little on the d3200 and still only 8 virtuals, 16 would be nicer, but ok i guess.

The thing I wonder about the d3200 is how much difference is it than the 1600, is it a totally new design or is it based on the 1600 in some ways.

also, if I want 24bit, it's an 8 track! so for that alone, $500 more is probably worth it. I hope it has better pres, better fx algorithms, and at least *** one stereo send if not 2. D1600 only has one MONO!! so that's about useless.

I could go on, but i'll save it for later, thinking about posting my impressions on my site at some point...,

good luck let us know how it is.
 
I appreciate your input!

I have a couple of decent mics (AKG B414 ULS and an NTK) that I put through a Mackie 1202 VLZ, and then a RNC. I tend to be conservative in my use of FX, so if I can tweak a reverb into something half-way decent, I'll be happy.

I was told, over at the Korg forum, that I could use the 2 'Master FX' as sends over all of the tracks during mixdown. As for the inserts, I am really conservative with my use of chorus and other modulation FX, and tend to print those FX to the tracks as I record, because I know what sound I am after (well, often after a bunch of experimentation). Internal compression....well, we'll see. I tend to go lightly on that, as well. What I think I will likely need, if I am going to keep this unit, is a proggy that masters and dithers a 24 bit song within my iMac.

We shall see, what we shall see. If I can't get a better sound out of this than I can with my old 16 bit RDACed 880 EX, then I'll have to consider the VS2400CD.

Cheers!

MK
 
PHILANDDON said:
MK-ULTRA,

You might want to consider the Roland VS machines. With a VS8F3 card the effects are processed at 56 bit.
Click to expand...


Well, after further consideration, I canceled my order for the 3200, and ordered a VS2000CD. I wasn't really aware of this model, thought it was merely an extension of the 1680/1880 architecture, but it has the same processor as the 2480 and 2400. Just fewer tracks, no 96k sampling, and no flying faders. Those are the major differences, I guess. The optional FX cards, and LCD screen (shouldn't have to buy a friggin' adaptor!!!) will come down the road. At 2000 Euros, this will stretch our budget to the breaking point.
 
You did the right thing. I have a VS-2000. It's great. It's pre loaded with effects that are definitely superior to Korg's. When and if you have the money definitely get the VS8F3 effects card and AT LEAST the TC Electronics Reverb. The people at Roland all seem to recommend the T-Racks plug-in for mastering.

Warning: The VS-2000 is intimidating at first, but you'll get the hang of it in a month or so. Call Roland with any "how do I..." questions. (323) 890-3741. Also call Roland for the Turbostart DVD. There is also a DVD that show's off what some of the plug-ins can do. The DVD's are free or almost free. I wound up paying $20 for mine but I'm a sucker. The preamps sound fine unless you have the gain completely turned up, in which case they sound a little noisy and you may want to consider using your mackie. (I aslo have a 1202 VLZ and I think the preamp on the Mackie are a little warmer and maybe a tiny bit cleaner; but you know that's more cabling and more hastle and may not be worth it inthe end). Incidentally, I have the AKG 414 XLS and love it. It's super clean and honest. I also have the AKG 414 XLII and I don't like it as much; it's little too brite for me. What do you think of your 414?

One other thing about the Roland. Some people say the A/D converters aren't that good on the Rolands. I don't know. To me it sounds fine...i.e. not as good as tape but like clean digital. (So long as you've tracked correctly; i.e. hot signal with no clipping). I've never tracked with high end converters. But one day I may try tracking through an outboard A/D converter into the s/pdif in to see how it sounds.


Good luck. Also check out VS planet for some tips from fellow VS-2000 users.

--Neil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top