Recording interface vs. portable studio? What's the difference?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chammy
  • Start date Start date
I have , so far, an old Roland VS840ES and it needs to be serviced. I mean, it can record but has a few quirks now. I need something to bounce it onto the computer, that's where I started to look into buying a box for the computer.

So I can use the R16 as a interface box to bounce tracks onto a computer? In other words, i can also do the same with the R16 as I would the ProSonus Firebox?

I was also thinking of buying a small mixer for it, maybe the R16 will have the best of both worlds I assume. hmmm
 
The Zoom R16 really is an incredible little machine.
If I was starting out today, knowing what I do now, I wouldn't consider buying an interface that didn't double as a mixer, control surface or stand alone recorder and have at least 4 channels. Any one of those features.
The Zoom R16 has all of those.
That is a huge saving down the road.
Get yourself a pair of powered speakers and you also have a live PA.
Not a bad investment at all.
 
Jim Lad said:
The Zoom R16 really is an incredible little machine.
If I was starting out today, knowing what I do now, I wouldn't consider buying an interface that didn't double as a mixer, control surface or stand alone recorder and have at least 4 channels. Any one of those features.
The Zoom R16 has all of those.
That is a huge saving down the road.
Get yourself a pair of powered speakers and you also have a live PA.
Not a bad investment at all.
Click to expand...

hmmmm, I'm actually really thinking of buying one, but, how is the life span of this contraption? Sorry for all the questions :/
 
mac and fp10

I use a Macbook and a presonus fp10 in a 6 space rack. when i need to go portable i just take my Macbook and the rack (filled with a couple preamps and compressors) to the location. its quite an easy setup. just plug the rack into the wall and the firewire into the mac and you're recording in a matter of minutes.
 
How is the life span of this contraption?
Click to expand...
No way to know. It's only been out for close to a year.
At this point, I would be looking at reviews.
 
Chammy said:
hmmmm, I'm actually really thinking of buying one, but, how is the life span of this contraption? Sorry for all the questions :/
Click to expand...

Hard to say what the lifespan is...it's still pretty new to the market. From the short time I've had mine (4 months), it feels like it will hold up over the long haul as long as reasonable care is taken with it. It's entirely made of plastic and it's very lightweight. The pots and faders all have a nice, snug feel to them and the buttons are very stable...no wobbling around or flexing.
 
Now I'm stressed with decisions.... OK, so buying something like the FirePod or Firebox with a small Behringer mixer may not be the way to go? Well, can be but depends on my preference. Gosh, the R16 seems so brittle or fragile. I know every instrument is but it doesn't look as sturdy as the Boss 600, not that I am going by looks.
 
Oh, to give details on the type of laptop I have, its a Dell Inspiron with Win XP.

Ok, so now, if I went with the Firepod what are the advantages there? Like, what are the differences between Firepod and the Firebox? If i went with a simple interface like the FireStudio with a few inputs, later, can I just get a small mixer later? ugh
 
Last edited:
Forget mixers! A mixer will take multiple inputs and channel them down to fewer outputs to go into whatever recording device you are using. You want to record everything on its own channel so that you can adjust each one separately during the mixdown. Choose an interface based on your needs - do you need phantom power for condensor mics? How many tracks do you plan on recording at the same time?
 
mjbphotos said:
Forget mixers! A mixer will take multiple inputs and channel them down to fewer outputs to go into whatever recording device you are using. You want to record everything on its own channel so that you can adjust each one separately during the mixdown. Choose an interface based on your needs - do you need phantom power for condensor mics? How many tracks do you plan on recording at the same time?
Click to expand...
not true. do your homework. There are many Firewire and USB 2.0 mixers that output channel-for-channel to computer. Check out Alesis, Tascam, Phonic, Yamaha, Edirol & more
 
johnnymegabyte said:
not true. do your homework. There are many Firewire and USB 2.0 mixers that output channel-for-channel to computer. Check out Alesis, Tascam, Phonic, Yamaha, Edirol & more
Click to expand...

That's true but I want to remind anyone knew to this thread, I want to build a small studio, or semi portable one on a budget :/
 
Yo Chammy! Give up the idea that you are ever going to get the *right* answer. There will always be multiple options and multiple opinions. I run a Pro Tools rig based on the Digi002, but I also own a Zoom H4n, which is sort of like the R16's little brother. I think that essentially the day of the computer interface and the day of the standalone recorder are both coming to an end, because there is no blessed reason the machine can't do both.

Zoom is made by Samson, and both companies are known for building cheap gear. The H4n's predecessor, the H4, was a cheap piece of gear that tried to do too much at its price point. There were inherent design flaws and poor component and build quality. The H4n corrected those problems, and is a kickass little box. No one can tell you what the long term track record of the R16 will be, it's too new. Hopefully they learned from the mistakes of the H4/H4n experience. In any event, whether it's built by Zoom or Fostex, Tascam, Boss, Yamaha, or whoever, the next generation of interfaces will also be standalone recorders, and vice-versa.-Richie
 
The Zoom H4N is a handy little field recording device which although, a marvelous tool, in no way resembles the Zoom R16.
 
Jim Lad said:
The Zoom H4N is a handy little field recording device which although, a marvelous tool, in no way resembles the Zoom R16.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. They resemble each other in many, many ways. Consider these features:


- Digital recorder with 16-track playback and 8-track simultaneous recording utilizing Secure Digital (SD) memory (only 4 track simultaneous recording/4 track playback on H4n- For more tracks, you have to do it in the computer by overdubbing or bouncing tracks)

- 16/24-bit/44.1kHz linear PCM recording in WAV format (same as H4n-except H4n can also do 24bit/96kHz and MP3 in assorted resolutions)

- Built-in stereo condenser microphones (Same as H4n)

- Includes 1GB SD card and supports cards up to 32GB SDHC (same as H4n)

- Allows simultaneous recording on up to 8 tracks (Only 4 simultaneous tracks on H4n)

- Battery operation for remote recording (Same as H4n)

- USB power for audio interface and control surface operation (Same as H4n)

- 8 mic inputs / 2 outputs (8 x 2) (4 in/2 out on H4n in standalone, 4 in/ 4 out as interface/conroller)

- 8 combination XLR-1/4-inch inputs (only 2 combijacks on H4n)

- High-definition 24-bit/96kHz recording capability using digital audio software (Same as H4n)

- Built-in effects can be used as outboard effects as well (Same as H4n)

- Hi-Z input for direct connection of guitar or bass (Same as H4n)

- Includes preamp with phantom power on two channels (Same as H4n)

- Mackie control emulation via USB for popular DAW software including Cubase, Logic, Digital Performer and more (Not sure on this one, but you can certainly use H4n with any of those software systems, as well as Reaper)

- Over 100 built-in studio effects coming from advanced DSP (Less extensive in H4n, but the basics are all there)

- Amazing guitar amp and effects models (amazing? maybe not- but they are the same as H4n, although R16's FX is more extensive)

- Professional quality mastering effects including multi-band compressor, normalizer and more (compressor is more rudimentary on H4n)

- Operates as USB storage device for quick data transfer (Same as H4n)

- Connect two R16s via USB for synchronized operation and 16 tracks of simultaneous recording (As far as I know, you can't do this with 2 H4n's)

- Undo/Redo functions ( Not available on H4n)

- Comes with Steinberg Cubase LE 4 (Same as H4n)

- Supports Windows XP/Vista, Mac operating systems (Same as H4n)


I would call these two units *very* similar. They both share the same technological concept of combining a standalone SD card recorder that runs on batteries and has built in stereo mics with a USB powered interface. Both can employ onboard dynamic and ambient effects, or whatever effects are available in computer software. What's not similar? R16 just does more of the same thing.-Richie
 
Chammy said:
hmmmm, I'm actually really thinking of buying one, but, how is the life span of this contraption? Sorry for all the questions :/
Click to expand...
R-16
Just make sure you check out the specs before you buy it,...there are "some" limitations.
www.zoom.co.jp
I own a ZOOM 1266 w/ usb card and it sounds incredible,...also, I don't lose any recording "generations" when I transfer to my computer.
There are some answered questions on the site you may want to check out.
 
Richard Monroe said:
I think that essentially the day of the computer interface and the day of the standalone recorder are both coming to an end, because there is no blessed reason the machine can't do both.
Click to expand...

I sincerely hope you're wrong on that. I love my little standalone ! ;)
In this regard, I'm with the analog brigade - having a wide variety of choices is good. Why should everyone be squeezed down the same conveyor like sausages ?
 
grimtraveller said:
I sincerely hope you're wrong on that. I love my little standalone ! ;)
In this regard, I'm with the analog brigade - having a wide variety of choices is good. Why should everyone be squeezed down the same conveyor like sausages ?
Click to expand...


What difference does it really make? Because most standalones now have to have the capability to import and export data to computers, they already share 90%+ of their components in common. It doesn't add significantly to the size or cost of a standalone to give it interface capabilities. You don't want to use it as an interface? Then don't.-Richie
 
No they don't.
Most of them have the capability but all of them are quite capable of doing the complete job, start to finish.

You are actually trying to be helpful here. Right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top