Digital 4 Track Recorders? 111
leftist writes "I'm looking for an entry level digital 4 or 8 track digital recorder to experiment with in the $500 range. Any product recommendations or warnings out there in the geek crowd? Something that uses mp2/mp3 natively a plus!" Krow: What, you wanted content with your story?
Problem (Score:1)
Cool...so now... (Score:1)
Re:Cool...so now... (Score:1)
Sure... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sure... ME TOO! (Score:1)
In soviet russia nothing nothing's you???
If they're offering, I'll take 2!
qualified (Score:2)
Did you search google? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Did you search google? (Score:1)
Re:Did you search google? (Score:1, Insightful)
If, by "better", you mean "better than Windows sound recorder", I agree. However, if you mean "better than Pro Tools, Cubase or even Cooledit", then you are delusional or high.
Whoo hoo! (Score:1)
AKA (Score:2)
4'33"? (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm... (Score:1)
Re:4'33"? (Score:1)
Re:4'33"? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:4'33"? (Score:1)
Re:4'33"? (Score:1)
3D holographic allusions not suppported. Contact the administrator, or try again later.
--
639 years (Score:1)
yes, I know I'm off topic.. but, I actually AM in the market for a digital 4 tracker, so leave me alone!
Nihilism? (Score:5, Funny)
You even cop crap for posting about every release of Mozilla/Phoenix/other OS darling
But did you really have to revert to denying the existence of the posted article by posting the textual equivalent of John Cage's patented 4:33?
(Is the title - pertaining to music creation - a reference to the aforementioned composition?)
Are you posing the ultimate philosophical yet slashdotical question:
"If a post has no text, does it get read?"
Cliff, I give you 11 out of 10 and salute your originality.
But don't let CowboyNeal repost it!
Re:Nihilism? (Score:3, Funny)
If a post has no text, will it still be redundant and misspelled?
If a post has no text, can it still be filled with factual errors and misinterpretations?
If a post has no text, can you still flame it? (Yes, you can)
If a post has no text, will moderators still mod everything down as off-topic?
If a post has no text, will hordes of Slashdotters still jump to random conclusions without checking the facts?
If a post has no text, is it ok for fanboys to post "*n1x r00lz" messages?
If a post has no text, what happens to the Slashdot effect?
You have entered the realm of the Slashdot singularity. Time and space, as you know it, are no longer relevant.
Oh come on (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, it turns out, Bruce Willis was dead through the entire movie. He only realized it when he saw that his wife dropped the ring; but there were numerous clues dropped, like his choice of attire through the entire thing, as well as some foreshadowing with the "I see dead people."
Question answered.
Re:Oh come on (Score:2)
Or the fact that every scene he's in without being alone, the temprature makes people cold and/or uncomfortable.
Plus, he probably could have used a digital 4 track recorder to enhance the tapes he was listening to in the basement...
42 (Score:1)
I love it! (Score:2, Funny)
It figures... (Score:2)
So I'll post my own question, guessing what the post was supposed to be: I'm in the market for a digital multitrack, but since I'll be recording my wife's voice, a guitar and keyboard, I shouldn't need more than four tracks. I've seen lots of expensive digital 8-track and 16-track recorders, but a simple, high-quality digital equivalent of the old casette four-tracks (we own one of the casette types) would be really nice and would save some money. So what do people recommend?
Re:It figures... (Score:1)
Re:It figures... (Score:4, Informative)
(sorry, had to be said)
http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM02/Content
http://www.crmav.com/recording/81/pxr4_4_track_
Sony Minidisc? (Score:1)
I once saw one that used Sony Minidiscs and supported only four tracks. It looked like this [harmony-central.com] or this [sospubs.co.uk].
Re:It figures... (Score:3, Informative)
Something off this page [midiman.com]. From what you're asking, the Delta 66 may be the right one. Don't waste your time with cassettes, digital or not, when for about the same price, you get 6 in/6 out, and virtually unlimited tracks in software (CoolEdit [syntrillium.com], Cubase [steinberg.net], etc.).
Re:It figures... (Score:3, Insightful)
ADAT.
There's several real advantages over anything consisting of just the simple PCI audio card that many others have suggested:
The converters are outboard, you get an automatic backup of your work for the cost of a VHS tape, the converters are outboard, it can operate independantly of a PC, the converters are outboard, and it's easy to use while intoxicated.
Did I mention that the converters are outboard?
Oh. You also get complete electrical isolation from the RFI monster that is a PC, which will help prevent your mic preamps from picking up seti@home via the temporary wiring disaster that comes along with any recording project.
Just plug it in with toslink. RME cards are supposed to have good support under ALSA. I've used a Lexicon Core2 (under...another OS) with good results.
You also need a bunch of mics, and mic preamps of some variety. I used to use a 24x8 Tascam console before dropping the studio. It served mostly as a big pile of mic preamps with handy signal routing, though I do admit to mixing some things to 2-channel DAT, sans PC, and having a great deal of fun in the process.
Mixer, mic, and preamp selection is a topic of endless debate, so I'll leave it at that, except for one final note:
Ebay is the poor musician's friend. Just because most of this gear is usually fairly expensive, doesn't mean that it must be so.
Re:It figures... (Score:1)
well... (Score:1)
Hold on, everybody's pointed that out. Oh well.
Yes, Virginia (Score:1)
Comment (Score:1)
Off-topic?!?! (Score:4, Funny)
Hey, does this mean nothing can be considered off-topic? ;)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Off-topic?!?! (Score:2)
Looks like I was wrong! =)
Great (Score:3, Funny)
RE: Digital 4 Track Recorders (Score:5, Funny)
1) Current regulation prohibit non-canine devices from pulling the sled. However, a more liberal tone has been taken in recent years may allow this. Cats are supposed to considered for next year's race
2) Current power consumption is pretty high, the solar power banks required to power it would be prohibitive.
3) It may come as a surprise to you, but Digital 4 track recorders don't provide any locomotive capabilities. However, apparently some Japanese company is preparing to release in Q4 of 2003 a dual tread model, so keep the look out for that
Perhaps (Score:2, Insightful)
Otherwise I think they've jumped April Fools Day by a month and some-odd days.
Hey Cliff... (Score:1)
Story (Score:3, Funny)
[n/t] (Score:2)
In case of slashdotting... (Score:3, Funny)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
PREVIEW! (Score:3, Funny)
(Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs! Don't forget the http://!)
Answer (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Answer (Score:2)
Thanks, another old-timer.
Re:Answer (Score:1)
Best things is: (Score:2)
Digital 4 Track Recorders (Score:1, Insightful)
Simply: Don't buy one. Why: Too expensive, very inflexible and not expandable (unless you pay even more through the nose.)
Instead, go for what the pros use: Protools. I've mixed extensively in the Protools environment, and I am constantly blown away by its power.
Protools: Tracks limited only by the computer's power
4 Track: 4 tracks, often 'virtual tracks', but at a great loss of flexibility
Protools: Amazing expandability, FX, Midi, virtual instruments
4 Track: Expandable only by FX units you can plug in
Protools: Brilliant UI, ease of use blah blah, takes a while to learn, but the skys the limit
4 Track: Simple, basic, not powerful
I could go on and on, but I'm tired and busy at work.
Protools can be expanded at your own rate, as you need it, and as you can afford it. Because it doesnt get 'damaged' or worn out (just out of date), it'll have a higher resale value too, if you ever decide to part with it.
The only advantage a four track digital recorder would have is that its more portable. Easier to chuck into a car boot and jam at a mates place with it. You could also use it for the most basic live sound, but thats probably not a consideration.
If you can afford it, get Protools, and remember that it will pay for itself in the long term. While you're at it, get a decent computer for it too.
Hope this helped
Rock or Doof on
Acid? (Score:2)
What about Sonic Foundry's Acid [sonicfoundry.com]? Protools is probably the budget of most aspiring musicians.
oops (Score:2)
I meant to say "Protools is probably beyond the budget of most aspiring musicians."
Re:Acid? (Score:3, Interesting)
As somebody who uses Acid a lot for creating music, I'd have to say that it's more of a production tool than a recording tool. Not to harp on Acid, but composition, rather than recording, is where it really shines.
Typically, when laying down tracks, you're recording a live artist, where something like Acid works really well with loop-based arrangement; the two functions are really hard to mix together and still have a usable interface.
Personally, I use Acid for most of my mix-down and rearrangements, as well as final post mix. I also use a simple USB-controlled 8-track mixer and Cubase to to my track layouts. In a pinch, since I'm the only person ever playing in my stuff, I'll use something like SoundForge and then go back and sync the tracks up manually with Acid.
I'd recommend something like Cubase ($150 to $500, depending on your local music stores) or the Digi-01 pack from the makers of Protools ($450 to $700, again depending on the music store.)
If you're looking for an all-in-one type solution, then the Digi-01 pack is probably the way to go. For the price, you get a very good quality professional (read: 96kbit, 24-bit sampling) four track (I think, it might be 8 tracks) with a variety of inputs. In addition, it comes with a Protools "lite" package of software that should be good for most of the home recording junkies out there.
Another package to consider, although it's not out yet, is FruityLoops [fruityloops.com]4.0. Their new package has the sequencing, MIDI and, added in the 4.0 version, track recording capability from an ASIO source like the Digi-01 or Gina cards.
I use FruityLoops 3.56 currently and, while it's a great music creation tool, it's really lacking in the track recording arena. Hopefully, this month's release will remedy that. Perhaps I'll review it in my /. journal when it comes out at the end of this month.
Hope that helps!
Mbox? (Score:1)
Has anyone had any experience with the Mbox?
Re:Digital 4 Track Recorders (Score:1, Interesting)
Definitely avoid the special-purpose units though. Get a powerbook (or whatever) with a CD burner, an audio i/o module if you need it, and a small high-quality mixer (I have one of the tiny behringers).
Infinite possibilities.
+5 Interesting (Score:2)
Do Not Try To Read The Article (Score:1)
What Truth?
There Is no article. Only then will you see it is not the article you read, but ARTICLE READS YOU
Stupid? yes Pointless? yes
No (Score:1)
Echo Audio's Layla (Score:1)
Re:Echo Audio's Layla (Score:2, Informative)
jesus. duh (Score:2)
Sometimes all you need is a subject, without any elaboration. So, everyone talk about DIGITAL 4 TRACK RECORDERS. sheesh.
The answer might just be 42 (Score:1)
Ok, this narrows it down a bit... (Score:2)
If you don't have to go digital, you might check your local pawn shops to see if you can find a used 4- or 8- track Tascam. Even the cheapest Tascam recorders were fairly decent-sounding. Depending on how long it's been on the shelf, you might get away for under $100.
The biggest warning I can think of is don't bother with anything that uses mp2/mp3 as a native recording format.
I don't know about you, but when I write and record my own music, I don't want a lossy compression codec to remove any of the sound I've worked hard to produce.
If it doesn't have to be portable, get 4 SoundBlaster-16 PCI cards and the cheapest copy of Cubase you can find. The cards should be less than $30 at your local computer store and the el-cheapo version of Cubase should be less than $300.
Once you have that built and in the computer, see if you can find ASIO drivers for the SB cards; Creative doesn't make them but there is at least one free aftermarket (http://come.to/sblive) [come.to] ASIO driver package. Install those, and you've got a decent-sounding, 16-bit digital recorder.
The 16-bit sound isn't going to give you studio quality mix-downs or anything, but it'll do for just screwing around at home.
software or hardware? (Score:5, Informative)
Please, people, if you don't know what s/he's asking, keep your trap shut, m'kay? We're talking audio here, so signal-to-noise ratio counts, you see...
But, do you want to go the hardware or software recording route?
If you have a decent enough computer (G3 macs or PII upwards x86s will do the trick for about 16 tracks), you might consider getting a good soundcard.
I personally use a M-Audio Delta44 [m-audio.com], 4 inputs, 4 outputs, nothing more. Perfect for recording. They have nice break-out boxes, so you don't have to crouch behind your computer when plugging in your guitars, basses or mics, they work under Macs, PC's and have linux support via ALSA [alsa-project.org] (yes, linux can do multitracking as well). When you need more tracks, you can just add more cards and get 8/8 or up to 16/16 in/out-system.
As for recording software, well... my delta came with a cut-down version of Logic Audio [emagic.de], which should be good enough for start. Most 'pro-sumer' soundcards come up with basic software, so you shouldn't need to cough up any more money for it in the beginning.
Other software: Cubase [steinberg.de] is nice, and there's nice 'lite'-versions for beginners (some soundcards come with this instead of logic). Cakewalk [cakewalk.com] is quite popular as well.
If you just want audio recording (the aforementioned do MIDI as well), then there's Cool Edit Pro [syntrillium.com]. For free, there's Audacity [sourceforge.org] (audacity does Windows, Linux and Mac) which is proficient enough multitrack audio editor. SLab [slabexchange.org] is a good linux multitrack recorder.
And mp3, well, you don't want to use mp3 for multitrack recording, but most modern software can import mp3-sounds, and output the result to mp3 (some of them [cool edit/audacity] can do ogg as well)
If you want a proper hardware recorder (which are nice, since you can take them to your rehersal space, summer cottage, ..., what have you), then there's plenty to choose from. Most of these are a couple of years old, so you can find them for reasonable prices used (or even new!)
Roland VS-8xx series [sospubs.co.uk], they're nice, compact, can do 4-track recording, and 8-track playback. Loads of features, and useful later on even if you grow out of this one. Earlier models had inbuilt harddrives, the later ones have ZIP-drives (if I remember correctly). If you can get one for cheap (and i think you should), then go for this one.
Korg D-8 [gearpreview.com]. A bit easier to operate, but quite useful nevertheless.
And i think Fostex had some as well, just keep your eyes open in the pawnshops.
Re:software or hardware? (Score:2)
AWESOME machine, but I have access to a full 8-track/digital (cubase) setup, now, so I never use the 880.
I call it my studio in a bag.
email me sean[@caedmon.]NET
S
Fostex MR8 (Score:1)
Zoom MRS-4 (Score:1, Informative)
It is also possible to mix down onto two "virtual tracks" without the need for an external recorder.
You're welcome
Tom
Beware of distortion - not for live rec (Score:1)
Because of this I routinely record on analogue 4track (Tascam 424Mk3) and feed that into my PC for postprocessing. In fact, most of the time I do the mixdown on the analogue 4track and only record the pre-mixed stereo into the PC. Saves time and hassle.
So where do you want the 4track for? If only for home studio use, a decent software (CoolEdit, Cubase) will be much more convenient and more flexible to use.
Re:Beware of distortion - not for live rec (Score:2)
Re:Beware of distortion - not for live rec (Score:1)
An analogue recorder can go way further without compressor/limiter (thus saving money). The analogue saturation/distortion on the cassette/tape is quite okay for most cases you run in in live recordings.
But if you intend to pingpong or record "alternative" tracks - there the digital sisters beat the analogue deck hands down, no discussion.
Well, recording capacity is another point. 20 hours live 4track = 28 cassettes = 25 GB (4x @44.1/16). You'll hardly find the latter in the smaller decks.
So again: make a checklist on what you need - and only after that, choose wisely
Warnings (in the spirit of the 4'33" posts) (Score:2)
Don't run with scissors.
Steer clear of software digital recording tools (Score:3, Informative)
My personal recommendation would be the Boss BR-8 digital multitrack (http://www.musicstop.com/update/200008/product.ht m [musicstop.com]). It has eight tracks, and you can mixdown as much as you want - with no degradation of course. There are two multi effects devices built in, and a decent set of other features. It records onto Zip disks, which are more convenient than a hard disk based system IMHO.
It looks like it retails for around $600 in the States (I picked up mine for £450 in the UK). In comparison, all the computer based digital recording systems I've used are unstable, unfriendly and overpriced. Why people still buy things like Steinbergs software is beyond me, they've not produced a stable release since Pro 16 on my humble Commodore 64.
Chris
Re:Steer clear of software digital recording tools (Score:2)
Cubase SX is an amazing piece of software, extremely easy to use, and (at least on MacOSX 10.2.4) quite stable.
Hmmm ... so perhaps it's Windows and classic MacOS that cause the instability of Cubase. I've given up upgrading my copy, so it would probably cost quite a bit to get upto date (plus I'd need to shell out for a Mac capable of running MacOSX). However, my brother's still using Cubase on his G3, so I'll keep badgering him as to whether it's improved.
Chris
Fill me in? (Score:2)
Actually, I didn't see the original story. Could someone please post it? Thanks.
Re:Fill me in? (Score:1)
Re:Fill me in? (Score:1)
OT (Score:1)
Quartz (Score:2)
Multitrack MD (Score:1)
It's not what you would use for final CD-quality tracks, but it does suit experimentation and ought to hit your price point.
If you can find one.... (Score:1)
M-Audio's Delta Series (Score:1)
http://midiman.com/products/m-audio/delta
You may be interested in the Tascam Pocketstudio.
http://midiman.com/products/m-aud io/delta.php
Midiman (Score:1)
Fostex FD-4 (Score:1)
akai dps12 (Score:1)
I picked up a used Akai DPS12 awhile back...haven't had the time to play with it as much as I'd like, but it's pretty nice. May be ore than you're looking for, though.
A few sidepoints (Score:1)
- durability
- portability
Because these are the advantages 4-Tracks offer.
Can you take it round pubs or the sqat? Will it survive? Will it not inhibit making decent music?
Because of this I think a long record time and ability to quickly find the good stuff is important so you can just leave it going.
Also I'm guessing that multitrackers may work nice with computers. Since the software method is mostly free (especially since the ASIO sound-blaster drivers) you might as well try it. My preference would be to:-
- use the multitrack to jot down ideas / jam with mates
- get this onto computer
- polish it up / fiddle
The 'get it onto computer' stage is what I know little about. Slashdotters to the aid. Hopefully a nice Firewire link would be nice. Unfortunately multitrackers and the industry isn't quite like the video industry so this sort of thing may be unavailable
Finally don't dismiss minidiscs. Yes they are technically a bad idea but if there isn't any better... personally I like reliablity, proveness and removeable, cheap media over a HD for example.
The main message I say to you is
THINK PRACTICAL.
Slashdotters may give you lots of handy advice but wether you are happy using the thing matters most. Power is pointless if it is not used.
Use Cakewalk (Score:2)
Re:Asshole. (Score:3, Funny)