Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
I'm doing a drum session today at my buddy's studio. He has a Tascam DM24
and a 2424 HD recorder. We will be using all outboard mic pres, and could go direct into the 2424 (vs routing them through the mixer and then to the 2424 via tdif), if it has better converters, or if there were any other real advantage to it. I suppose there could be an upside to avoiding the attenuation in the line ins at the board. It would be slightly more convenient to go through the board though. Anyone know? Bill L |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of t
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of t
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1077978145k@trad... In article writes: We will be using all outboard mic pres, and could go direct into the 2424 (vs routing them through the mixer and then to the 2424 via tdif), if it has better converters No you couldn't. If you connect the output of the preamp to the mixer, then connect the mixer's TDIF output to the recorder's input, you're using the mixer's A/D converters. Mike, I'm not stupid - please re-read my post. I know that going into the mixer first would give me the mixer's A/Ds. That's why I asked the qustion. I was hoping someone who actually knew the answer to the question could supply an informed response. Bill L If the MX2424 has the optional analog I/O board and you really care, I'd suggest that you try making a test recording with the preamps connected directly to the MX's analog inputs and compare that with connecting the preamps to the console and connecting the console to the recorder with TDIF. Be sure that you listen using the same converters, probably the console's. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
The Analog I/O in the MX2424 has much better converters than the DM24.
Besides which, entering the recorder directly you'll record flat (which is good), you'll gain analog I/O channels (which if recording live and doing FOH simultaneously (something I do all the time) is good), and if you're going to have an external preamp there is likely something about it that you wanted it for so why not use it? For what it is worth, now that i've added a Millenia Media HV-3D to my equipment, this will be my default setup: 8 "Gold" channels consisting of mics preamped by the HV-3D on stage - snake - analog input on MX2424 - TDIF - DM24 Mixer - Sound reinforcement (if required). 16 "Not quite so Gold" channels consisting of mics - snake - DM24 preamps - DM24 direct analog out via inserts - analog input on MX2424 - TDIF - DM24 Mixer - Sound reinforcement (if required). Total capablity: 24 analog channels recorded flat without worry, 24 digital returns mixed anyway required for FOH; 8 nearly perfect & 16 pretty darn good! "Bill Lorentzen" wrote in message ... I'm doing a drum session today at my buddy's studio. He has a Tascam DM24 and a 2424 HD recorder. We will be using all outboard mic pres, and could go direct into the 2424 (vs routing them through the mixer and then to the 2424 via tdif), if it has better converters, or if there were any other real advantage to it. I suppose there could be an upside to avoiding the attenuation in the line ins at the board. It would be slightly more convenient to go through the board though. Anyone know? Bill L |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
Thanks David. That's what I wanted to know.
Bill L "David Zajac" wrote in message ... The Analog I/O in the MX2424 has much better converters than the DM24. Besides which, entering the recorder directly you'll record flat (which is good), you'll gain analog I/O channels (which if recording live and doing FOH simultaneously (something I do all the time) is good), and if you're going to have an external preamp there is likely something about it that you wanted it for so why not use it? For what it is worth, now that i've added a Millenia Media HV-3D to my equipment, this will be my default setup: 8 "Gold" channels consisting of mics preamped by the HV-3D on stage - snake - analog input on MX2424 - TDIF - DM24 Mixer - Sound reinforcement (if required). 16 "Not quite so Gold" channels consisting of mics - snake - DM24 preamps - DM24 direct analog out via inserts - analog input on MX2424 - TDIF - DM24 Mixer - Sound reinforcement (if required). Total capablity: 24 analog channels recorded flat without worry, 24 digital returns mixed anyway required for FOH; 8 nearly perfect & 16 pretty darn good! "Bill Lorentzen" wrote in message ... I'm doing a drum session today at my buddy's studio. He has a Tascam DM24 and a 2424 HD recorder. We will be using all outboard mic pres, and could go direct into the 2424 (vs routing them through the mixer and then to the 2424 via tdif), if it has better converters, or if there were any other real advantage to it. I suppose there could be an upside to avoiding the attenuation in the line ins at the board. It would be slightly more convenient to go through the board though. Anyone know? Bill L |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of t
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of t
Ok, first empirically: to my ears using an external preamp into directly
into the MX2424 sounds much more open. Of course (duh), the external preamp happens in this case to be a Millennia Media HV-3d! This openness ( / airiness / intangible wonderful something ) is lost if I use either the console's preamps alone, or go through the console's preamps set to no gain and use the Millennia Media to provide the preamp gain externally (one of the first things I tried). Second, although I picked up both my DM24 & MX2424 used so didn't worry much about the OEM prices, the analog board in the MX2424 ain't cheap! Wouldn't surprise me if it cost new what I paid for the DM buy itself (not that money is a perfect predictor of value). Third, don't know if TimeLine was involved with the DM but do know TimeLine was heavily involved in the MX2424. Only reason I mention this is your post wasn't clear as to which device you were referring to. "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1078073430k@trad... In article writes: Thanks David. That's what I wanted to know. And of course you trust him implicitly. That was my thought, too (that the converters and analog circuitry on the analog I/O board for the MX were better than that in the DM24) but these days you can't be too sure. I'd put money on the analog path being better in the TimeLine board, but the converters in the console are two years newer in design and might just be better. But then there's the other stuff like board layout, stray signal paths, clocking, etc. The only way to tell for sure is to compare the two, which you can do. Best not to be biased. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of t
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
"David Zajac" wrote in message
... The Analog I/O in the MX2424 has much better converters than the DM24. Besides which, entering the recorder directly you'll record flat (which is good), you'll gain analog I/O channels (which if recording live and doing FOH simultaneously (something I do all the time) is good), and if you're going to have an external preamp there is likely something about it that you wanted it for so why not use it? I'll give a completely opposite opinion. I think the converters in the MX-2424 f-in' ruin music. The DM24 is good, but the clock needs a bit of help from a good external source (as a lot of cheap digital boards do). I have gotten so many things to mix off of a 2424 that take a ton of work to make them sound even remotely decent. Everything that comes off of that recorder sound flacid as the converters have horrible transient response and a generally "smeary" sound (too many electrolytic caps in the signal chain?). The 2424 is a great recorder for what it can do technically (like timecode sync), but the sound of conversion is not a strength of it. In comparison, I find that the DM24 is a much clearer sounding set of conversion. As I said, the clock isn't wonderful and an Aardsync II helps it quite a bit. The mic pre's also have a bit of a bite (upper mic/high-end lack of transparency) to the sound that you aren't going to get with a set of Millennias, etc... The line inputs reflect a bit of that, but it is a cleaner sound than the mic pres. --Ben -- Benjamin Maas Fifth Circle Audio Los Angeles, CA http://www.fifthcircle.com Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
"Benjamin Maas" wrote in message news:T3N0c.92653$Xp.419438@attbi_s54...
"David Zajac" wrote in message ... The Analog I/O in the MX2424 has much better converters than the DM24. Besides which, entering the recorder directly you'll record flat (which is good), you'll gain analog I/O channels (which if recording live and doing FOH simultaneously (something I do all the time) is good), and if you're going to have an external preamp there is likely something about it that you wanted it for so why not use it? I'll give a completely opposite opinion. I think the converters in the MX-2424 f-in' ruin music. The DM24 is good, but the clock needs a bit of help from a good external source (as a lot of cheap digital boards do). I have gotten so many things to mix off of a 2424 that take a ton of work to make them sound even remotely decent. Everything that comes off of that recorder sound flacid as the converters have horrible transient response and a generally "smeary" sound (too many electrolytic caps in the signal chain?). The 2424 is a great recorder for what it can do technically (like timecode sync), but the sound of conversion is not a strength of it. In comparison, I find that the DM24 is a much clearer sounding set of conversion. As I said, the clock isn't wonderful and an Aardsync II helps it quite a bit. The mic pre's also have a bit of a bite (upper mic/high-end lack of transparency) to the sound that you aren't going to get with a set of Millennias, etc... The line inputs reflect a bit of that, but it is a cleaner sound than the mic pres. --Ben I have to agree with Ben about the MX2424. It's not the caps, nor the converters, it's the way data is handled internally. I modified one using very good analog parts and first rate caps, sounded like c**p. Next I tried my custom A/D's and D/A's through it and it still wouldn't record or playback properly. Helped make the decision to go with the Alesis HD24XR, that machine will record properly. Jim Williams Audio Upgrades |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Alesis HD24XR (Was " Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?")
Jim Williams wrote:
Helped make the decision to go with the Alesis HD24XR, that machine will record properly. What's your early-on opinion of its operational bulletproofness? -- ha |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Alesis HD24XR (Was " Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?")
operational bulletproofness?
Sounds like a honor or title or something. --------------------------------------- "I know enough to know I don't know enough" |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
Hmmm... you guys must have some extraordinarily discriminating ears!
Obviously way out of my league. "Jim Williams" wrote in message om... "Benjamin Maas" wrote in message news:T3N0c.92653$Xp.419438@attbi_s54... "David Zajac" wrote in message ... The Analog I/O in the MX2424 has much better converters than the DM24. Besides which, entering the recorder directly you'll record flat (which is good), you'll gain analog I/O channels (which if recording live and doing FOH simultaneously (something I do all the time) is good), and if you're going to have an external preamp there is likely something about it that you wanted it for so why not use it? I'll give a completely opposite opinion. I think the converters in the MX-2424 f-in' ruin music. The DM24 is good, but the clock needs a bit of help from a good external source (as a lot of cheap digital boards do). I have gotten so many things to mix off of a 2424 that take a ton of work to make them sound even remotely decent. Everything that comes off of that recorder sound flacid as the converters have horrible transient response and a generally "smeary" sound (too many electrolytic caps in the signal chain?). The 2424 is a great recorder for what it can do technically (like timecode sync), but the sound of conversion is not a strength of it. In comparison, I find that the DM24 is a much clearer sounding set of conversion. As I said, the clock isn't wonderful and an Aardsync II helps it quite a bit. The mic pre's also have a bit of a bite (upper mic/high-end lack of transparency) to the sound that you aren't going to get with a set of Millennias, etc... The line inputs reflect a bit of that, but it is a cleaner sound than the mic pres. --Ben I have to agree with Ben about the MX2424. It's not the caps, nor the converters, it's the way data is handled internally. I modified one using very good analog parts and first rate caps, sounded like c**p. Next I tried my custom A/D's and D/A's through it and it still wouldn't record or playback properly. Helped make the decision to go with the Alesis HD24XR, that machine will record properly. Jim Williams Audio Upgrades |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Alesis HD24XR (Was " Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?")
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
(Jim Williams) wrote:
I have to agree with Ben about the MX2424. It's not the caps, nor the converters, it's the way data is handled internally. I modified one using very good analog parts and first rate caps, sounded like c**p. Next I tried my custom A/D's and D/A's through it and it still wouldn't record or playback properly. Helped make the decision to go with the Alesis HD24XR, that machine will record properly. Are you talking about the functionality of the unit, or are you saying that somehow it's not just 111's and 000's? In the past with certain OS' were very quirky, 2.11 has been extremely stable. If you are saying that it's somehow not bit accurate, you must have had a broken unit. I have used the MX2424 for 3 years, backing up between the computer and the 2424 and digital information is *****exact*****. I'm not talking about conversion, I'm talking about straight AES transfers. If it wasn't, I think someone would have noticed by now. Nathan Eldred http://www.atlasproaudio.com |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
(Nathan Eldred) wrote in message . com...
(Jim Williams) wrote: I have to agree with Ben about the MX2424. It's not the caps, nor the converters, it's the way data is handled internally. I modified one using very good analog parts and first rate caps, sounded like c**p. Next I tried my custom A/D's and D/A's through it and it still wouldn't record or playback properly. Helped make the decision to go with the Alesis HD24XR, that machine will record properly. Are you talking about the functionality of the unit, or are you saying that somehow it's not just 111's and 000's? In the past with certain OS' were very quirky, 2.11 has been extremely stable. If you are saying that it's somehow not bit accurate, you must have had a broken unit. I have used the MX2424 for 3 years, backing up between the computer and the 2424 and digital information is *****exact*****. I'm not talking about conversion, I'm talking about straight AES transfers. If it wasn't, I think someone would have noticed by now. Nathan Eldred http://www.atlasproaudio.com If a bit map was done I would believe all the 0's and 1's would line up. This is common where measured data and subjective sonics just don't add up. Try a listening test between them and report back. I did. Jim Williams Audio Upgrades |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1078400835k@trad... The discussion was about conversion - how a recording with the analog I/O board sounds with an analog signal going in, in this case, as compared to the same signal going into the TASCAM DM24 console, then to the recorder via the TDIF inputs. So far we have two votes for "it doesn't sound that good." A bit disappointing considering the cost of the analog I/O option board and all the part on it (as well as all the work that must have gone into the design), but as we all know, not everything sounds as good as it looks or costs. I've found that like a lot of digital gear (more than I'd like to believe), the clock in the MX2424 is pretty suspect. Not only are the analog converters lacking, but even when going in digital, an external clock really helps it (whether the clock on a set of high-end converters like Lavry's or an Aardsync doesn't really matter- it just needs better clocking). I think the data integrity is certainly fine on that recorder and the timecode sync is excellent. My complaint is just that conversion on that recorder is less than perfect. For $1800, you'd expect an analog card to sound a bit better, but then again, that is not such a high price for 24 channels of conversion. Any after-market converter will cost more for that many channels. --Ben -- Benjamin Maas Fifth Circle Audio Los Angeles, CA http://www.fifthcircle.com Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the the same converters in both of these?
(Jim Williams) wrote in message . com...
(Nathan Eldred) wrote in message . com... (Jim Williams) wrote: I have to agree with Ben about the MX2424. It's not the caps, nor the converters, it's the way data is handled internally. I modified one using very good analog parts and first rate caps, sounded like c**p. Next I tried my custom A/D's and D/A's through it and it still wouldn't record or playback properly. Helped make the decision to go with the Alesis HD24XR, that machine will record properly. Are you talking about the functionality of the unit, or are you saying that somehow it's not just 111's and 000's? In the past with certain OS' were very quirky, 2.11 has been extremely stable. If you are saying that it's somehow not bit accurate, you must have had a broken unit. I have used the MX2424 for 3 years, backing up between the computer and the 2424 and digital information is *****exact*****. I'm not talking about conversion, I'm talking about straight AES transfers. If it wasn't, I think someone would have noticed by now. Nathan Eldred http://www.atlasproaudio.com If a bit map was done I would believe all the 0's and 1's would line up. This is common where measured data and subjective sonics just don't add up. Try a listening test between them and report back. I did. We must be talking about two different things. I have done a comparison between digital transfers, countless times. They sound exactly the same. If you are talking about A/D conversion, that's a completely different ball of wax (even Mike Rivers seems to think that's what we are talking about here, but when you say "Next I tried my custom A/D's and D/A's through it and it still wouldn't record or playback properly" it leads me to believe to you are talking about digital only. If we ARE talking about ADC's then I agree they aren't the best, nor the worse (I think their DAC's are better than their ADC's). Nathan Eldred http://www.atlasproaudio.com |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the
(Mike Rivers) wrote :
You ARE talking about two different things. Jim's talking about the sound of the A/D converter. Mike, please go back and read what he originally wrote. He said that he added his custom (and I'm assuming extremely 'hi-fi') A/D/A and even then it sounded bad. If it still sounded like crud with his ADC's, then that only leaves one thing left. Nathan Eldred http://www.atlasproaudio.com |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
MX2424 Bit accuracy --- WAS: Tascam DM24 or Tascam MX2424 - are the
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ... No point in arguing about it though. If Ben doesn't like it (I think he said it sounded better with outboard converters but I don't have the thread in front of me) and Jim couldn't make it sound any better, there are two people who would rather not use it. They may or may not influence the decision of others. That is what I said... With outboard converters, it is a fine transport. You want to give it a better clock, but it records and plays back just fine. The internal converters and the clock are it's weak points. I still use the machine on some gigs because I've been quite happy with timecode sync options on it. That and it is easy to export the files and the project to just about any DAW out there through the use of its OpenTL EDL. It is a very small and easy way to record 48 tracks wide in the field- (48 tracks in 8 rack spaces isn't too bad) --Ben -- Benjamin Maas Fifth Circle Audio Los Angeles, CA http://www.fifthcircle.com Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
the mx2424 board - A Tascam MX-2424 users forum. Community based, user-end support | Pro Audio | |||
Tascam DM24 Forum? | Pro Audio | |||
tascam dm24 firewire | Pro Audio | |||
Tascam MX2424 Problem? | Pro Audio | |||
mmc for control tascam MX2424 ? | Pro Audio |