| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Some help with final DAW and preamp decisions for firewire recording, please.f
Hope some of you fellow RAP-er's can lend me your experience.
I'm in the process of planning/finalizing a DIY recording workstation to be used for recording, mixing, and editing. My plan is to use it with either a Mackie 1620 firewire-enabled console, or a Presonus Firebox firewire mixer/preamp. In either case I will be sending a firewire signal of up to eight channels into the DAW, and monitoring at least a two-channel mix out back through the firewire to the console/mixer. I've done research and narrowed my choices, but the final selection could use some actual real-world input, and since all my recording activities heretofore have been to tape (analog or DAT), I'm flying a bit blind. The two workstation finalists are two Shuttle small footprint and ultra-quiet boxes, each outfitted with a main boot HD (160mb Western Digital "silent" ultraDMA drive) and a separate recording or media drive (SATA Western Digital 10,000rpm "Raptor" 74mb drive). Either will also have 1 Gig of appropriate ram, and plenty of USB 2.0 and Firewire connections. The difference between the two (aside from about $200 in cost) is that one would use an AMD 3000+ XP Athlon and and Socket A motherboard using DDR333 (PC2700) memory, while the other would use an AMD 3000+ Athlon 64 and a socket 939 motherboard with DDR400 (PC3200) memory. In each case the memory chips would be of good quality and low latency (cas of 3). Both workstations would be running Windows XP professional SP2. My main question therefore is -- will there be a real world difference between these two systems when it comes to laying down tracks, and if so, how would it manifest itself? I'd particularly appreciate hearing from folks who've actually had experience with both, or faced this choice themselves. A separate question concerns the quality of the mic preamps/mixers. The Mackie 1620 contains their ballyhooed Onyx low-noise mic preamps. The Presonus has their usual mic preamps. Each contains eight inputs and will be used to record chamber music, jazz, and small-group rock and folk-rock. Some of the recording will be live, some done in good semi-studio surroundings. The Mackie setup will cost approximately twice that of the Presonus, but it's extra control features would only be of use (if at all) for the rock recording, which will be less than half of what I do. I put a premium on really good sound quality (especially for the chamber and jazz work) and would love to be able to afford a bank of Great Rivers, Milleniums, or Grace's, but I simply can't afford them right now. I will be using a mixture of Sony condensers, dynamics, and a Royer amplified stereo ribbon mike. So the question is: for this use and with these mics, will there be a dramatic difference between the two choices in quality of preamplification and resultant sound. Or should I make the choice based on convenience, size, and cost factors? Or is there some comparably priced firewire input/output/mixer/preamp combination that I should consider in additon. Any and all help in answering these questions will be appreciated. Thanks. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
The two workstation finalists are two Shuttle small footprint and
ultra-quiet boxes, each outfitted with a main boot HD (160mb Western Digital "silent" ultraDMA drive) and a separate recording or media drive (SATA Western Digital 10,000rpm "Raptor" 74mb drive). Either will also have 1 Gig of appropriate ram, and plenty of USB 2.0 and Firewire connections. The difference between the two (aside from about $200 in cost) is that one would use an AMD 3000+ XP Athlon and and Socket A motherboard using DDR333 (PC2700) memory, while the other would use an AMD 3000+ Athlon 64 and a socket 939 motherboard with DDR400 (PC3200) memory. In each case the memory chips would be of good quality and low latency (cas of 3). Both workstations would be running Windows XP professional SP2. I think the 10k rpm drive is uneconomical, 7200rpm is fine for 24 channels of 24/48. If that's not enough, just get a second 7200rpm drive to share the load. You should also have each audio drive on its own controller, so for small format PC's that often means a Firewire drive, not a bad idea. My main question therefore is -- will there be a real world difference between these two systems when it comes to laying down tracks, and if so, how would it manifest itself? I'd particularly appreciate hearing from folks who've actually had experience with both, or faced this choice themselves. Laying down tracks isn't the problem as much as mixing with lots of plug-ins. A 300MHz celeron can record and play back 24+ tracks no problem. The Athlon 3000 is ample CPU for a typical mix. A separate question concerns the quality of the mic preamps/mixers. The Mackie 1620 contains their ballyhooed Onyx low-noise mic preamps. The Presonus has their usual mic preamps. The Firepod does not have the same caliber preamps as their Digimax units, which are a step down from their M80's pre's. The Digimax LT (24/48, ADAT) costs $200 more than the Firepod (24/96, Firewire). My experience with the Firepod gave me the impression that the pre's are about on par with mid-level mixing desks like an Allen & Heath GL2200. I would expect the Firepod to marginally outperform the Mackie, and better yet the Firepod can be powered with 12-24V DC, so you can run it anywhere off SLA batteries with a laptop. It also indicates that the power is more thoroughly regulated than the Mackie, which is as important as the caliber of preamp componentry. The Mackie can't be used for recording directly after the preamp, which means if you rent some high-end preamps you'll be running them through the whole mixer, rather self-defeating. The Mackie also only has two return channels from the host computer, while the Firepod has 12 analog and two digital. For $600 the Firepod is a steal just for 8 channels of 24/96 A/D and the Firewire interface. Think of the modest-but-very-useable preamps as a bonus. What I'd like to know is if you can use two of them on one computer and sync via s/pdif... |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , "Harry Lavo"
wrote: The difference between the two (aside from about $200 in cost) is that one would use an AMD 3000+ XP Athlon and and Socket A motherboard using DDR333 (PC2700) memory, while the other would use an AMD 3000+ Athlon 64 and a socket 939 motherboard with DDR400 (PC3200) memory. I would have to recommend two motherboards/cpus that are the same, or at least compatible in case you have an urgent need to swap components. And a 74gb drive may not be enough if you choose to record at high sample rates, unless you don't mind doing a lot of data transfer. You might want to consider an external firewire drive with hot-swapable trays. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Zigakly" wrote in message ... The two workstation finalists are two Shuttle small footprint and ultra-quiet boxes, each outfitted with a main boot HD (160mb Western Digital "silent" ultraDMA drive) and a separate recording or media drive (SATA Western Digital 10,000rpm "Raptor" 74mb drive). Either will also have 1 Gig of appropriate ram, and plenty of USB 2.0 and Firewire connections. The difference between the two (aside from about $200 in cost) is that one would use an AMD 3000+ XP Athlon and and Socket A motherboard using DDR333 (PC2700) memory, while the other would use an AMD 3000+ Athlon 64 and a socket 939 motherboard with DDR400 (PC3200) memory. In each case the memory chips would be of good quality and low latency (cas of 3). Both workstations would be running Windows XP professional SP2. I think the 10k rpm drive is uneconomical, 7200rpm is fine for 24 channels of 24/48. If that's not enough, just get a second 7200rpm drive to share the load. You should also have each audio drive on its own controller, so for small format PC's that often means a Firewire drive, not a bad idea. Actually I'll be recording up to eight channels at 96/24. And the S-ATA runs off a different controller than the IDE main HD, so I think I'm covered there. You think a 7200 rpm SATA drive about 60%) the cost of the 10,000) would suffice? How about if I extend the channels to 16? My main question therefore is -- will there be a real world difference between these two systems when it comes to laying down tracks, and if so, how would it manifest itself? I'd particularly appreciate hearing from folks who've actually had experience with both, or faced this choice themselves. Laying down tracks isn't the problem as much as mixing with lots of plug-ins. A 300MHz celeron can record and play back 24+ tracks no problem. The Athlon 3000 is ample CPU for a typical mix. That's one place where I probably won't have a problem, as much of my recording/mixing will be done with only minimal modification. And for now, my intensive rock mixing will probably be limited to eight tracks. I'm one of those people who believe in using the minimum number of mics to get the job done. A separate question concerns the quality of the mic preamps/mixers. The Mackie 1620 contains their ballyhooed Onyx low-noise mic preamps. The Presonus has their usual mic preamps. The Firepod does not have the same caliber preamps as their Digimax units, which are a step down from their M80's pre's. The Digimax LT (24/48, ADAT) costs $200 more than the Firepod (24/96, Firewire). My experience with the Firepod gave me the impression that the pre's are about on par with mid-level mixing desks like an Allen & Heath GL2200. I would expect the Firepod to marginally outperform the Mackie, and better yet the Firepod can be powered with 12-24V DC, so you can run it anywhere off SLA batteries with a laptop. It also indicates that the power is more thoroughly regulated than the Mackie, which is as important as the caliber of preamp componentry. The Mackie can't be used for recording directly after the preamp, which means if you rent some high-end preamps you'll be running them through the whole mixer, rather self-defeating. The Mackie also only has two return channels from the host computer, while the Firepod has 12 analog and two digital. I agree that the Firepod seems to be an extradinary value over the Mackie for the reasons you mention below. The Mackie Onyx does claim to output individual channels from the preamp (analog) ahead of the mixer circuitry -- perhaps an improvement in this Onyx design? And yes, the return mix of only two channels does bother me somewhat..but when recording/monitoring that is all that is likely to be used in my case. The surround mix can use different software/equipment if need be for post-session mixing. And as you note, the Mackies do add one desireable feature...the ability to daisy chain two mixers. However, the quality of the preamps is a key issue...I simply don't want to make much compromise here, especially, as I said, for recording chamber music and jazz where I want to get the most natural sound possible. For $600 the Firepod is a steal just for 8 channels of 24/96 A/D and the Firewire interface. Think of the modest-but-very-useable preamps as a bonus. What I'd like to know is if you can use two of them on one computer and sync via s/pdif... Interesting question...have you aked Presonus? Thanks for a thoughtful response to my question. It has been helpful. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1111407055k@trad... In article writes: My plan is to use it with either a Mackie 1620 firewire-enabled console, or a Presonus Firebox firewire mixer/preamp. In either case I will be sending a firewire signal of up to eight channels into the DAW, and monitoring at least a two-channel mix out back through the firewire to the console/mixer. Be very sure you understand what the Onyx Firewire option does, and doesn't do. It's a very good and cost effective way to record what's going into the mics when you're mixing a live show, but signal routing is hard-wired and not as flexible as you'd want for studio work. Consider it as a 16-input sound card with "courtesy" monitoring outputs that can only go one place - to the monitoring section of the Onyx mixer. These issues come up all the time from people who wish Mackie had done this differently: - Recording is direct from the mic preamp and doesn't allow using the (pretty darn good) channel EQ on the mixer or outboard processor through the insert jack when tracking. - There's no way to mix the multitrack recording on the mixer. It's all in the computer. - Since you can't assign the 2-channel playback to a channel, you can't use it in a headphone mix created with auxiliary sends. If you overdub, you have to listen to the control room/phones or main output. OK for a one man band, but not good for a group. Visit the Mackie web site, download the Onyx Firewire manual, and read it through very carefully. It's a really good option for a specific job, but it's not a replacement for the kind of interface that turns your computer into a multitrack recorder. The Mackie setup will cost approximately twice that of the Presonus, but it's extra control features would only be of use (if at all) for the rock recording, which will be less than half of what I do. Understand that when recording from the Onyx Firewire interface, unless you use an outboard front end connected to a mixer line input, there are only two things you can record - the mic preamp output (pre-everything) or the stereo mix output. There are no options, no buttons, no jumpers, and no modifications to change this. The preamps are quite good, a little quieter and smoother than the VLZ Pro, typical of a better than average transformerless mic preamp. Thanks, Mike, for making clear what was only vaguely clear to me before. I did recognize that the mixing features would be largely wasted on this unit, but the combination of good preamps (by reputation, which you seem to confirm) and the eight channels of firewire in at 96/24 seemed attractive at the price. The mixing capabilites for live use or for analog recording seemed almost a throw-in. Size is a negative compared to the Presonus, obviously. Now if Mackie would just put their preamps into a firewire front end like the Presonus...... |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"jackfish" wrote in message
... In article , "Harry Lavo" wrote: The difference between the two (aside from about $200 in cost) is that one would use an AMD 3000+ XP Athlon and and Socket A motherboard using DDR333 (PC2700) memory, while the other would use an AMD 3000+ Athlon 64 and a socket 939 motherboard with DDR400 (PC3200) memory. I would have to recommend two motherboards/cpus that are the same, or at least compatible in case you have an urgent need to swap components. And a 74gb drive may not be enough if you choose to record at high sample rates, unless you don't mind doing a lot of data transfer. You might want to consider an external firewire drive with hot-swapable trays. Thanks for the input. I stayed away from the external HD (except for archive storage) primarily to minimze latency in monitoring during the session. Same reason for choosing the 10,000rpm drive. If you are using this approach, is latency an issue? Here's a specific case where real-world experience has to provide the answer. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Mackie Onyx does claim to output
individual channels from the preamp (analog) ahead of the mixer circuitry -- perhaps an improvement in this Onyx design? Hah! I didn't think they'd be daft enough to do that. A Firewire interface for a mixer should be able to tap directly after the preamps, post-EQ/pre-fader, or post fader. If the mixer offers any less than two of those three options, it doesn't have the versatility that price-point calls for. If only one is available it's got to be post-EQ/pre-fader. They finally put a reasonable EQ in a mixer and they bypass it for the recording outputs... those guys will never learn. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Zigakly" wrote in message
... The Mackie Onyx does claim to output individual channels from the preamp (analog) ahead of the mixer circuitry -- perhaps an improvement in this Onyx design? Hah! I didn't think they'd be daft enough to do that. A Firewire interface for a mixer should be able to tap directly after the preamps, post-EQ/pre-fader, or post fader. If the mixer offers any less than two of those three options, it doesn't have the versatility that price-point calls for. If only one is available it's got to be post-EQ/pre-fader. They finally put a reasonable EQ in a mixer and they bypass it for the recording outputs... those guys will never learn. No, in this case it makes sense...they've split it, with the analog outs coming post-EQ/pre-or-post fader, but the firewire outs coming out pre-eq, pre-fader. That way the mixer can serve as a road mixer for a band and still deliver a clean, non-eq'd signal to a laptop or other DAW for later mixing/processing. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Zigakly" wrote in message ... The difference between the two (aside from about $200 in cost) is that one would use an AMD 3000+ XP Athlon and and Socket A motherboard using DDR333 (PC2700) memory, while the other would use an AMD 3000+ Athlon 64 and a socket 939 motherboard with DDR400 (PC3200) memory. Thanks, Zigakly, for your helpful comments. Does seem the Firepod is probably the way for me to go...now I've got to figure out how to get my hands on one to pre-test the mic/preamp combo quality. I would have to recommend two motherboards/cpus that are the same, or at least compatible in case you have an urgent need to swap components. And a 74gb drive may not be enough if you choose to record at high sample rates, unless you don't mind doing a lot of data transfer. You might want to consider an external firewire drive with hot-swapable trays. Thanks for the input. I stayed away from the external HD (except for archive storage) primarily to minimze latency in monitoring during the session. Same reason for choosing the 10,000rpm drive. If you are using this approach, is latency an issue? Here's a specific case where real-world experience has to provide the answer. Latency is a non-issue. When recording overdubs the performer(s) listen to a mix of the prerecorded content and an analog feed of what they're playing. The Firepod has a knob that lets you blend the analog inputs with the outputs from the computer for zero-latency monitoring, so you mute the channels being recorded. You can also set up pre-fader reverb sends on the channels being recorded so the performer(s) hear ambience to what they're playing, but is not recorded. A Behringer MXB1002 and an FMR RNC come in really handy for tons of tasks including when performers are picky about their monitor mixes and you don't have a full console. |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , "Harry Lavo"
wrote: "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1111407055k@trad... In article writes: My plan is to use it with either a Mackie 1620 firewire-enabled console, or a Presonus Firebox firewire mixer/preamp. In either case I will be sending a firewire signal of up to eight channels into the DAW, and monitoring at least a two-channel mix out back through the firewire to the console/mixer. Be very sure you understand what the Onyx Firewire option does, and doesn't do. It's a very good and cost effective way to record what's going into the mics when you're mixing a live show, but signal routing is hard-wired and not as flexible as you'd want for studio work. Consider it as a 16-input sound card with "courtesy" monitoring outputs that can only go one place - to the monitoring section of the Onyx mixer. These issues come up all the time from people who wish Mackie had done this differently: - Recording is direct from the mic preamp and doesn't allow using the (pretty darn good) channel EQ on the mixer or outboard processor through the insert jack when tracking. - There's no way to mix the multitrack recording on the mixer. It's all in the computer. - Since you can't assign the 2-channel playback to a channel, you can't use it in a headphone mix created with auxiliary sends. If you overdub, you have to listen to the control room/phones or main output. OK for a one man band, but not good for a group. Visit the Mackie web site, download the Onyx Firewire manual, and read it through very carefully. It's a really good option for a specific job, but it's not a replacement for the kind of interface that turns your computer into a multitrack recorder. The Mackie setup will cost approximately twice that of the Presonus, but it's extra control features would only be of use (if at all) for the rock recording, which will be less than half of what I do. Understand that when recording from the Onyx Firewire interface, unless you use an outboard front end connected to a mixer line input, there are only two things you can record - the mic preamp output (pre-everything) or the stereo mix output. There are no options, no buttons, no jumpers, and no modifications to change this. The preamps are quite good, a little quieter and smoother than the VLZ Pro, typical of a better than average transformerless mic preamp. Thanks, Mike, for making clear what was only vaguely clear to me before. I did recognize that the mixing features would be largely wasted on this unit, but the combination of good preamps (by reputation, which you seem to confirm) and the eight channels of firewire in at 96/24 seemed attractive at the price. The mixing capabilites for live use or for analog recording seemed almost a throw-in. Size is a negative compared to the Presonus, obviously. Now if Mackie would just put their preamps into a firewire front end like the Presonus...... Uhh... you mean like this: http://www.mackie.com/products/800r/index.html |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1111446794k@trad... In article writes: Thanks, Mike, for making clear what was only vaguely clear to me before. I did recognize that the mixing features would be largely wasted on this unit, [Onyx + Firewire] but the combination of good preamps (by reputation, which you seem to confirm) and the eight channels of firewire in at 96/24 seemed attractive at the price. The mixing capabilites for live use or for analog recording seemed almost a throw-in. That's a healthy way of looking at it. The Onyx is a good 16-input A/D converter with decent mic preamps and you can use the mixer section for monitoring. Size is a negative compared to the Presonus, obviously. Now if Mackie would just put their preamps into a firewire front end like the Presonus...... Well, Mackie does have the Ony 800R, 8 mic preamps in a single rack space, with analog, AES/EBU. amd ADAT optical (S-Mux on dual outputs for sample rates above 48 kHz) outputs. The noise specs on the A/D are a little better than on the Onyx Firewire, but I can't say as I notice the difference (or if I do, at least I don't care about it) in real life. Two of the inputs have switchable input impedance, something that I haven't yet found a mic in my collection that prefers any of the low-Z settings but it's there to play with. Two inputs can be switched to high-Z for instrument DI, and two inputs (the two with the adjustable impedance) can be switched to give you left-right from an M-S mic pair. The channels can be switched to line inputs for outboard gadgets if, say, you want to use a multi-function channel strip for a channel or two. Yeah, that unit has a lot going for it. But the interface would require a lot more complicated setup on the input side of the DAW, and might even limit some of my software choices.....I'd really prefer to stay with firewire. When I looked at it, I thought to myself "if only they brought out a Firewire version.....". Then the issue would be solved. Seems to me that now that they have the 1620 Firewire box in production, would be almost a trivial design excercise to redo or bring out a Firewire version of the 800. Mackie, you listening.......? |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
"jackfish" wrote in message ... In article , "Harry Lavo" wrote: "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1111407055k@trad... In article writes: My plan is to use it with either a Mackie 1620 firewire-enabled console, or a Presonus Firebox firewire mixer/preamp. In either case I will be sending a firewire signal of up to eight channels into the DAW, and monitoring at least a two-channel mix out back through the firewire to the console/mixer. Be very sure you understand what the Onyx Firewire option does, and doesn't do. It's a very good and cost effective way to record what's going into the mics when you're mixing a live show, but signal routing is hard-wired and not as flexible as you'd want for studio work. Consider it as a 16-input sound card with "courtesy" monitoring outputs that can only go one place - to the monitoring section of the Onyx mixer. These issues come up all the time from people who wish Mackie had done this differently: - Recording is direct from the mic preamp and doesn't allow using the (pretty darn good) channel EQ on the mixer or outboard processor through the insert jack when tracking. - There's no way to mix the multitrack recording on the mixer. It's all in the computer. - Since you can't assign the 2-channel playback to a channel, you can't use it in a headphone mix created with auxiliary sends. If you overdub, you have to listen to the control room/phones or main output. OK for a one man band, but not good for a group. Visit the Mackie web site, download the Onyx Firewire manual, and read it through very carefully. It's a really good option for a specific job, but it's not a replacement for the kind of interface that turns your computer into a multitrack recorder. The Mackie setup will cost approximately twice that of the Presonus, but it's extra control features would only be of use (if at all) for the rock recording, which will be less than half of what I do. Understand that when recording from the Onyx Firewire interface, unless you use an outboard front end connected to a mixer line input, there are only two things you can record - the mic preamp output (pre-everything) or the stereo mix output. There are no options, no buttons, no jumpers, and no modifications to change this. The preamps are quite good, a little quieter and smoother than the VLZ Pro, typical of a better than average transformerless mic preamp. Thanks, Mike, for making clear what was only vaguely clear to me before. I did recognize that the mixing features would be largely wasted on this unit, but the combination of good preamps (by reputation, which you seem to confirm) and the eight channels of firewire in at 96/24 seemed attractive at the price. The mixing capabilites for live use or for analog recording seemed almost a throw-in. Size is a negative compared to the Presonus, obviously. Now if Mackie would just put their preamps into a firewire front end like the Presonus...... Uhh... you mean like this: http://www.mackie.com/products/800r/index.html Unfortunately, a nice unit but with no firewire output. I want to keep it simple, and building around a split ADAT interface into a DAW is not my idea of simple. Thanks for the suggestion though. If it only had the firewire output it would be *THE* unit for me. If you know of a simple way to use the ADAT interface into a PC with limited slots, let me know...I'm new to this digitial conversion/interface stuff and might be missing something. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harry Lavo" wrote:
If you know of a simple way to use the ADAT interface into a PC with limited slots, let me know... How about this? http://www.frontierdesign.com/products/dakotamain.html (P.S. Please trim when replying) -- "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!" - Lorin David Schultz in the control room making even bad news sound good (Remove spamblock to reply) |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lorin David Schultz" wrote in message news:4N80e.98659$fc4.43273@edtnps89... "Harry Lavo" wrote: If you know of a simple way to use the ADAT interface into a PC with limited slots, let me know... Thanks, Lorin. Didn't know of it. Might fill the bill. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
If you know of a simple way to use the ADAT interface into a PC with limited slots, let me know...I'm new to this digitial conversion/interface stuff and might be missing something. How about no slots required? http://www.behringer.com/BCA2000/index.cfm?lang=ENG It does require a USB port. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message ... "Zigakly" wrote in message ... The Mackie Onyx does claim to output individual channels from the preamp (analog) ahead of the mixer circuitry -- perhaps an improvement in this Onyx design? Hah! I didn't think they'd be daft enough to do that. A Firewire interface for a mixer should be able to tap directly after the preamps, post-EQ/pre-fader, or post fader. If the mixer offers any less than two of those three options, it doesn't have the versatility that price-point calls for. If only one is available it's got to be post-EQ/pre-fader. They finally put a reasonable EQ in a mixer and they bypass it for the recording outputs... those guys will never learn. No, in this case it makes sense...they've split it, with the analog outs coming post-EQ/pre-or-post fader, but the firewire outs coming out pre-eq, pre-fader. That way the mixer can serve as a road mixer for a band and still deliver a clean, non-eq'd signal to a laptop or other DAW for later mixing/processing. So it's best suited only for live recording, only when the SR needs match the recording needs (no unmic'ed drums), and if you want room mics you have to give up mixing channels. That's your idea of versatile? |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Zigakly wrote:
So it's best suited only for live recording, only when the SR needs match the recording needs (no unmic'ed drums), and if you want room mics you have to give up mixing channels. That's your idea of versatile? The assumption is that whatever you are using for recording will have a matrix in it so that you can configure which channels get recorded and which do not. And yes, you will have to give up PA channels for room mikes unless you use an outboard box for them and keep them off the PA console. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Linear Mode
