These machines appear to do roughly the same thing, though the Tascam does
"more" (but "more" that I might not ever need, such DSD and 192K, and
burning DVDs rather than plain old CDRs).

Mostly I'd like to continue my analog mix, but going into 96/24 and
pulling 44.1/16 copies as needed; and, also having the ability to provide
96/24 to a mastering house.

Anyone use/compare these machines? Are their internal ADCs any good? Is
one machine's ADC noticeably better than the other? (I'm not in such a
great need of the "mastering" capabilities - comp, eq, etc - but does one
machine have a superior suite of these tools?)

Might it generally be better to stick with a good outboard converter, such
as the Lucid, Mytek, etc and go right into PC DAW? (I know the money is a
little different.)

Oh, this machine might also see use as a DAT replacement, but that's
perhaps a secondary application.

Thanks,

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio
--

Frank Stearns wrote:


Mostly I'd like to continue my analog mix, but going into 96/24 and
pulling 44.1/16 copies as needed; and, also having the ability to provide
96/24 to a mastering house.

Anyone use/compare these machines? Are their internal ADCs any good? Is
one machine's ADC noticeably better than the other? (I'm not in such a
great need of the "mastering" capabilities - comp, eq, etc - but does one
machine have a superior suite of these tools?)


Oh, this machine might also see use as a DAT replacement, but that's
perhaps a secondary application.

I have a Masterlink, and recommend it highly, but I think that the two
units are probably apples and oranges, etc. I plan on picking up a
RA1000 though, to help out with the DTS 5.1, DAVa, etc. stuff that I do.
I would like to hear from someone that uses the new Tascam.


--
--Scot
www.RonnieJamesDio.org
www.SMCProductions.org
www.CraigGoldy.org
www.ScotClayton.org

In article writes:

These machines appear to do roughly the same thing, though the Tascam does
"more" (but "more" that I might not ever need, such DSD and 192K, and
burning DVDs rather than plain old CDRs).

Anyone use/compare these machines? Are their internal ADCs any good? Is
one machine's ADC noticeably better than the other?

This should be a "don't care" unless you're on a very tight budget.
Either machine can take a digital input, and you should feel free to
use an outboard A/D converter any time you want to throw some money at
a sonic improvement. You might also be concerned with the D/A
converter since that's what you'll be listening to when evaluating
your mixes.

Might it generally be better to stick with a good outboard converter, such
as the Lucid, Mytek, etc and go right into PC DAW? (I know the money is a
little different.)

If you find it necessary, yes. But this is a decision that you can
make after you've decided which machine is functionally better for
your use. Personally, I'd go for the Masterlink. The TASCAM is a good
deal for the mastering house who needs to deliver DSD or other high
resolution product for replication.

Oh, this machine might also see use as a DAT replacement, but that's
perhaps a secondary application.

The fact that you can record direct to media that you can immediately
remove from the machine and store away (or hand to the client) is a
plus for the TASCAM. I don't believe the Masterlink has a
record-direct-to-CD mode.

--
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

On Tue, 03 May 2005 01:58:29 -0000, Frank Stearns wrote:

These machines appear to do roughly the same thing, though the Tascam does
"more" (but "more" that I might not ever need, such DSD and 192K, and
burning DVDs rather than plain old CDRs).

Mostly I'd like to continue my analog mix, but going into 96/24 and
pulling 44.1/16 copies as needed; and, also having the ability to provide
96/24 to a mastering house.

Anyone use/compare these machines? Are their internal ADCs any good? Is
one machine's ADC noticeably better than the other? (I'm not in such a
great need of the "mastering" capabilities - comp, eq, etc - but does one
machine have a superior suite of these tools?)

I cannot comment on the DV-RA1000 but it is several years younger than
the ML-9600. That could mean: a larger disk, a faster CD/DVD burner,
better connection to a PC or keyboard.

I use my ML-9600 for live event recordings and had used it for about
50 concerts. The internal AD and DA converters are well suited for
that purpose, way better than those of my (old) DAT decks.

I've never used the DSP functions (EQ, normalizing, dynamics
processing) as these are a lot easier to use on a PC DAW and - if I'm
not mistaken - only work when burning audio CDs. The DSP functions are
non-destructive.

Might it generally be better to stick with a good outboard converter, such
as the Lucid, Mytek, etc and go right into PC DAW? (I know the money is a
little different.)

As both machines have full digital IO you can always add an external
converter at some later time if needed.

Oh, this machine might also see use as a DAT replacement, but that's
perhaps a secondary application.

I still use a DAT parallel with the ML-9600 as a backup. If power
fails a DAT simply stops and you'll only loose the last fraction of
a second. A power failure on a ML-9600 will make some more trouble
because anything recorded after entering record mode is be
inaccessible from within the ML-9600.

What are the goodies of the ML-9600?

It's robust and reliable. Quickly set up for recording. Writes CDs in
both red book and raw format (ISO file system). Can be used as CD
player. Can import red book CD tracks into a project.

What drives needs to get improved?

When recording in 96/24 the CD will only hold about 22 minutes.
Red book CDs are limited to 80 minutes recording time.
The number of projects is limited to 16.
Neither computer networking of any kind nor keyboard connector
available. So file names (=track titles) must be entered with
the remote control by scrolling through the alphabet. No input
volume control.

Norbert

Norbert Hahn wrote:



I cannot comment on the DV-RA1000 but it is several years younger than
the ML-9600. That could mean: a larger disk, a faster CD/DVD burner,
better connection to a PC or keyboard.

Does the Tascam have a hard drive?

In article ,
Norbert Hahn wrote:

I still use a DAT parallel with the ML-9600 as a backup. If power
fails a DAT simply stops and you'll only loose the last fraction of
a second. A power failure on a ML-9600 will make some more trouble
because anything recorded after entering record mode is be
inaccessible from within the ML-9600.

Which is why, for live recordings, I would never use a Masterlink
without a UPS.

"Joe Sensor" wrote in message
...
Norbert Hahn wrote:



I cannot comment on the DV-RA1000 but it is several years younger than
the ML-9600. That could mean: a larger disk, a faster CD/DVD burner,
better connection to a PC or keyboard.

Does the Tascam have a hard drive?

No, it doesn't. It also doesn't have the DSP that the Masterlink has. It
is strictly a recorder/burner.

--Ben

--
Benjamin Maas
Fifth Circle Audio
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.fifthcircle.com

Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies