[Mogens V.]

I'm getting close to select my DAW solution and interface.
It's for composing, arranging, recording my own stuff mostly.
Having read a lot in here, I've decided to go for PT, and need to decide
on an interface. The problem with PT is I can hardly change ifc without
selling off the whole package.

I'm looking at these configurations:

1. The Digi Mbox 2 Pro (Factory) meets my demands, less it has no ADAT.
Won't be a problem for some time, but I can't foretell what'll happen.

2. Going for a Digi 002 solution will give me far enough for present use
and no worries about expandability. Different pricetag though...

3. A used RME Fireface, and the somewhat cheaper PT/Digi mini USB
solution, possibly score a used package, leaving the ifc in the closet.
Only, the Fireface likewise has only one ADAT, IIRC.

4. PT M-powered with a M-audio 1814 is cheaper (1814 can be had used as
well), but I won't get the full software package, which may or may not
be a problem. That'll be up to myself to decide, of cause...
But can I go from there to, say, the RME Fireface later? Or is the
M-powered version locked to M-audio only? If it's not locked, it'll get
me started, and I can later sell off the M-audio thingy if need be.


I see two future needs:

a. More analog I/O, and hence another icf through the lightpipe.
This is less likely, unless I get into, say, club recording or need to
record my own (future) band live or such...
b. Outboard gear through ADAT or S/PDIF, which I find more likely.


5. Is it possible to add a (3rd party) ADAT ifc to a PT setup?
This would solve future needs, and I wouldn't have to shop more than
needed now.

6. I read the thread S/PDIF fanout, and wonder if a semilar approach
lets me overcome the missing/single ADAT, or if it's pratical using a
mix of ADAT for some purposes and S/PDIF for, say, future outboard gear.
Whether S/PDIF gets me 48 or 96Khz is kinda a doesn't matter.


I'd like comments to above. Things I overlooked...

If someone wants to hand off gear, contact me offlist (remove noyoudont)

--
Kind regards,
Mogens V.

[jumpinjavabean]

On Mar 2, 10:25 am, "Mogens V."
wrote:

I'm looking at these configurations:

2. Going for a Digi 002 solution will give me far enough for present use
and no worries about expandability. Different pricetag though...

FYI: it looks like the Digi 002 has been retired
Take a look at the Digidesign website...they have an 003 out now with
some cool upgrades (like improved preamps)

Jonathan

[HKC]

What are you going to be recording, PC, Mac and why PT.

[Mogens V.]

HKC wrote:
What are you going to be recording, PC, Mac and why PT.

Mostly good solid rock (whatever we may all think that is), dark wave,
but also some progressive jazz/rock.

Using a Mac. I chose PT because at some point I'll have to work with a
studio for acoustic recordings. Else I could use any of the 6-8 major
packages. I did read most of the threads here on recording...

--
Kind regards,
Mogens V.

[Peter Larsen]

"Mogens V." wrote:

HKC wrote:

What are you going to be recording, PC, Mac and why PT.

Mostly good solid rock (whatever we may all think that is),
dark wave, but also some progressive jazz/rock.

Hmm ... could be interesting to work with.

Using a Mac. I chose PT because at some point I'll have to work
with a studio for acoustic recordings.

Are you somehow publicly funded or on a budget?

Else I could use any of the 6-8 major packages.

Listen to the mixes I made in Audition at http://www.raw-tracks.com.

I did read most of the threads here on recording...

I don't want to say that your technology choice is wrong, because there
is no right or wrong in this, but I think you should re-examine the cost
benefit analysis. You also need to be aware that all those different
packages sound differently, it is not just a spec based choice.

Mogens V.

Regards

Peter Larsen

[Mogens V.]

Mogens V. wrote:
I'm getting close to select my DAW solution and interface.
It's for composing, arranging, recording my own stuff mostly.
Having read a lot in here, I've decided to go for PT, and need to decide
on an interface. The problem with PT is I can hardly change ifc without
selling off the whole package.

I'm looking at these configurations:
.... ideas ...

Hmm, so far I haven't seen too many comments. Please, I need them.

To complicate things.. It's possible to use an outboard converter
through ADAT, S/PDIF or other ifc's, but will PT load and use only such
an icf, and no 'normal' soundcard detected?
If so, I'd like references to ADAT and S/PDIF cards for Mac's. Possibly
something with both plus midi, and with good lo-latency drivers.

--
Kind regards,
Mogens V.

[Laurence Payne]

On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 01:19:47 +0100, "Mogens V."
wrote:

I'm getting close to select my DAW solution and interface.
It's for composing, arranging, recording my own stuff mostly.
Having read a lot in here, I've decided to go for PT, and need to decide
on an interface. The problem with PT is I can hardly change ifc without
selling off the whole package.

I'm looking at these configurations:
... ideas ...

Hmm, so far I haven't seen too many comments. Please, I need them.

To complicate things.. It's possible to use an outboard converter
through ADAT, S/PDIF or other ifc's, but will PT load and use only such
an icf, and no 'normal' soundcard detected?
If so, I'd like references to ADAT and S/PDIF cards for Mac's. Possibly
something with both plus midi, and with good lo-latency drivers.


Possibly because, having decided on ProTools, your choice is severely
limited.

I won't start on your choice to use a Mac :-)

[Peter Larsen]

Laurence Payne wrote:

I won't start on your choice to use a Mac :-)

You don't have to, I did. The extra cost of going for mac and protools
may be well warranted, but we are talking hardware with a 6 year
usability horizon, and it could be a lot of DKK's pr. month of usage.
That may matter less in case all usage hours are billable than it
matters for a diy setup as I understand this to be.


Regards

Peter Larsen

[Mogens V.]

Peter Larsen wrote:
Laurence Payne wrote:


I won't start on your choice to use a Mac :-)


You don't have to, I did. The extra cost of going for mac and protools
may be well warranted, but we are talking hardware with a 6 year
usability horizon, and it could be a lot of DKK's pr. month of usage.
That may matter less in case all usage hours are billable than it
matters for a diy setup as I understand this to be.

It _is_ non billable! I use Mac because I have it (and I'm a unix rat).
Protools because at some point I'll have to work with a studio for
acoustics parts, and having read numerous discussions here and discussed
the subject in shops, it's pretty much clear most all studios use PT.

Now, if some of you good guys would browse my opening post, I'll try to
briefly summerize:

I don't need an expensive ifc to get started, but with PT, I'll have to
swap the whole package later if I need more, and didn't get a ifc with
ADAT and S/PDIF, as seems the case with the cheaper ifc's.
So, I'd just like to start with a simple setup and be able to expand.

Which is why I asked in my last post about using an outboard converter
through ADAT, S/PDIF or other ifc's. Please also see that one.


Ohh, I've skipped the RME fireface. Got interested from seeing used
prices on another semilar RME with PCI ifc, but hadn't expected prices
on the fireface to go that high.

--
Kind regards,
Mogens V.

[Laurence Payne]

On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 11:50:47 +0100, "Mogens V."
wrote:

Ohh, I've skipped the RME fireface. Got interested from seeing used
prices on another semilar RME with PCI ifc, but hadn't expected prices
on the fireface to go that high.

If you're set on Mac and Protools, you'll have to get used to that
level of price :-)

Actually, of the three, the Fireface is the only one I'd consider
WORTH it's price.