Hi all:

I have been mixing down my analog recordings to a Tascam DA30 for, oh my
gawd, countless years! A pal recently gave me a Mac G3 with the
Audiomedia 3 card (& a million plug ins, btw!). Which of these two
archcaic mixdown mediums is sonically superior in y'all's opinion?? Are
the DAT's converters better than the Audiomedia 3??

Thanks in advance folks!!

Dave N.

http://www.fondamusic.com/rollercoaster

David Newton wrote:

I have been mixing down my analog recordings to a Tascam DA30 for, oh my
gawd, countless years! A pal recently gave me a Mac G3 with the
Audiomedia 3 card (& a million plug ins, btw!). Which of these two
archcaic mixdown mediums is sonically superior in y'all's opinion?? Are
the DAT's converters better than the Audiomedia 3??

The DA-30 has pretty rotten converters in it. I don't know how bad the
Audiomedia 3 converters are.

But I do know that if you buy a used Symetrix 620 for $200 or so, you can
put it in front of either the DA-30 or the Audiomedia machine, and never
have to worry again about which sounds better because you will have separated
the conversion from the interface.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

David Newton wrote:

I have been mixing down my analog recordings to a Tascam DA30 for, oh my
gawd, countless years! A pal recently gave me a Mac G3 with the
Audiomedia 3 card (& a million plug ins, btw!). Which of these two
archcaic mixdown mediums is sonically superior in y'all's opinion?? Are
the DAT's converters better than the Audiomedia 3??

Probably not, since even an AMII will do 24 bits if the old mac can keep
up will. But it'd be easy enough for you to compare the two.

--
ha

David Newton wrote:

I have been mixing down my analog recordings to a Tascam DA30 for, oh my
gawd, countless years! A pal recently gave me a Mac G3 with the
Audiomedia 3 card (& a million plug ins, btw!). Which of these two
archcaic mixdown mediums is sonically superior in y'all's opinion?? Are
the DAT's converters better than the Audiomedia 3??

David,
I've got a DA-30 and an AMIII here. We haven't used the DA-30 in
years. Although the converters in the AMIII are probably just as
crappy as those in the DA-30, we wouldn't use either one of them. The
reason for using the AMIII instead of the DA-30 are as follows: First
of all, the SPDIF i/o on the AMIII carries up to 24 bits, which means
that we can use the full resolution of the 20-bit AD converter we own
(Symetrix 620). We plan to upgrade the converter at some point, and
being able to record all the bits is important to us. Also, recording
into the computer allows us to archive on CD-R which costs $0.20 to
$0.40 apiece, as opposed to $10 or so for a DAT tape. CDRs are less
prone to mechanical failure and are generally more reliable than DAT
tapes, in my opinion, though of course I wouldn't trust an imporant
recording to a single copy on either format. Since DAT is pretty much
a dead horse at this point, and the personal computer looks like it'll
be around for a couple more years, technical support and repair for the
hardware will be easier and cheaper on a computer than on the DAT. If
your DAT's transport craps out, you're looking at at least a hundred
bucks just for diagnosis. You can replace the CD-R drive on your
computer for $50. Also, it makes a lot of sense to record into the
computer since that's where you'll need to end up if you want to do
editing and post-production on your recordings. All of this adds up to
no good reason I can think of for powering up the DAT machine in the
studio. We keep it around in case somebody brings in a DAT tape they
need worked on (in which case we'd immediately transfer the DAT through
the AMIII into the computer) and the occasional remote gig, where the
portability of the DAT machine beats the computer.

ulysses