4-8 tracks real time recorders

4-8 tracks real time recorders

Hello guys,
I am thinking of getting some pro equipment to do some concert and
demo recording, possibly using 48/96 technology.

Being a classical musician, I do not need overdubs and I usually do
editing on my PC.

For this reason, I am looking for a digital device which could record
4 or 8 tracks at the same time, allowing me to mix down the tracks in
a second time.

The tracks will be all coming from microphones, so no "line in" are
needed (there will be no guitars, keyboards etc, obviously).

I am still choosing the mics, so I do not have particular requests in
terms of balanced inputs and/or phantom power.

My typical layout for a recording is two mics for the ambient overall
sound, and frequently I have to add 2-3 more mics to enhance presence
and/or volume of instruments which need particular attention (e.g., a
harpsichord in the backline, a solo instruments with strings
accompainmnent, a choir put on the back of the orchestra....).

Since I need to mix down in a later time, I have to get a multitrack
master to be mixed later to a stereo file.
(possible editing will be done on the final stereo mixdown, so I'd
like the mixing to be done in the recording unit, in order to use the
pc just for editing).

I would like to buy a medium-low cost item, to be highly transportable
and - possibly - with a good amount of embedded memory (if expandable
is better). In any case, I am not a professional technician, so I
won't be around recording every day (so I won't need to have more than
one recording on the unit, I have all the time to download it on the
pc between two works).

Which unit would you suggest me?

Thank you very much.

Carlo

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

Carlo Centemeri wrote:
> Hello guys,
> I am thinking of getting some pro equipment to do some concert and
> demo recording, possibly using 48/96 technology.
>
> Being a classical musician, I do not need overdubs and I usually do
> editing on my PC.
>
> For this reason, I am looking for a digital device which could record
> 4 or 8 tracks at the same time, allowing me to mix down the tracks in
> a second time.
>
> The tracks will be all coming from microphones, so no "line in" are
> needed (there will be no guitars, keyboards etc, obviously).
>
> I am still choosing the mics, so I do not have particular requests in
> terms of balanced inputs and/or phantom power.
>
> My typical layout for a recording is two mics for the ambient overall
> sound, and frequently I have to add 2-3 more mics to enhance presence
> and/or volume of instruments which need particular attention (e.g., a
> harpsichord in the backline, a solo instruments with strings
> accompainmnent, a choir put on the back of the orchestra....).
>
> Since I need to mix down in a later time, I have to get a multitrack
> master to be mixed later to a stereo file.
> (possible editing will be done on the final stereo mixdown, so I'd
> like the mixing to be done in the recording unit, in order to use the
> pc just for editing).
>
> I would like to buy a medium-low cost item, to be highly transportable
> and - possibly - with a good amount of embedded memory (if expandable
> is better). In any case, I am not a professional technician, so I
> won't be around recording every day (so I won't need to have more than
> one recording on the unit, I have all the time to download it on the
> pc between two works).
>
> Which unit would you suggest me?
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Carlo
>

AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.

Cheers

Ian

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

> AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.

Thank you Ian.

Is there anything interesting on Tascam or Fostex catalogues?

Thank you again...

Carlo

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders


"Carlo Centemeri" <centemeri@gmail . com > wrote in message
news:58ee3b1d-8ca6-450d-903e-d7734b15d9f2@k13g2000hse.googlegroups . com ...
> > AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.


> Is there anything interesting on Tascam or Fostex catalogues?


I love Fostex recorders, but the Akai DPS24 is in a class of its own.

Predrag

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

Carlo Centemeri wrote:
>> AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.
>
> Thank you Ian.
>
> Is there anything interesting on Tascam or Fostex catalogues?
>
> Thank you again...
>
> Carlo
>

There's lots of stuff in their catalogues but IMHO non of it is up to
the rigours of on location recording. The only alternative I can think
of that might do the job as well as an AKAI is the Yamaha AWG16...something.

Cheers

Ian

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

In article <fv7t08$1k1b$1@energise.enta . net >,
Ian Thompson-Bell <ruffrecords@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Carlo Centemeri wrote:
>>> AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.
>>
>> Thank you Ian.
>>
>> Is there anything interesting on Tascam or Fostex catalogues?
>>
>> Thank you again...
>
>There's lots of stuff in their catalogues but IMHO non of it is up to
>the rigours of on location recording. The only alternative I can think
>of that might do the job as well as an AKAI is the Yamaha AWG16...something.

I beg to differ. The Fostex PD-6 has become very common in the field
recording industry. It's very popular with the film sound guys, and
intended to do precisely what the original poster is asking for. Converters
and preamps aren't top notch, but are about as good as you'll get with
battery power and a tiny box.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <fv7t08$1k1b$1@energise.enta . net >,
> Ian Thompson-Bell <ruffrecords@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Carlo Centemeri wrote:
>>>> AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.
>>> Thank you Ian.
>>>
>>> Is there anything interesting on Tascam or Fostex catalogues?
>>>
>>> Thank you again...
>> There's lots of stuff in their catalogues but IMHO non of it is up to
>> the rigours of on location recording. The only alternative I can think
>> of that might do the job as well as an AKAI is the Yamaha AWG16...something.
>
> I beg to differ. The Fostex PD-6 has become very common in the field
> recording industry. It's very popular with the film sound guys, and
> intended to do precisely what the original poster is asking for. Converters
> and preamps aren't top notch, but are about as good as you'll get with
> battery power and a tiny box.
> --scott

I take it back - this looks like a very capable machine.

Cheers

Ian

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

"Ian Thompson-Bell" <ruffrecords@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
message news:fv83uv$20q7$1@energise.enta . net
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> In article <fv7t08$1k1b$1@energise.enta . net >,
>> Ian Thompson-Bell <ruffrecords@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Carlo Centemeri wrote:
>>>>> AKAi DPS16 or if you can afford it an AKAi DPS24.
>>>> Thank you Ian.

>>>> Is there anything interesting on Tascam or Fostex
>>>> catalogues?

>>>> Thank you again...
>>> There's lots of stuff in their catalogues but IMHO non
>>> of it is up to the rigours of on location recording. The only
>>> alternative I can think of that might do the job as well as an AKAI is
>>> the
>>> Yamaha AWG16...something.

>> I beg to differ. The Fostex PD-6 has become very common
>> in the field recording industry. It's very popular with
>> the film sound guys, and intended to do precisely what
>> the original poster is asking for. Converters and
>> preamps aren't top notch, but are about as good as
>> you'll get with battery power and a tiny box. --scott

> I take it back - this looks like a very capable machine.

B&H says that the PD-6 is discontinued.

Recommended replacement is Fostex PD-606, which runs about $8K.

With an $8K budget, it seems like there are a lot of alternatives to do the
same thing and have a $ or two left over.

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

"Carlo Centemeri" <centemeri@gmail . com > wrote in message
news:c95da5b5-c42d-4438-b128-c8dce346889f@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups . com
> Hello guys,
> I am thinking of getting some pro equipment to do some
> concert and demo recording, possibly using 48/96
> technology.

48/96? Surely you jest! Why would you need 48 bits, let alone 96 KHz?

> Being a classical musician, I do not need overdubs and I
> usually do editing on my PC.

> For this reason, I am looking for a digital device which
> could record 4 or 8 tracks at the same time, allowing me
> to mix down the tracks in a second time.

That's a requirement that many of us fulfill with a PC. 4 or 8 track PCI
cards or Firewire or USB-attached audio interfaces abound. What's the budget
(as little as $200 will suffice).

> The tracks will be all coming from microphones, so no
> "line in" are needed (there will be no guitars, keyboards
> etc, obviously).

4 and 8 channel mic preamps abound as separate devices, and they also abound
as Firewire or USB-attached audio interfaces.

> I am still choosing the mics, so I do not have particular
> requests in terms of balanced inputs and/or phantom power.

Presume that all mic inputs will be balanced and need phantom power. Doesn't
matter - nobody bothers to make much more than absolute toilet-level mic
preamps that aren't balanced and have phantom power. If its a pro-grade mic
pre, it will have phantom power and balanced inputs - you can take that to
the bank!

> My typical layout for a recording is two mics for the
> ambient overall sound, and frequently I have to add 2-3
> more mics to enhance presence and/or volume of
> instruments which need particular attention (e.g., a
> harpsichord in the backline, a solo instruments with
> strings accompainmnent, a choir put on the back of the
> orchestra....).

Hold that thought! ;-)

Been there, done that, and it works!

> Since I need to mix down in a later time, I have to get a
> multitrack master to be mixed later to a stereo file.
> (possible editing will be done on the final stereo
> mixdown, so I'd like the mixing to be done in the
> recording unit, in order to use the pc just for editing).

The world is full of multitrack recording and mixing software ranging from
Audacity freeware to higher end stuff like Nuendo, etc. The basics are all
there from top to bottom and credible work can be done with any of it. OTOH,
you get what you pay for if you choose well.

> I would like to buy a medium-low cost item, to be highly
> transportable and - possibly - with a good amount of
> embedded memory (if expandable is better). In any case, I
> am not a professional technician, so I won't be around
> recording every day (so I won't need to have more than
> one recording on the unit, I have all the time to
> download it on the pc between two works).

Downloading audio files to a PC can be surprisingly time-consuming. If you
record on the same PC as you edit, then you avoid that step.

> Which unit would you suggest me?

A PC with your choice of audio interfaces and recording software. $200 and
up. What's your budget?

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

> 48/96? Surely you jest! Why would you need 48 bits, let alone 96 KHz?

Sorry. Typo. I meant obviously 24/96 ;-)

> > For this reason, I am looking for a digital device which
> > could record 4 or 8 tracks at the same time, allowing me
> > to mix down the tracks in a second time.
>
> That's a requirement that many of us fulfill with a PC. 4 or 8 track PCI
> cards or Firewire or USB-attached audio interfaces abound. What's the budget
> (as little as $200 will suffice).

Yes, this was a solution I had thinked about in the past. By the way,
I was trying to think about other solutions than the recording done on
the computer.

I frequently need to record my concerts, so I cannot be at the console
during the recording. The idea is to have something that can be left
in the hand of a generic user ("where's the big red button to
press?"), at least for starting and stopping the recording.


> The world is full of multitrack recording and mixing software ranging from
> Audacity freeware to higher end stuff like Nuendo, etc. The basics are all
> there from top to bottom and credible work can be done with any of it. OTOH,
> you get what you pay for if you choose well.

As before: I have used them all since a lot of time ago (from audacity
through goldwave until cooledit and nuendo).
I have a lot of application that I like, and that I use for editing,
but I'd really rather a standalone solution.

>
> Downloading audio files to a PC can be surprisingly time-consuming. If you
> record on the same PC as you edit, then you avoid that step.

Yes, this is the aching point.


Thank you for all the suggestions...

Carlo

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders


"Carlo Centemeri" <centemeri@gmail . com > wrote in message
news:fd83d7c0-72a3-468a-a339-86961cc6e767@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups . com ...
> > 48/96? Surely you jest! Why would you need 48 bits, let alone 96 KHz?
>
> Sorry. Typo. I meant obviously 24/96 ;-)
>
> > > For this reason, I am looking for a digital device which
> > > could record 4 or 8 tracks at the same time, allowing me
> > > to mix down the tracks in a second time.
> >
> > That's a requirement that many of us fulfill with a PC. 4 or 8 track
PCI
> > cards or Firewire or USB-attached audio interfaces abound. What's the
budget
> > (as little as $200 will suffice).
>
> Yes, this was a solution I had thinked about in the past. By the way,
> I was trying to think about other solutions than the recording done on
> the computer.
>
> I frequently need to record my concerts, so I cannot be at the console
> during the recording. The idea is to have something that can be left
> in the hand of a generic user ("where's the big red button to
> press?"), at least for starting and stopping the recording.
>

Zoom H2 ... you want stand alone field recording that you can hand to "Joe"
and push the button.
forget about 4 tracks and higher.



>
> > The world is full of multitrack recording and mixing software ranging
from
> > Audacity freeware to higher end stuff like Nuendo, etc. The basics are
all
> > there from top to bottom and credible work can be done with any of it.
OTOH,
> > you get what you pay for if you choose well.
>
> As before: I have used them all since a lot of time ago (from audacity
> through goldwave until cooledit and nuendo).
> I have a lot of application that I like, and that I use for editing,
> but I'd really rather a standalone solution.
>
> >
> > Downloading audio files to a PC can be surprisingly time-consuming. If
you
> > record on the same PC as you edit, then you avoid that step.
>
> Yes, this is the aching point.
>
>
> Thank you for all the suggestions...
>
> Carlo
>

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

> Zoom H2 ... you want stand alone field recording that you can hand to "Joe"
> and push the button.
> forget about 4 tracks and higher.

I already own a Tascam DR-1 for this kind of purposes.

All this debate was to try a situation in which I could use a multi
microphone recording, due to strange placement of musicians in
churches or in similar places, where a two mics recording often gives
a very strange sonic landscape in the resultant recording...

Carlo

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

> Zoom H2 ... you want stand alone field recording that you can hand to "Joe"
> and push the button.
> forget about 4 tracks and higher.

the H2 is a good pic for good cheap one button ambient classical
recordings It aslo can do 4 ch files from its 4 mics :)

Kevin T
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > The world is full of multitrack recording and mixing software ranging
> from
> > > Audacity freeware to higher end stuff like Nuendo, etc. The basics are
> all
> > > there from top to bottom and credible work can be done with any of it.
> OTOH,
> > > you get what you pay for if you choose well.
>
> > As before: I have used them all since a lot of time ago (from audacity
> > through goldwave until cooledit and nuendo).
> > I have a lot of application that I like, and that I use for editing,
> > but I'd really rather a standalone solution.
>
> > > Downloading audio files to a PC can be surprisingly time-consuming. If
> you
> > > record on the same PC as you edit, then you avoid that step.
>
> > Yes, this is the aching point.
>
> > Thank you for all the suggestions...
>
> > Carlo- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

Carlo Centemeri wrote:

> I am thinking of getting some pro equipment to do some concert and
> demo recording, possibly using 48/96 technology.

> For this reason, I am looking for a digital device which could record
> 4 or 8 tracks at the same time, allowing me to mix down the tracks in
> a second time.

> The tracks will be all coming from microphones, so no "line in" are
> needed (there will be no guitars, keyboards etc, obviously).

Usually the requirement is the other way - "I only need line inputs. I
don't need mic inputs because I have plenty of outboard preamps"

> I am still choosing the mics, so I do not have particular requests in
> terms of balanced inputs and/or phantom power.

Given that you're recording classical music, unless you decide to use
ribbon mics (not a bad choice by the way) you will probably end up with
condenser mics which, unless they're special purpose or cheeeeep, will
be balanced and require phantom power.

> My typical layout for a recording is two mics for the ambient overall
> sound, and frequently I have to add 2-3 more mics to enhance presence
> and/or volume of instruments which need particular attention (e.g., a
> harpsichord in the backline, a solo instruments with strings
> accompainmnent, a choir put on the back of the orchestra....).

It sounds like you've done this before. What mics have you been using in
the past? Well, that's a rhetorical question - it's not important that
we know other than to judge your level of "professional" but it's
important that YOU think about it.

> I would like to buy a medium-low cost item

What's wrong with this picture? What compromises are you willing to make
to get low cost? And, what's "low cost" to you? Are you looking for
something for under $200? Under $1,000? A stand-alone recorder, or would
you accept a reasonable interface for a computer, and use the computer
as your recorder?

> Which unit would you suggest me?

I'd suggest an Alesis HD24 and one of the zillions of 8-channel mic
preamps on the market today. It's two boxes, but they can be put
together in a single case that's easy to carry, connected with a single
cable (which may be fiber optic or copper depending on your choice of
preamp) and it will be quite bulletproof. While it may seem wasteful to
buy a 24-track recorder when you only need four or five tracks, it's
about the cheapest way to go. It sounds good, and you can either buy the
upgraded (high resolution) model up front or get an upgrade kit for the
standard model when you feel that you can get benefit from it.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me here:
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
(mriv...@d-and-d . com )

Re: 4-8 tracks real time recorders

> Given that you're recording classical music, unless you decide to use
> ribbon mics (not a bad choice by the way) you will probably end up with
> condenser mics which, unless they're special purpose or cheeeeep, will
> be balanced and require phantom power.

That's quite probable, indeed.

> It sounds like you've done this before. What mics have you been using in
> the past? Well, that's a rhetorical question - it's not important that
> we know other than to judge your level of "professional" but it's
> important that YOU think about it.

Usually a pair of ORTF for the overall effect, and some condensers
here and there for the singe instruments.

>
> > I would like to buy a medium-low cost item
>
> What's wrong with this picture? What compromises are you willing to make
> to get low cost? And, what's "low cost" to you? Are you looking for
> something for under $200? Under $1,000? A stand-alone recorder, or would
> you accept a reasonable interface for a computer, and use the computer
> as your recorder?

I'd prefer a standalone equipment, not an interface for PC.
I mean, when I need to do masters for cd's I have several sound
engineers to work with, which can do also a better work for the
mastering and the overall management of the work.
If I can do something like the situation you proposed below it would
be real bliss.

>
> > Which unit would you suggest me?
>
> I'd suggest an Alesis HD24 and one of the zillions of 8-channel mic
> preamps on the market today. It's two boxes, but they can be put
> together in a single case that's easy to carry, connected with a single
> cable (which may be fiber optic or copper depending on your choice of
> preamp) and it will be quite bulletproof. While it may seem wasteful to
> buy a 24-track recorder when you only need four or five tracks, it's
> about the cheapest way to go. It sounds good, and you can either buy the
> upgraded (high resolution) model up front or get an upgrade kit for the
> standard model when you feel that you can get benefit from it.

Thank you, very much.

Carlo