| SP-FORUMS http://sp-forums.com/ |
|
| Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... http://sp-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10857 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | groktopus [ Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
Has anybody messed with both or either and have an opinion on this? I'm looking for something nice and simple to record with at home. I like to have controls at my fingertips which is what makes me want a multi-track, but I've worked with the M-Audio box and can definitely work with that as well. I don't have much to record at the moment, so I'm not worried about connections, but it would be nice to have multiple instruments connected in the future... Any insight is appreciated. Also, for now I'm just recording Turntables, SP-404SX, and soon a MicroKorg... |
|
| Author: | LimpyLoo [ Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
my prediction is that if you were to get a digital multi-track, you would wish you had gotten an interface instead. more of a promise than a prediction, really. I have found that with digital 8-tracks (or 16 or what have you), the stuff doesn't naturally sound good. i def think you can make good stuff this way, but i find i have to compress stuff just to get it to sound listenable. whereas if you invest in a good preamp (oh god i never thought i'd be the guy hyping pre's, but alas...), then you'll have a much better signal to work with and all things being equal probably a better final product. |
|
| Author: | groktopus [ Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
Thank you veddi much. I already have Logic so I guess that pretty much answers that for me. I also have the Korg NanoKontroller so I can simulate sliders for mixing and whatnot. M-Audio it is at least for now, I'm pretty sure I can get it all set-up nicely so I keep a good workflow. |
|
| Author: | yo-yo crunch [ Fri Jul 29, 2011 1:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
LimpyLoo wrote: if you invest in a good preamp...then you'll have a much better signal to work with and all things being equal probably a better final product. are you talking about something like a mackie analog mixer or more like an avalon tube pre? the behringer xenyx 802 is sort of my audio hub right now but i'm thinking of trading it in tomorrow for a mackie 402 |
|
| Author: | Ill Green [ Fri Jul 29, 2011 2:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
I never had a problem with multitracks. The sound you put in, is what you get. I can see how computer-based DAWs speed up work but they're all options to me. Either you know what you are doing or you don't, the science and art of multitracking remains the same on whatever you choose. |
|
| Author: | LimpyLoo [ Fri Jul 29, 2011 3:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
yo-yo crunch wrote: LimpyLoo wrote: if you invest in a good preamp...then you'll have a much better signal to work with and all things being equal probably a better final product. are you talking about something like a mackie analog mixer or more like an avalon tube pre? the behringer xenyx 802 is sort of my audio hub right now but i'm thinking of trading it in tomorrow for a mackie 402 i''ll just say i use an alesis i/o2--which is about as budget and vanilla as it gets--and from my budget, vanilla mics(57, beta 57a, at 2020) i get absolutely workable stuff. (there ARE bad preamps, though, that make stuff sound worse. i own a couple of them.) having said all that, i have two tascam 424's that are getting new motors this weekend, and i'm pretty stoked about that. gonna see if they can be seamlessly integrated into my workflow. |
|
| Author: | groktopus [ Fri Jul 29, 2011 5:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
Ill Green wrote: I never had a problem with multitracks. The sound you put in, is what you get. I can see how computer-based DAWs speed up work but they're all options to me. Either you know what you are doing or you don't, the science and art of multitracking remains the same on whatever you choose. I think I still want one in the future. I've seen some nice ones that seem to get good results and I like working with them. I think the DAW works best for now, but I even worked with a cool Yamaha multi-track in this sound class which cost < $200 and worked independently and with a DAW so that seems pretty nice... |
|
| Author: | LimpyLoo [ Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
groktopus wrote: . I think the DAW works best for now, but I even worked with a cool Yamaha multi-track in this sound class which cost < $200 and worked independently and with a DAW so that seems pretty nice... You could do that. Just make sure the multi-track sounds good as a preamp. |
|
| Author: | ghost ghost ghost [ Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Digital Multi-track vs M-Audio Ultra box... |
Zoom make multitracks which double as sound cards. They've even got basic sampler functionality built in. I've only used the 24 track model so I can't say anything about the others but the 24 is really dope and sounds fine. I've never used computer in my setup and notice I end up spending a lot less money than those who do. Used to use adat gear but now I'm all about the Tascam portastudios |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|