Max Ventura Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 As I predicted a week ago, Roland has just unveiled at Namm a 24-tracker V-Studio similar to the Yamaha AW4416 but with more options: besides 8 more tracks, it also has a VGA monitor out! Let me see how long before they develop the voice-modeller that I predicted a couple of months ago. Call me "Max-adamus". Max Ventura, Italy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 Can I call you "Max-a-Million$?" Or "Max-24-Tracks-Attacks?" How about "Max-Factor-Tracktor-Smacked 'er-'till she can't relaxter?" I, too, am molto psyched about this new Roland innovation, but I didn't until now know about THE VGA MONITOR OUT!!! HOW F*CKING SUPER-PHAT CAN THAT BE???!!!! Ciao, Massimo, come stai, tutto bene? Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual.rayprodigy.net Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 On the not-so wonderful side,it has shared faders like the 1680,the 24 bit recording mode is RDAC (lossy compression),and list price is announced as $4500 w/o CD burner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormhole Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 i'll stick with my 1680 until the price drops a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Ventura Posted January 22, 2001 Author Share Posted January 22, 2001 Ciao Eric, tutto bene. No mail yet. Max Ventura, Italy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 .... I waited for almost a year for the Yamaha AW4416 to be released. And I knew damn good and well that within a few months somebody else was going to announce something that would blow the AW away, and I would have to wait months for THAT, and meanwhile somebody ELSE would develop something ELSE that they would annouce at Summer NAMM that blows THAT away... etc. I mean one could go on doing that forever, and whenever you buy something you just have to face the fact that it is never going to be the latest and greatest for very long. Meanwhile I'm very glad that I now have my 4416 and am actually making music on it, as opposed to having endless gear lust. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 01-22-2001 at 01:06 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 Does it still have that brittle Roland sound? Great for mixing jingles for dog food commercials, but less than optimal for rock, IMHO. I'll stick with the Yamaha for now, but might consider a WR-DA7/ADAT HD24 setup later this year. And I'm sure someone has a hot, under $5K mixer in the works somewhere. What do YOU think, Max? My suspicions - won't call them predictions since I didn't post them - were that high priced rigs like ProTools and the Mackie duo would be challenged by lower priced units. Not everyone wants to burn fifteen grand on a multi-track system, but a lot of people would be willing to shell out, say, three to seven K. It reminds me of the history of samplers. They were interesting when they cost $14,000.00, but they didn't really catch on with the public until you could get one for under $2000. The Alesis ADAT HD24 and TC Electronic VST farm card are steps in the right direction, i.e. more bang for the buck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Yo, Lee, I hear ya babes, I went through the same psychological torture with the 880 when the 890 came out just a few months later w/24 bit converters, but for the same price. Sometimes you can't wait - ya just gotta buy SOMETHING and get to work. Yo Dan, you're right, the Rolands DO sound kinda brittle, as my first client with it pointed out to me, though it was for a robotic sink manufacturer, not a dog food brand. This works well for getting crisp drum and percussion sounds, but other instruments like strings and vocals have to be warmed up a lot going in. I'm shopping for a mic pre with a tube stage to help me alleviate this problem. I think in the long run though that it's good that the Rolands sound that way 'cause sometimes you need a lot of crispness and precision, and you can't get that if the unit doesn't have it. You also can't beat the price/features ratio. But yeah, you definitely have to be careful of that "shrill" quality getting out of hand. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Hey, Curve! The Roland stuff is excellent for songwriters and for many other applications. Victor Wooton used it to cut a couple of CD's, and they sound very clean, but a little glassy for my taste. That was one of the reasons I went with the AW, and it suits my needs very well. It's got a nice clean sound with a lot of warmth. How's that dance music coming along? You got those Philie fillies hoppin' yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 >>How's that dance music coming along? You got those Philie fillies hoppin' yet?<< Yo Danno, good lookin' out, mah brutha, the Philly filly's are indeed a-hoppin' like bunnies on an Easter egg hunt. Composing music for a dance troupe is a little like being a wolf in a chicken coop. Ya wanna bite into something, but ya don't want to break any eggs. Does that make any sense? Probably not. Try this...oh fughettaboutit. I'm too lit to make any sense. I'll try again later. But, yeah, the Roland is a fantastic composing tool, hands down. But there's something about the compression algorithm that creates that shrillness, and I suspect that it's in the de-compression stage that this happens. Now, it has a "MAS" or Mastering Mode where there's no compression, and for VIP clients I'm gonna try that. But right now the unit is still new to me, and I'm filling up the hard drive just experimenting, so I have all the partitions and songs set to "MT1," which is the "highest quality but still compressed" setting. There are two more lower-quality stages of compression that you can set it to, and now that I'm typing this, I wonder if they might sound warmer? Hmmm...I may do some experimenting and get back to you about that. But I'm looking at the dbx 386 mic pre to warm things up going in. The choreographer for that dance troupe complained about the string sounds sounding too brittle, too, and I schooled him on how this is a factor with digital recording in general, and I appreciate feedback from him, and folks like yourself and Lee, and this is something that needs to be addressed. DAW's in the future could benefit from some kind of anti-aliasing feature that simulates the response of analog tape - a way to "smooth out" the hard edges that high resolution conversion rates create with 20-24 bit a/d converters. Perhaps some electrical engineer lurking on these threads with an entrepeneurial bent can pick up on this and make some big $$$ on a patent and solve our problem at the same time. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Dansouth said: >>Does it still have that brittle Roland sound? Great for mixing jingles for dog food commercials, but less than optimal for rock, IMHO. I'll stick with the Yamaha for now, but might consider a WR-DA7/ADAT HD24 setup later this year. And I'm sure someone has a hot, under $5K mixer in the works somewhere.<< Hi Dan. You already know what I think about the Roland converters, data compression and preamps making the thing sound "brittle". Not that they can't be used to make nice recordings, but they do have those problems. The DA7 / Alesis HD24 sounds like a nice setup, but I heard the Alesis lacks any virtual tracks whatsoever, so that might (or might not) be a concern for you. And you were right: someone DOES have a "hot, under $5 K mixer in the works". The Tascam DM-24 is 24 / 96 capable, is due to ship this spring and will list for $2,999.00. They say you can link two for more tracks. Might be worth checking into. Phil O'Keefe Sound Sanctuary Recording Riverside CA http://members.aol.com/ssanctuary/index.html email: pokeefe777@msn.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Curve - Gee it sounds like a really miserable way to make a living. ;-) I admire any man who can get the ladies dancing. Hey, you might want to try one of those Empirical Labs Fatso processors to warm up your VS. Phil - I've seen the ads for the Tascam. I'll check into it, and I'm sure that other stuff is on the horizon. I have avoided dropping 15K on a Mackie system, because these things HAVE to get less expensive in the future. I remember when the big news was CD burners for under $2000. Imagine that! There's a good thread on the Keyboard board about overspending. You know what they say about a fool and his money... For now, the AW is enabling me to do what I want, so no rush. I'll just sit back and watch the prices come down. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif I'm STILL waiting for my OS upgrade, though. Virtual tracks on a recorder are not a big issue, because most of those tracks will be dedicated to the output of my MIDI gear. One take wonders! One reason that I have considered going with Mackie is their customer service, which has always been very responsive. You can pick up a phone and actually speak to a human being. Try that with Yamaha, Korg, Tascam, et al. That level of service is worth a premium, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 BTW- speakng of virtual tracks, this is a feature of the Roland that makes overcoming those other problems worthwhile. You can cut re-write after re-write, and yet have every version of every track sitting right there on your desk at your fingertips. This is FANTASTIC when it comes to developing compositions. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 I think it's the VS's converters as well as the compression that make it sound that way. The AW does have a much warmer and fuller sound - AND virtual tracks (which I agree are fabulous!). Probably if you got a good pre and an external converter (and track through the digital in) you could get your VS to sound a lot better. --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Lee, I totally agree with that. A mic pre, with a tube stage and digital outs is next on my shopping list. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Curve - I've been doing some experimenting on my VS 1880 with the various recording modes s well. No noticeable warmth changes to my ears anyway. For the most part I've been recording in MTP ans MT1 @ 44.1, all the 48 KHz seems to give is 2K extra in the top end. Who can hear that anyway ? And since most mic.'s, speakers, amplifiers etc etc are only rated up to 20K why give the extended range if your gear isn't going to pick it up that well ? I'm glad to hook up with other VS users though, I was sold on it the minute I saw it and I've been loving it ever since. I'm taking mine to record a live gig this weekend with a sub mix and ambient mic.'s, any advice ? As for the Roland shrillness, I've never encountered it as a problem before. I've also found that if I run the audio through my BBE Maximizer (with the "process" knob about 11:00)in stereo en route to the CD or cassette, things come out a little sweeter . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Props to Pyramid (a molto phat tag, by the way). When you run your mixes through the BBE, you are "mastering" that chumpy. Now, the BBE is a controversial subject on these pages, so get ready for some divergent opinions on that unit - but I'm not going to go there at this time. What's important is that you've touched on the issue of mastering, and this is an essential step in the process of producing recordings. If you are using the BBE, and it works for you, then all the power to you, mah brutha, rock on. I personally like to use mastering houses to conduct that sort of activity, and since I prefer to get the best possible sound BEFORE mastering, I am right now focusing on getting the best possible sound in the tracking phase. That having been said, a BBE could be a useful purchase for "home mastering," and if I go that route, I will bear in mind your suggestion to set the "process" knob at eleven o'clock. Now that I think about it, I can see how "home mastering" can be cool for one-off demos & such. Thank you, Pyramid! Oh, and thank you again, Pyramid, for sharing with me the results of your experimenting with the different recording modes - you just saved me hours of experimenting. If you ever visit Illadelph, the drinks are on me. This message has been edited by Curve Dominant on 01-24-2001 at 02:14 AM Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Ventura Posted January 24, 2001 Author Share Posted January 24, 2001 Ciao guys & ciao Curve. About the VS sound quality, I have the 1680 and yes, there are some crackles on the upper end that I cannot seem to avoid; I am not sure, but I think they actually generate from the input converters, not from the subsequent processing at the output stage. Now, I know this machine is not the best recorder out there, it does compress and it does cut a lot of corners, but the exceptional ease of use, and the sheer amount of stuff it does, and expecially, the rock-solid OS and its reliability, even live, make me love it. I sometimes have to process the output more than necessary to make it sound better and richer, both the mix and indiv.tracks, but that's a minor nuisance. As I said in a previous post, not being a purist, I'll take practicality and ease of use over absolute sound quality at all times. However, as soon as I do find a better machine I'm for it right away, and I'"ll keep this one for live gigs. Max Ventura, Italy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 >>the exceptional ease of use, and the sheer amount of stuff it does, and expecially, the rock-solid OS and its reliability, even live, make me love it.<< I luv my Roland VS880EX - crackles and all. 64 virtual tracks is what sold me. That gives the unit an amazing flexibility in composing: 4096 different possibilities. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kobb Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Here's a great forum for anybody who wants to find a lot of discussion about the VS machines. http://www.vsplanet.com/cgi-bin/ubb/Ultimate.cgi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.