dansouth Posted February 24, 2001 Share Posted February 24, 2001 Perhaps it's time to pool the AW4416 knowledge pool. Do you have any tips or tricks to share? Any questions about the AW4416's operation? Post 'em here. I'll start the ball rolling with a couple of quick tips. TIP 1: Buy a mouse. I used the AW for a couple of months without one because I didn't think the mouse would make much of a difference. BIG MISTAKE! Some tasks are up to ten times faster with a mouse, and I'd rather replace a $19 mouse than send the AW to the shop for new buttons. TIP 2: Explore routing options. This is one of the areas that puts the AW in a class by itself. If you look at the back panel, you'll see analog and monitor stereo outs, digitals stereo ins and outs, 4 aux (omni) outs (no aux returns), two channel inserts, and eight analog channel inputs. This might lead you to believe that you're limited to two inserts and four aux sends. But look more closely. Input and output routings are very flexible. The digital in and out can be used as a stereo aux send/return (or two channel inserts). If you're monitoring through the monitor outs, you can use the stereo outs for aux sends or channel inserts. This gets really exciting when you add I/O expansion cards. If you add a couple of AES/EBU or lightpipe cards, and you have a rack of processors with digital ins and outs (e.g., the TC M3000 or the new Kurzweil KSP), you could have six analog and sixteen digital sends and returns for your channel inserts and aux busses and still have a stereo digital send to your DAT or mixdown deck. And don't forget that an internal plug-in card will be offered for the AW4416 later this year for even more signal processing muscle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted March 6, 2001 Author Share Posted March 6, 2001 I notice that when I punch in a part, the level of the track is lower when it's being recorded. Am I not setting the monitoring levels up correctly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Yo Dan whassup??!!! I use the VS, but what I'm curious about is if this level while recording issue is related to both machine types. On the VS, the fader settings work independently of the faders among the 3 stages of the mixer, so that if, for example, the fader is moved while the mixer is on input, that setting will not affect subsequent movement while the mixer is set to tracking, or recording. Does the AW work similiarly? Could the level when you punch in (recording stage) be adjusted correctly in the tracking stage? School me, bro, I'm flyin' blind here, 'cause I never used the AW. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com: I notice that when I punch in a part, the level of the track is lower when it's being recorded. Am I not setting the monitoring levels up correctly? Dan, when you punch in, the AW switches to monitoring the input source instead of the recorded track. So if your input faders and your monitor faders are at different levels, the levels will be different. I try to keep both faders at unity or close to it, while tracking, so I don't have that problem. --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted March 6, 2001 Author Share Posted March 6, 2001 Lee, now that I think of it, that's perfectly logical. I guess I should lower the monitor volume in this case until it matches the input level. Thanks for the tip!! Curve, lemme ponder your issues and get back ta ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 >>Curve, lemme ponder your issues and get back ta ya. Actually, Dan, Lee nailed it, I think. The fader levels get "stuck" at the levels they're at whenever you "leave" that mixer stage. Or so it goes on the VS. Does the AW work that way? Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayman Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Can I set up the AW in "overwrite"-mode. When I record a song (16 tracks simultaneously) and decide to do another take, I press "Return to zero" and start again. What happens is that the AW keeps all the data from the first take somewhere. After a while this fills the disc with stuff that I really don't want to keep. Anyone? Richard http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Richard, in the Song management screen there's a feature called "Optimize". When you optimize a song it gets rid of all the undo/redo data. So if you've already overwritten a take several times, just run Optimize and it will free all that disk space. --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Originally posted by Curve Dominant: Actually, Dan, Lee nailed it, I think. The fader levels get "stuck" at the levels they're at whenever you "leave" that mixer stage. Or so it goes on the VS. Does the AW work that way? Sort of. You press buttons to switch mixing "layers" on the AW - one button and the 16 channels become input channels 1-16, another button and they become channels 17-24, and a third for the 16 monitor returns. Since the AW has moving faders, the faders change their position to where you last left them on that layer. So if the input channel fader isn't at the same level as the monitor fader for the same track, punch-ins will be heard at a different level from playback. --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Cool idea Dan - sort of a "mini AW4416" forum. Seems like the Sony owners rate their own forum, but we don't... can I have some cheese with my whine? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Anyhow, I'll be checking in from time to time, and will make some suggestions on tips, etc. as I think of them. Actually, questions are always good too - that way we get to address specific problems instead of just always posting "tips" that might be old news to many / most /all of the readers... Here's a question: Is anyone besides me locking up and digitally cascading two (or more) AW4416's? Tell us about your setup! Thanks! Again, great idea Dan! 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 March 6, 2001 Author Share Posted March 6, 2001 Originally posted by Richard Hjemmen: Can I set up the AW in "overwrite"-mode. When I record a song (16 tracks simultaneously) and decide to do another take, I press "Return to zero" and start again. What happens is that the AW keeps all the data from the first take somewhere. After a while this fills the disc with stuff that I really don't want to keep. Anyone? Richard http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Lee is correct. The "somewhere" that you're referring to is the UNDO buffer. This allows you to go back to Take 1 if Take 2 turns out not to be worse. Optimize will clear this buffer, but you'll lose the ability to UNDO or REDO any previous operation. A better approach, provided that you have the disk space, would be to record each pass on a separate set of virtual tracks. Then you can compare them later. If you play in time to the internal metronome and you make sure to start each recording at the same place, you can later edit the song selecting the best pieces of each take. In other words, if the vocal sounds best on Take 1 and the guitar solo sounds best on Take 3, your final version can be a combination of these better takes. You'll have to delete the unwanted virtual tracks later, but this opens up some interesting possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.