Jim,

I prefer Harddisk-recorder.
UD is very right about the noise of PC/MAC based systems.
Dan01 has a good point too : Plug and Play for dedicated Harddisk-recorders. (Computers sometimes behave as 'plug and pRay' equipment.

I used to have a Roland VS880, then switched to VS1880 (with built in noisy fan)... made a jump to Digi001 (Protools) and finally ended at a Yamaha AW16G (no noisy fan or HDD)

On my PC I have Cubase SX...great software but plugins require lots of CPU power and money while an AW16G has everything in it !!
(dynamics, EQ's, DSP's real faders and buttons)
I must admit, since XP the PC's run very reliable, but still I record multitracks on AW16G.
Mastering is done on PC with Soundforge.

Roel

Hi Terry & Roel & all: I too have been seriously considering purchasing a hard disk recorder (like the Yamaha's AW16G or Tascam recorder) to add to my setup, but a telephone sales Rep at Zzounds.com warned me I won't be able to easily transfer individual HD recorder tracks to my PC for editing in Cakewalk Sonar, which I already own. He said I would first must 'mix down' all the individual tracks to 2 (stereo) tracks. He said I need to decide between: recording on a hard disk recorder standalone unit, or recording using computer software, and that's its NOT recommended to combine the 2 recording types. He strongly recommended that I stick with Sonar and if I wanted to record outside the studio, to purchase a laptop instead. I'm a bit suprised he told me this because he just lost a potential commission in selling me a HD recorder. Was this guy giving me mis-information? - Scott

Scott,
I love my AW4416, been using it for probably 2-3 years since they first came out. Certainly much more push record and go than Sonar (I have that too) is, without hassles.

About what the rep told you:
It depends on how one defines "easily." I would agree to get seperate tracks from the AW into Sonar for editing purposes is not just push and record.

If on the other hand you want to wind up with a pair of stereo tracks in Sonar for mastering then it is that easy. You do not have to mix it down first, you can mix it realtime into Sonar and leave them all as seperate tracks on the AW.

The AW burns to disc pretty slow. You can though burn seperate tracks to disc, then import them into Sonar. I'm not sure that would be much of an advantage though unless you want to cut and paste, or have access to more plugin effects for seperate tracks.

You're limited on the AW to 2 effects per channel, such as reverb and chorus or distortion or any one of several that are on board, unless you buy an optional board at about $1000.00 was the last price I heard and can then do 8 per channel.

The one advantage that Sonar has of course is being able to record midi, which the AW cannot.

You do not have to decide between one or the other. With my latest cd, I am going back and forth between the two.

Don't know who it is that recommends you cannot mix the two recording types that's nonsense.
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 11-22-2003).]

Hey Scott ....hay?, ( how are you ?) get it .
You finish recording 8 tracks .....
Play Track 1 from hard disk recorder into Track 1 of Sonar ?
You may have to do each track seperately and take a little more time , but it could be done this way ........

Here is my humble opinion about this:

If the portable recorders are to be used eventually to transfer work to PC for final editing-what is really needed for professional result, it would be nice if they could provide the capability to write to external firewire harddrives so that these harddrives are detached from the recorders and attached directly to the PC. Then the file transfer will make sense.

In fact, if I can find such a recorder, it will absolutely make lot of sense of portability. So they will be used in live settings to capture the live recording in multiple tracks. Then the tracks are easily tranferred to the PC by simply disconnecting the firewire harddrive and connecting to the PC and BOOM you are ready.

But to transfer each track one by one and to force it to go to D/A conversion then back to A/D and to pass through the whole gain structure, seems to be pointless and defies the purpose of portability and ease of use.

Harddisk recorders are created in the first place to allow some users to avoid the PC altogether. It does make sense for those who do no care about the advantages that the PC gives them and they truly want to avoid the hassle of building, learning, configuring and maintaining and paying for a professional DAW.

Hi All,

Modern Harddisk-recorders all are equiped with digital in/outs (optical and/or coaxial)
So there is no need to pass DA- and AD converters.

Since (harddisk)recorders and midi-sequencer software exist it is very easy to get them 'in sync' together with the help of midi-cables and the MTC (midi-time-code), SMPTE or MMC (Midi machine code).
All studio's used these features from the mid-eighties.

Each track of the AW16G can be saved on CD (WAV-file) Importing them on PC can be done in a split second.

Scott :
I do not understand at all what the salesman told you. (He is wrong in my opinion)

What I often did :
Record all music-tracks (midi) on PC.
Connect (harddisk)recorder and set 'synchronisation' to ON.
Record 'raw' midi-tracks on the recorder (only 2 track stereo) and then switch off PC.
Do all audio-recordings in the recorder and when done reconnect the PC-sequencer and midi-equipment. (erase 'raw' tracks on recorder)

From now on I'm able to create the total mixdown..... with computer and recorder working TOGETHER !

The final mixdown can be recorded on PC through the digital input. (e.g. in Soundforge running simultaniously with Cubase or Cakewalk)

Hi Terry. I'm really interested to hear how you utilized both the 'TascamUS122' and 'Sonar' in your latest CD. At what step(s) in your recording project did you utilize each of these, and what was the advantage (if any) of going back and forth.

Roel: Thanks for your correcting (what I had expected) the sales rep's totally inaccurate statement. Your explanation makes more sense than his. I guess my non-purchase from him has become his loss (of a sales commission).

I'm attracted to the reported button pushing ease of a HD disk recorder, but I've also heard that hard disk recorders involve a rather steep learning time curve as well, and that their small LCD screen (compared to a desktop PC screen monitor) makes navigation a bit cumbersome. Is this really true? If I do get a hard disk recorder I'm probably most inclined to go with the Yamaha AW16G, especially cuz you decided on that model yourself. Curious what other brand/models are comparable to the AW16G as well as what other advantages hard disk recorders may offer other than the fan issue? Thanks. - Scott

Scott,
"Hi Terry. I'm really interested to hear how you utilized both the 'TascamUS122' and 'Sonar' in your latest CD. At what step(s) in your recording project did you utilize each of these, and what was the advantage (if any) of going back and forth."

The Tascam is just the interface to get into the pc with audio and midi. I used both the AW 4416 and my laptop software for this cd, as follows.

I think audio is more flawlessly (or at least hasslelessly) recorded on the hard disc AW4416, because it is a dedicated unit that does not have all the other things going on that my laptop does. So on some of my cuts I recorded things like the Stick on the h/d first transferred it to the laptop to sync it up with drum tracks I put together in Sonar or Adobe Audition (I'm using both at the moment.) I started this cd out on the AW and about half way through decided I wanted to get back to making the laptop sequencing work and bought the US 122 to make it happen. I was using the M Audio Quattro and while the sound was great M Audios drivers leave a lot to be desired.

The laptop offers the flexibility of being able to see the wavs better cut and paste, record and edit loops to put the tracks together as well as having so many more tracks available to record on and as I mentioned before midi.

The other thing I did with the laptop was take advantage of the mastering and the more available effects, that the AW lacks.

About a couple of your other Q's to Roel. I actually think pc software has a steeper learning curve than my AW had. I think the other h/d recorder you should look at is the Akai 24. It has a larger screen with wav editing capabilities like a pc and it also has a hookup for a pc monitor to get it all on the big screen. It also has a 60g hard drive where my AW has a 12 (it may be larger now though.) I'm only sort of considering going down to look at one and maybe trading my AW in, although I know and like the AW very much.

The one major difference I notice for me that I do not like about pc recording is that I do not work as quickly with it as I do my AW. I spend too much time tweaking stuff just because I can in Sonar. With the AW I push record and go, if it's wrong I just rerecord it, which takes a lot less time then fooling with editing in the software.
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 11-22-2003).]

I've read each and every thread with great interest, and most of what I've read seems to point toward a dedicated, external recording device, one that is very expensive and still must be edited with a computer.

What I would really like to see/hear is some songs A/B'd using both techniques, songs using the same keyboard, same vocal processor, same everything--except one would be recorded with an external, digital recorder, while the other would be recorded directly into the PC using either Cakewalk, Sonar, Sound Forge, GoldWave or any other PC based recording program. No editing, just straight recording--the exact same way that the song would be recorded on tape or a digital recorder. This would be the true test of which is best.

My gut feeling is that without editing, both will be about equal, but I won't know this until I hear a couple MP3's posted by those who have both recording systems available and post the A/B recordings. Then, and only then, will my aging ears be able to tell if there is truely a difference in the unedited versions.

I no longer own a digital recorder, so I'm out of this one for anything other than posting songs put together on my PC. I'm working on a CD now of all Italian songs and hope to have it complete sometime early this coming week. I'll post them on my web site when they're ready.

Cheers,

Gary

Editing can certainly be done on a HD unit. It just is more menu intensive. I just finished my first album for a client done entirely on the Roland VSR880. No computer edits ..... if it needed fixing - I re did the take. There are still a few bugs that need fixin', but I'm out of time. The album needs to be delivered this Wednesday, so I'm going to live with the imperfections.