] [Thread Prev
Re: More Roland VS info
> >> It's confusing because it mentions that if you want
> >> to do 24-bit 44.1 khz compressionless recording, you're
> >> limited to 8/4 tracks. The other option is 16-bit (which
> >> allows 16/8 tracks) but it doesn't say whether or not
> >> 16-bit mode is compressionless or what the sample rate is.
> There's a couple of issues with this. First, the Roland VS has (4) modes
> can record in; LIV, MT2, MT1, and MAS, from lowest quality to highest. In
> all modes, some sort of compression algorithm is used by the VS to get
> data on the hard drive called MDAC, which is a proprietary algorithm
> developed by Roland.
What's MAS? Mastering mode? This has the compression on it too? What
MT Pro? That's 24-bits but it still uses compression?
> I don't know the specifics and there is much confusion
> as to how MDAC really works and how it integrates with the on-board
> AD converters, and how "lossy" this algorithm really is. Since most of
> I record is bound for CD, which is a 16-bit format, I use the MT1 format
> which is suppose to be a 20-bit format for editing to compromise between
> sound quality and hard drive savings. To me, I've never like ADAT and I
> could always hear a loss of quality. Plus, why should I have to wait for
> tape to cue up all the time ... hard drives are the way to go in my book.
My question was about the D16 but thanks for explaining the VS16. But I
thought the ADAT was compressionless. Isn't it 8 tracks of digital audio
on essentially a high-quality VHS tape? Yes, I love HD recording over the
> >> Plus I didn't find anything about a tuner or a drum machine
> >> built in, and the only built-in effect seems to be basically
> >> preamp modeling.
> On the Harmony Central press ad, they specifically mention a integrated
> machine and chromatic tuner.
Yeah, it's nowhere on the official site. Either that or I missed it. I
pore through all the specs pretty thoroughly looking for just those
> >> Doug, how is the sound quality?
> I'm not going to run the whole digital vs. analog argument. That's what
> rec.pro.audio is for, but for my purposes, it works great. The
> factor was the decisionary factor for me. I also found that the input
> preamps don't offer much headroom, so it's better to use a better
> preamp and possibly compression to help control signal spikes. I use a
> Mackie board and a Presonus or Mindprint compressor which do a great job
> the $$$$
So you're saying the quality is good enough to cut CDs, eh? I don't need
Anita Baker Million Dollar Jazz Paradise quality sound, but I don't want a
shlocky, canny CD that sounds like an old Misfits bootleg recorded onto a
microcassette stuffed in some stoner's pocket either.
> >> Does anyone have any experience with other 16-track portable HD
> I don't know if any really exist other than the Roland. Maybe the Akai
Yeah, I'm seriously looking into that to upgrade my DR8 because I hear
sports compressionless, pure digital data, like my DR8. However it's only
four more tracks than what I'm using. But it is much lighter. I love my
but it weighs about 7 gazillion pounds. It's like an HD recorder from the
> >> Does anyone use their computer as a multitrack recorder and if so, how
> >> tracks, and what do you think the minimum specs for the computer would
> have to
> >> be?
> The biggest issue with computer based recording is disk I/O. I would
> recommend getting a Ultra2 SCSI drive subsystem with a quality hard drive
> such as the IBM Ultrastar or Seagate Cheetah drives. As always, put your
> on a separate partition from the drive you are actually recording on. If
> are running Windows NT, split the memory page file across the drives as
> well. I use this type of setup with Cakewalk 8.0, but I'm switching over
> Logic Audio 4.0 since it integrates with the VS-1680.
A five minute song on 16 tracks would be like 80 track minutes, which
equal to 40 stereo minutes. A forty-minute CD quality stereo 16-bit 44.1
WAV file would be what? Something like 400 megabytes? Is that how much
would need? I only have 256 megs.
> Also, if you are buying a new PC (please don't flame me on the MAC vs. PC
> issue), wait until after September 5th when Intel is announcing their new
> i820 chipset which will introduce 133Mhz back plane for PCs and AGP 4x
> video. It will either lower the price of the machine you want today, or
> you a new hardware standard to but into.
Hey, I've used both Macs and PCs and I love 'em! I would never start a
war over something so frivolous. Now on the other hand, if this was a
great vs. less filling argument, or the Kraft Macaroni & Cheese vs. the
Cheese & Macaroni argument...
This is like way off the topic but thanks again.