|
|
|
|
| Re: Tascam DM4800? - Euphonix Artist [message #102566 is a reply to message #102560] |
Wed, 18 February 2009 15:31   |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
How about all those Roland displays that whine incessantly! At least you
can fix the Tascam ones...
David.
James McCloskey wrote:
> Way back when, Tom Lubin had a series of recording videos. In one of the
> videos he shows a close up of a Tascam reel to reel machine, in the picture
> it shows the Tascam logo with a piece of tape over the Ta so it reads "scam"
> for the brand. I always thought it was kind of humorous. Yeah, Tascam's
> warranties suck, especially when it comes to the DM-24 LCD screen issue,
> $168.00 plus shipping is an unreasonable amount for a user to have to fork
> out for a defective design. I do think Tascam is making better stuff today,
> compared to some of the sub-par stuff of the past.
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>> Tascam, yuk. Their product is fine as long as it's fine. Once you need
>> support though, brother watch out.
>> They have bar none the worst support I have ever encountered.
>> Glad you didn't go that direction.
>> AA
>>
>>
>> "TC" <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote in message
>> news:499b5980@linux...
>>> Just a follow up here..
>>>
>>> I went with the Euphonix Artist series for about a week (1 mix unit and
>
>>> the main control unit). I then returned them, and ended up getting a used
>
>>> Control 24 (in really good shape) instead. It must be a later rev version,
>
>>> as there is no history of PS issues etc.
>>>
>>> The Euphonix MC Mix unit had one intermittent fader. Worked about 40%
> of
>>> the time. The fader caps felt really floppy and cheap, so I wasn't real
>
>>> confident in the build quality and how it would hold up over time,
>>> considering these were brand new units.
>>>
>>> I got the used Control 24 for hundreds less than the Euphonix, so I think
>
>>> I made out pretty well. It interfaces better with PT, has 24 sturdy
>>> faders, decent pots, and lots of shortcut buttons etc. I liked the
>>> Euphonix idea, but I'm not sure how much I would have used the
>>> touchscreen, and it just felt really delicate to me.
>>>
>>> The pres on the Control 24 will never be hooked up (focusrite platinum
> -
>>> yuck), but I only bought it as a control surface, so that's no problem.
>>>
>>> If I was going to be using Logic more for mixing, I would probably have
>
>>> gone with the Tascam, those still seem really sweet and a good value..
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> TC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> James McCloskey wrote:
>>>> Hey TC! I don't know what your budget is, but maybe you should be
>>>> looking
>>>> at this since your going PT.
>>>> http://www.avalive.com/Digidesign/9935-55144-05/57920/produc tDetail.php
>>>>
>>>> TC <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks everyone for all the feedback and suggestions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Although the DM4800 seems excellent for the price, I've decided on a
>
>>>>> different solution for what I'm trying to do. The Tascam is a bit huge
>
>>>>> for my space, and I would primarily be using it for routing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am at this point keeping one Digital 192, probably adding an old adat
>>>>> bridge 24, and adding another Accel card for PT. I'd also like to get
>
>>>>> the Euphonix Artist controllers, as they seem to have worked out many
> of
>>>>> the bugs with Pro Tools, and the touchscreen with custom macros is
>>>>> really enticing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've also decided to pull Logic from the equation for new work. This
>
>>>>> decision came after finally getting time to dig into PT8 a bit more
> over
>>>>> the last week, as well as working in a project in Logic 8 at the same
>
>>>>> time. For me, it's going to be harder to want or need to keep working
> in
>>>>> Logic native. There are still things I like better in logic (take
>>>>> comping features are quicker, easier to audition takes), advanced midi
>
>>>>> editing, hyper editor (my favorite way to program drums in Logic), but
>
>>>>> for the most part, PT has added the features that were making me hate
>
>>>>> trying to do any composing in it on previous versions. Routing is much
>
>>>>> easier in PT HD (discreet mono output, inserts etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> I also have to say that the new AIR plugins are quite nice. I use
>>>>> bitcrusher in logic quite a bit, and the new Air lo-fi plug sounds as
>
>>>>> good, with more features.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, I think this will work for my needs, and save me a few
>>>>> headaches. I would still like to ditch the digi interfaces and move
> to
>>>>> all Lynx interfaces (an additional Aurora 8 would be ideal). I would
>
>>>>> then need to get 4 or 5 AES/EBU to ADAT format converters (Alesis AI4
> or
>>>>> similar) to lightpipe to Paris.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> TC
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> James McCloskey wrote:
>>>>>> Bill, I think your off by a K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Oops it was a DM24.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's a new digital mixer from Presonus that's around 1K I think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bill L wrote:
>>>>>>>> I had the DM 3200 and liked it a lot. It was adequate audio-wise
> and
>>>>>>>> very convenient to have for all the routing and console features.
>
>>>>>>>> You've
>>>>>>>> got other pres, right? I just ran synths and lines into it and used
>>>> it
>>>>>>>> to feed the DAW via ADAT and SPDIF.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TC wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm on the verge of purchasing one of these digital consoles, along
>>>>>>>>> with a Motu 2408 MKIII, to interface both with Paris, PT and Logic.
>>>> It
>>>>>>>>> would solve a few issues for me and get me away from using a mouse
>>>>>>>>> (I've been having major problems with severe pain in both wrists
> for
>>>>>>>>> the last month).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have experience with the DM4800? I'd love to get
>>>>>>>>> opinions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.tascam.com/products/dm-4800.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> TC
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
