[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference napalm::commusic_v1

Title:* * Computer Music, MIDI, and Related Topics * *
Notice:Conference has been write-locked. Use new version.
Moderator:DYPSS1::SCHAFER
Created:Thu Feb 20 1986
Last Modified:Mon Aug 29 1994
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2852
Total number of notes:33157

53.0. "Product review" by BAILEY::JWALTON () Tue Jan 22 1985 17:24

	Hi ALL!!

	  In two weeks I'll be buying a Drum machine,
	I'll put review of it here so you all can benifit
	from my mistake. (nervous laughter)
	  Also a review of the tascam 234, unless I get
	something different.
	  I hope that some of you out there could maybe
	review some of the stuff that YOU have already bought
	so the rest of us could make some decisions based
	on your input, so as to avoid buying something
	we may not have wanted if we had had the opportunity
	to have it at home for a week or so.....like the following:


	My experience with DOD rack mount equipment is this..

	The rack mount holes on the older R series like the
	reverb and the stereo delay and the compressor are
	not very close the IEEE standard for the hole spacing
	such that I've had to file away at the holes so they
	fit some of my rack enclosures.
	  Also DOD, there is an objectional amount of 60hz
	hum that comes from all of the DOD racks I've bought
	my speculation is that the power-supplys may not be
	too tight, also the leads from the input and output jacks
	may need shielding and re-routing, either of these 
	conditions are prime suspects for the noise problems.
	  Also DOD, perhaps this is to picky but....
	that acks don't hold the plugs in. Some of these
	plug have had to be adjusted, such that when I took
	my equipment on the road the jacks wouldn't fall out
	then I wouldn't have to hunt around for my "NO SOUND"
	problem.

	All of these problems I've had, were not noticed at
	the store when I tried them out and bought them.
	  And if I'd have know it before I wouldn't have bought
	them, like the noise problem.


	Enough for now, back to work.

	John
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
53.1GLORY::LAUTTue Jan 22 1985 19:0576
	Howdy,

	Since we are doing equipment reviews, I will throw my two cents 
worth in as well.

	I have been, for roughly the past year, been working on setting 
up a decent synth studio in my apartment.  The following is some of the 
object lessons I have learned in the process of collecting the 
equipment, as well as a review of the equipment itself.

	I presently have a Moog 12 synthesizer, a pair of Tascam model 
10 mixers, a Tascam model 1 mixdown unit, and an Orban 111B stereo 
reverb.

	The Moog is living up to the reputation of the Moog name.  The 
model 12 is a small studio system which has basically the same module 
compliment as a Mini-moog, except that it is completely patchable and 
features a 907 fixed filter bank.  I have had the synth for about 11 
months now, and I am still coming up with new sounds.  The sound quality 
is excellent, and the synth has never given me any trouble, with the 
exception of a solder break in the power supply, and some weak contacts 
inside the keyboard controller.  So, as regards the Moog stuff, I 
heartily recommend any of their studio equipment.

	My mixer is a pair of Tascam model 10s.  My plan is to merge the 
two of them into a single 26x8x2 mixer by spring.  It includes some of 
the optional stuff like the talkback/slate module, and the 8-channel 
monitor mixdown.  When I am done, it will also have a "home-brew" input 
mixdown for all input channels, and a stereo monitor before the echo 
sends on the submasters.  It will be functionally near-equivalent to the 
Tascam model 16.

	The Orban 111B was a unit which had been recommended to me in 
the past.  It is a stereo reverb, and has pseudo-parametric equalization 
on both channels.  It is one of the nicer analog reverbs, since it uses 
six springs to generate a more natural reverb.

	As for tape recorders, I am sucking in my breath and bracing to 
buy on the new, instead of used, market place.  The reason being is that 
unless you know what to look for, it is really easy to buy a lemon for 
almost-new prices.  For people interested in h*e*a*v*y synth work, you 
have to be extremely careful so that you buy a machine with a transport 
designed to handle "mass quantities" of tape moving.  The best tape 
machine that I have seen for serious synth work is the Tascam 50-series. 
If you are interested in 16 track work, a good machine is the Tascam 
85-16B.  I have not seen enough of the new Fostex to have an educated 
opinion on their 16-track 1/2-inch machine.


	The following are the lessons I have learned during this 
process:

	The first lesson was one which I learned from a friend over in 
Field Service.  The first lesson is this:  "Don't be afraid to buy in 
the used market place."  I discovered that one can save considerable 
sums of money by buying used, and watching like a hawk when stuff comes 
onto the market place.  My favorite weapon is the latest copy of 
"Tradin' Times" (a swap-and-sell magazine over here in Detroit).  Plus 
some patience to wait for equipment to become available.

	The second lesson is to not trust myself.  If I don't know 
anything about the kind of equipment I want to get, I stop and get 
information first before spending money.

	Finally, if I am going to buy something brand-new, I will plan 
on buying the best, top-of-the-line that I can afford, so that I won't 
have to re-buy the equipment a second time in the future.

	Let's hear from somebody else on their experiences, and 
recommendations.


						Bill Laut


53.2KATADN::BOTTOMTue Jan 22 1985 22:059
I bought a 234 and like it very much. The main disadvantage to this machine
that I can see is that you cannot monitor the inputs of one or more channels
as well as the outputs of the remaining channels. I used this feature on my
3340 and now I miss it. Also I found that the line inputs are a little weak,
or maybe my mixer just distorts too easy, easily solved by using the "mic"
inputs and padding them down a little with the pads on the back of the unit.
My only other main disadvantage is that it only has four tracks.

					Dave
53.3BARNUM::JWALTONWed Jan 23 1985 23:2287

	Ibenez.....


	   I've had a few digital gizmos made by Ibenez
	namely..

	HD1000 pitch transposer
	DM500  256ms delay
	DM1100 3.6sec delay

	and here are my views...

	HD1000 - for a low end pitch transposer ($500 range) you could
		 say it wasn't worth the investment. 

	   Sound - I'ts effect signal has a lot of process glitch
		   (for those of you who don't know glitch..it is
		   a form of transient discontiuety caused by 
		   the editing that the thing does in order to have
		   a continueouly fresh signal source to speed up
		   or down). Plus there is an objectional amount
		   of pre-delay caused by processing, about ~11ms
		   to ~65ms depending on the transposition.

	   Disadvantages - The dry singal path through the HD1000
			   has some level compression on it, why
			   I don't know! But if you don't want it
			   you have to patch externally.
			   Also it doesn't do micro-pitch shifts.

	   On the road - "gee wouldn't it be great to play on stage
			  with a pitch transposer for this song or
			  that song", I never had ONE application
			  for it that I didn't find something better 
			  to without it.
 
	DM500 - I like it! It's about 15KHz bandwidth makes it nice
		for slap-backs and pseudo-sustain effects, but the
		delay range limits it to those effects, additionally
		It's a great digital chorus adn negative flange effect.

	  Disadvantages - Somehow there is one strange thing about it
			  it may be only with mine and it is hard
			  to describe (sorry if I loose you) here goes..
			  the echo signal has a noise envelope on it
			  it's not hiss, it's more like a quite 'thock'
			  type noise. Anyway it bugs me sometimes.

	   On the road - I've used it all the time and have it on most
			 of the time too. So try it you'll like it for
			 the price, I got mine second hand for $200.


	DM1100 - It's nice...bandwidth @8KHz 3.6secs, good low end
		 long delay effect. Has some nice touches, tone control
		 on input to delay line, good for simulating analog delay.
		 Pull-invert singal regeneration for negative flange, though
		 flange starts at 7ms, pretty low flange. Low price ~$200.

	  Disadvantages - Rather noise prone, with increasing high frequency
			  emphasis with tone control the hiss becomes VERY
			  noticable. A quirk here (again may only be mine)
			  but the unit has input level LED's, when the lowest
			  dB LED fires, as on the tail end of an echo, you can
			  here a little crackle. took a long time to notice it
			  but there you have it, a source of disatisfaction.

	   On the road - I've got a lot of use out of it, I mainly write
			 songs that have guitar echos in them so naturally
			 this is the one I used for them. Something good here,
			 the ablity to adjust the delay time control acuratly
			 was suprizingly good, just turn the knob and that 
			 delay time was the same as it always was, however
			 you have to expect inaccuracies when you just get
			 the thing out of the van and let it warm up a bit
			 before sound checks. A DOD delay that I like to 
		         use (not for above types of delays though) has a 
			 nonlinear delaytime knob that makes certain delay
			 ranges in it's travel impossible to adjust quickly.


	Well I hope I didn't spoil anyones hopes.

	John

53.4BARNUM::JWALTONMon Feb 04 1985 09:2115
	   As some of you may have noticed I havn't gotten 
	either the Drum machine or the recorder yet. 
	Well the drum machine has been put off in favor of
	a better recorder (money, money, money). I'm going
	for the Fostex A-8 (Dolby C) because I've worked with
	one before, and found that it was a good machine for
	the price. If anyone out there has any complaints 
	about this recorder I would LOVE of hear them (I crave
	criticism). The restrictions imposed by 4 input modules
	isn't important for the projects I've got in mind.
	Keep those cards and letter coming!               
                              (0  \ /
                                fOf
       (BJohn(0                   yyy zzz(B
	
53.5SAUTER::SAUTERMon Feb 04 1985 11:5016
I've been using the Fostex A-8 for a while.  The only problem I've had with
it was last weekend.  I recorded a clock track on channel 1 so I could
synchronize the sequencer to it for later tracks.  After recording the
other tracks several times I noticed that the clock track was audible on
the other tracks!  I had recorded the clock track very loud (0 on the VU
meter) so that the sequencer could "hear".  I erased the tape rerecorded
the clock track at 10, followed by the other tracks.  The sequencer had no
trouble "hearing" the clock track, and there was no crosstalk. 

The specs claim that crosstalk is 55db down from the main signal, but my 
experience is that if you re-record a lot a very loud signal will 
eventually make it to the other tracks.  It isn't necessarily the recorder 
of course: the crosstalk could be in the cables or even the mixer.  
Nevertheless, be careful.  In your application it may be harder to erase 
the tape and rerecord everything than it was in mine.
    John Sauter
53.6BARNUM::JWALTONMon Feb 04 1985 15:0213
   Thanks, high frequency saturation at 15ips is lower than
at 7 1/2 ips, but good recording techinques dictate that you
should put those tracks that contain high-high freq's (like
FSK timing tracks and high hat) on the edge tracks, or if not
possible (due to many of that type of signal) to place them
so adjectent tracks mask any 'splash'. Inadequate erasure,
tape skew and head height alignment are the common suspects
of 'splash', well shielded cables should be proof against crosstalk
but a poor mixer is a bad investment.
   Again thanks for the feedback, I lack a full set of spec's
for this recorder, and I can easily benifit from ANY information.

	John Walton