Any advice on whether to go with BR80 or BR800 ?

[chip]

And the BR80 has 8 tracks before a bounce, the rhythm track is separate.  I like the 80, one of the main reasons is, it's small, it has 8 tracks  most other Br's have less, (64 may like to explain this anomaly) you don't really have less but the 80 has 8 straight recording tracks. The drums are easy to sort out, this being another major selling point for me. You can take it anywhere. My daughter who is a teacher sometimes uses it a school for recording kids doing stuff, I sometimes record vocals and guitar in my taxi. I looked at the 800, in fact I looked at it again last night, but, the 80 seems way more flexible for me.

I don't use the play along part of it, but, that's just me. I am sure it is very good though. I don't record more than one guitar at a time so I don't need more inputs. The cosm effects are very good if you mess about a bit with them. I use a dynamic mic to record from the amp with reasonable results. Would I buy another? Probably.

[64Guitars]

You mentioned that the effects and COSM modelling on the BR80 is better than the BR800. I've heard a few negative comments on the BR80 on various forums (particularly over quality of distortion and the bass effect), this worries me slightly on the BR800 if that is indeed not up to the same standard as the BR80.

The BR-80 is about a year newer than the BR-800, so its effects engine has slightly newer technology. The effects in the BR-800 are based on the Boss GT-10, while the effects in the BR-80 are based on the newer Boss GT-100. But newer doesn't necessarily mean better (that's why vintage gear is so popular). I'm sure the effects are excellent in both units. If you really want to compare them in detail, I'd suggest downloading the owners manuals for each:

BR-80:
http://www.roland.com/support/article/?q=manuals&p=BR-80

BR-800:
http://www.roland.com/support/article/?q=manuals&p=BR-800

In regard to what you may have read about the effects on other forums, keep in mind that when people say things like "the effects aren't as good on the BR-80", they're probably talking about the preset effects patches, not the underlying effects. And its purely subjective anyway, depending on your own tastes. The preset patches are just there as a convenience. They let you try out lots of combinations of the built-in effects without having to manually select which effects you want to use and adjust their parameters. That's fine for just playing around with the unit and having fun. But for serious recording, you'll want to create your own effects patches, or at least modify the preset patches to your liking. Both the BR-80 and the BR-800 allow you to save your own patches, either on the memory card with the song (Song Patch) or in the BR's internal flash memory (User Patch).

The BR-800 has more effects (34) than the BR-80 (20). See the following table for a comparison of effects:

https://songcrafters.org/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=11749.0;attach=14242

[64Guitars]

And the BR80 has 8 tracks before a bounce, the rhythm track is separate.  I like the 80, one of the main reasons is, it's small, it has 8 tracks  most other Br's have less, (64 may like to explain this anomaly) you don't really have less but the 80 has 8 straight recording tracks.

"most other Br's have less" is incorrect. The only BRs that have less are the original Micro BR and the BR-532 which both have only 4 mixer channels, so they can only play back (and bounce) 4 tracks at a time. The BR-800, like the BR-80, has 8 mixer channels (plus separate stereo rhythm track channel and input channels), so you can play back or bounce up to 8 tracks at a time plus the drums and inputs. Neither unit has an advantage over the other in this regard.

the 80 seems way more flexible for me.

The only way it could be considered more flexible is in terms of portability. You can easily slip it into your pocket and take it anywhere. In terms of features and capabilities, they're very similar but I would give a slight edge to the BR-800.

[Hook]

I'm struggling with this choice also. I want to be able to use the on board mic & the guitar input at the same time, I'm assuming it can be done with the 800 (my 900 could), can it be done on the 80?? If it can than I'm leaning toward the 80 (size mostly) but the mixing restrictions are a little discouraging. Geir (or anyone) have you used batteries in the 800 & whats the realistic battery life? Does the 800 have chorus & reverb for each track? (another 900 feature I miss?) I'm realizing that I shouldn't have sold my 900, but it was a bit bulky to use in the car & the 800 seems a bit more doable. I was considering a zoom unit but I've been very unimpressed with the H4N & probably will stick with boss.

[cuthbert]

I want to be able to use the on board mic & the guitar input at the same time, I'm assuming it can be done with the 800 (my 900 could), can it be done on the 80??

Sadly, this can't be done on the BR80 - but you can record internal microphones and Line-In at the same time. Go figger...  

Don't know about the BR800, but I expect it can do internal mics and guitar input simultaneously?

[64Guitars]

I'm struggling with this choice also. I want to be able to use the on board mic & the guitar input at the same time, I'm assuming it can be done with the 800 (my 900 could), can it be done on the 80??

Input selection on the BR-80 is severely limited (I forgot to mention that earlier). It only has a single 1/4" mono input for guitar/bass or external mic and a 1/8" stereo input for line level signals. When you plug a cable into the 1/4" guitar/mic input, the internal mics are disconnected. So it's not possible to record guitar and vocals together unless you're just recording an acoustic guitar via the internal mics. But then both signals would be mixed on the same pair of tracks, so you won't have much flexibility when doing the final mix.

Also, there's no separate level control for the line input. It just gets blended equally with the Guitar/Mic signal and the USB signal. And you can't apply effects to the line signal or the USB signal. Effects can only be applied to the Guitar/Mic input or the internal mics.

The BR-800 is much more flexible in allowing you to control the inputs. You can record guitar and vocals together, with each going to a separate track. And you can apply effects to any input; even the drum track. There's also a "SIMUL" effects bank which allows you to use certain effects for the guitar input and other effects for the mics when recording guitar and vocals simultaneously (similar to the BR-900).

[Geir]

the 80 seems way more flexible for me.

The only way it could be considered more flexible is in terms of portability. You can easily slip it into your pocket and take it anywhere. In terms of features and capabilities, they're very similar but I would give a slight edge to the BR-800.

not only. It is also more flexible when it comes to the track configuration, as all pairs of tracks can be either stereo or mono, which means that the br 80 is a true 8 track recorder, while the 800 really is a 6 track (4 mono + 2 stereo). for some that's no big deal, but for me the 80 has a better configuration.

[64Guitars]

the 80 seems way more flexible for me.

The only way it could be considered more flexible is in terms of portability. You can easily slip it into your pocket and take it anywhere. In terms of features and capabilities, they're very similar but I would give a slight edge to the BR-800.

not only. It is also more flexible when it comes to the track configuration, as all pairs of tracks can be either stereo or mono, which means that the br 80 is a true 8 track recorder, while the 800 really is a 6 track (4 mono + 2 stereo). for some that's no big deal, but for me the 80 has a better configuration.

I know what you mean, Geir, and I agree that the BR-80 is a bit more flexible in that way. However, I disagree that the BR-800 is really a 6-track recorder. A track can be thought of as a storage location, and both the BR-80 and the BR-800 have 64 of them. What limits it to being able to play only 8 at a time is the number of channels in the mixer section and how they're configured. The BR-80 and the BR-800 both have the same number of mixer channels (8 plus 2 for the drums and 2 for the inputs - well, okay, the BR-800 has 4 channels for the inputs in some modes). Where they differ is in how you select the channels. As you said, the BR-80 always gives you the choice of treating a pair of channels individually or as a stereo pair, whereas the BR-800 is hard-wired to always treat 5&6 and 7&8 as stereo pairs. But a stereo pair is always two tracks. There's no such thing as a single stereo track (ie; a single recording location that magically stores two separate channels *). To record in stereo always requires two tracks on any recorder. For example, 5&6 on the BR-800 are controlled by a single fader and a single track button, but the stereo output of that mixer channel pair is always recorded to two tracks (track 5 and track 6). So both the BR-80 and the BR-800 have true 8-track playback; not 6. But the BR-80 is more flexible in how you select the tracks for recording.

* In theory, it would be possible to digitally encode two channels of sound in such a way that they could be stored in a single location then decoded to separate the channels on playback, but I'm not aware of any recorder that does that. They always use the much simpler method of recording each channel to a separate track, so a stereo pair is always recorded to two tracks, regardless of how the pair is selected.

For most people, I don't see any problem with the way the BR-800's mixer section is configured. The stereo pairs would only be a limitation if you wanted to record everything in mono. But most people are always going to want to record at least a few things in stereo, so the stereo mixer channels are ideal for that. And even if you really want to record all of your tracks in mono, you'd still want to bounce in stereo. So the stereo mixer channels are ideal as bounce destinations. I see them as a convenience rather than a limitation because I'd only have to push one track button to arm a pair of tracks for stereo recording, and I'd only have to adjust one fader. My BR-864 doesn't have any stereo mixer channels. To record in stereo, I have to push two adjacent track buttons simultaneously. If I don't press them both at exactly the same time, only one channel will be armed and the other will be unarmed. It can be a bit tricky sometimes. And when adjusting the levels of a stereo pair, it can be tricky to keep both faders exactly in sync so that I don't affect the stereo balance while I'm moving the faders. With a single fader, this wouldn't be an issue because the two channels are always perfectly in sync.

[wyvernwood]

Thanks guys,

lots of very useful information in there. One thing that strikes me, is that if there is no real consensus amongst you guys, then there isn't an obvious right/wrong choice - you pays your money and makes your choice.

From reading your posts and doing a bit more research, I could go with either unit, I would really like to clarify a couple of other points though:

Can both the BR80 + 800 handle two guitars + mic at the same time for recording onto individual tracks ?

Can the BR80 simulate a bass from guitar input (I've seen demos of the BR800 doing it, but can't remember seeing one of the BR80).

Is there really much difference between audio quality of COSM on each (GT10 vs GT100 derived) ? It's difficult for me to tell difference from various tracks and samples - from this laptop - way too tinny.


Other than that - I erring towards the BR800 at present - but that will probably change at least 12 times before trundling off to bed tonight.

Thanks again for all the advice
Martin

[wyvernwood]

Sorry - yet more questions.

Can anyone recommend a footswitch compatible with BR80 or BR800.

Do the units come with power supplies ?

Is a SD card included in the box ?


Thanks again
Martin