Hooking up TWO BR1600s - ANY INSIGHTS??

[Oldrottenhead]

i need to go to specsavers fucksake too much wee letters ma heidsburstintryintaereaditawe

[Super 8]

i need to go to specsavers fucksake too much wee letters ma heidsburstintryintaereaditawe

LOL! Yep, pretty technical stuff for sure from the sounds of it. (That said, I very much appreciate that folks have taken the time to put all this info down here. A lot of it has gone over my head too but there's a few nuggets of wisdom that may (or may not - we'll see!) have stuck. You're a good bunch!

[AndyR]

I pretty much agree with everyone - especially Hook's "you only need to do it if you need more than 8 inputs". I was thinking about that after I'd posted... yeah, it's if you need more than 8 simultaneous inputs for recording live.

I'm with you 64G - most definitely, they are mono tracks under there. But the user interface makes them, to all intents and purposes, "stereo tracks" to a user. Even the export etc routines won't let you export two monos from a "stereo track".

I think I agree with Super 8 - sometimes - it would be nice if you could split the dedicated stereo pairs if you needed to and were able to record 16 monos. But other times, when I've got more than 4 submixes to mix together (each one already balanced L-R), the ones that end up on tracks 1-8 can be a pain to control as a pair during a mix. If you could split 9-16, you'd have independent faders etc, and those would be a pain in the same way...

ACTUALLY - I really like how they built the thing

Oh, btw, I never use any of the Guitar/Vocal/etc COSM effects 64G. I do use the multi-track algorithm both for tracking and bouncing - it has Lo Cut, multi-band EQ, and Compression, mono for 8 individual channels (you do have to be careful about the LOCATION setting, though - it can do some crazy stuff based on the INPUT selection you made )

What I do use extensively is the standard track "insert" stuff during bounces - Pan, EQ, Compression, Delay/Chorus/Doubling, and Reverb. If it's a mono bounce I won't use any spatial effects (reverb, delay, etc). If I want to use those, it has to be a stereo submix for me, so a bounce to a stereo pair.

But anyone who uses those algorithms, yeah, if it's chucking out stereo - think twice before you bounce it to mono!! (Mind you, I learnt a while back to check mixes in mono - eg a nice jingly-jangly chorused guitar can sound fab over two speakers. But if you switch to mono, it can sound horrid. That's a good indicator you've got possible phase issues or whatever - If you adjust the effect until it sounds ok in mono as well, suddenly it sounds even better in stereo and fits into a mix better).

[Super 8]

Mind you, I learnt a while back to check mixes in mono - eg a nice jingly-jangly chorused guitar can sound fab over two speakers. But if you switch to mono, it can sound horrid. That's a good indicator you've got possible phase issues or whatever - If you adjust the effect until it sounds ok in mono as well, suddenly it sounds even better in stereo and fits into a mix better.

BRILL advice AndyR - thanks for that! I suppose what I'm 'getting at' here re: the numerous stereo tracks provided on a BR1600 is that, for my needs, I'd just prefer MORE dedicated mono tracks given the choice. Reason being is that, to date, I record solely on my own. It's a sad & lonely existance just 'Me, Myself & I' laying down just one (mono) track at a time and building up compositions via 'The Power of (Greyskull?) Multitracking'. I just feel that if I had more single mono tracks available then I probably wouldn't even need to commit to sub-mixing therefore allowing for more creative decisions to be made with each individual part when putting together the bounced down (stereo!) final mix. PS: TBH here, I don't really know what I'm talking about (but it sure sounds like I do eh?)

[Hook]

I record solely on my own. It's a sad & lonely existance just 'Me, Myself & I' laying down just one (mono) track at a time and building up compositions via 'The Power of (Greyskull?) Multitracking'.

Nice He-Man reference! I think this is the case for most of us here, certainly myself. I make it a tad lonelier since my loving family has forced(enlightened) me to recording in my car. I love having the 8 mono tracks on the BR80 & teh option of arming pairs for stereo or not. If built in effects aren't important to you should check out the tascam boards. I love the 008, easy to use and excellent quality & the DP03SD looks like a really fine unit. I'm just sitting on my Dp24 until my life allows me the opportunity to start using it...someday!
Rock On!

[Bluesberry]

I'd love to hear some of that nose flute playing

[64Guitars]

I just feel that if I had more single mono tracks available then I probably wouldn't even need to commit to sub-mixing therefore allowing for more creative decisions to be made with each individual part when putting together the bounced down (stereo!) final mix.

That's why I prefer to mix all of my tracks on the computer instead of the BR. It allows me to record a virtually unlimited number of tracks on the BR, knowing that I'll be able to mix all of them on the computer later without any submixes. Any submixes I make on the BR will not be used in the final mix, so they don't have to be perfect. They only have to be good enough to play along with while recording more tracks. When I'm in that creative stage of recording my performances on each instrument, I don't want to worry about the fine details of the mix. I just want to get my ideas recorded while they're fresh in my head. So, after I've recorded the first set of 8 tracks on my BR-864, I'll quickly bounce a rough mix of those tracks to a pair of v-tracks. It doesn't have to be perfect because I know I won't be using it in the final mix. Then, while listening to that sub-mix, I can record another 6 tracks and repeat the process indefinitely. Even if I used up all 64 v-tracks (which I've never done yet), I could easily export a submix of those tracks, then import it into a new song and continue adding another 62 tracks (actually, a bit less due to submixes, but you get the idea).

When I eventually finish recording all my tracks, I take off my musician's hat and put on my producer's hat. I export all of the individual tracks I've recorded (but not the submixes) to WAV files using BR Wave Converter which can export them all as a single batch operation. Now I can sit at my computer with a cup of coffee and take as much time as I like to carefully edit and mix all of those individual tracks.

I find that this idea of keeping the creative stage of a project separate from the production stage works really well. But I can't do that if I plan to do all my mixing on the BR. Every 6 tracks, I'd have to put aside my musical creativity while I fussed with a submix, knowing that I have to get it right since it will be part of the final mix. By making the decision to mix on the computer, I free myself from having to worry about production issues during the creative stage. Submixes become unimportant and can be made very quickly so they don't interrupt the creative flow. Plus, during the production stage, I have a virtually unlimited number of individual tracks to work with. Submixes aren't necessary on the computer because there's usually no limit to the number of tracks you can mix simultaneously (though it depends on what software you're using and how fast your computer is).

It usually takes me weeks to record all of my tracks. So, at the end of a daily session, I'll export whatever individual tracks I've recorded so far and play around with them on the computer for an hour or so to evaluate what I've recorded so far. It also lets me make a much better submix which I can save as a stereo WAV file and use as the base of my BR recordings the next day, replacing the crappy submixes I made on the BR.

Of course, what works well for me may not work well for everyone. We each have to find methods that work best for us. But if you've never tried mixing on the computer, I recommend that you give it a try. It not only gives you more freedom in the production stage, but it also frees you from most production decisions during the creative stage of recording your musical performances on the BR.

[Super 8]

I'd love to hear some of that nose flute playing

I'll get on the case!

[Super 8]

Of course, what works well for me may not work well for everyone. We each have to find methods that work best for us. But if you've never tried mixing on the computer, I recommend that you give it a try. It not only gives you more freedom in the production stage, but it also frees you from most production decisions during the creative stage of recording your musical performances on the BR.

That last post was/is inspirational 64G! Thanks for taking the time to put that down and share that amigo ;-)

[Super 8]

.... recording in my car

COOL! ('Who's gonna drive you home?')