Mar 31, 2005 03:05 am Any suggestions anyone??
Using ADAT
Posted on Mar 30, 2005 08:39 am
Grum
Member Since: Dec 31, 2004
I am purchasing a Behringer ADA8000 and also want to buy an ADAT compatible sound card to I can record up to eight tracks simultaneously into my PC. There are two sound cards I am looking at in particular and in my price range of £150, these are the Behringer B-Control Audio BCA2000 and the E-mu 1212M. Will these both do the job, and which would be the best option, or maybe there is another sound card that will work better!!! Would be grateful for the advice!!!
Thanks
[ Back to Top ]
Mar 31, 2005 08:16 am sorry, wish I could help, but I don't do ADAT, and never intend to...don't know many here that do, or what to, do ADAT.
Mar 31, 2005 01:53 pm yeah from what i understand, ADAT (atleast the standalone recorders) is on it's way out...but as for usin' the lightpipe for 8 channels of digital audio, that will prolly stick around a bit longer....ummm that's all i got to say about that...
sorry
wyd
Apr 01, 2005 05:36 am I checked out stuff that uses ADAT myself while looking for my interface, and considered both of those (in addition to others). I ended up purchasing the EMU 1820M because it does Windows 2K (which I have) and it's PCI. The 1212M is the same card without the breakout box. The BCA2000 only does XP and it's USB, which I don't trust, and the drivers at the time I was looking were still "beta", which to me is a sign of equipment being released prior to the testing stage.
The main problem with the ADAT interface is the 44.1/48kHz limitation - sort of. There is 96kHz ADAT, just that you go from 8 to 4 channels (the channels "share" bandwidth) (the 1212M can do this). Both ends of the pipe must be able to handle it. I don't recall the ADA 8000 being able to do that (and I have no idea as to the quality of its ADACs). ADAT 48kHz at 20 or 24 bit is really, for the most part, fine for recording. The ADAT machines are limiting in the fact that they're linear access, a computer is random access. The ADAT requires a tape (in the $20 range) for every 45 minutes of 44.1-16 recording.
If you're after an 8 input interface, just get something like the 1820M instead, with its 8 analog ins and ADAT and S/PDIF and clocks, etc. and buy your ADA8000 later as an expansion to 16 channels. ??? What the hey, we know you're loaded, buy 'em both now and give the economy a BIG boost... |;^)
Apr 01, 2005 07:43 am Thanks for that mate, not realy sure what you mean by
"The ADAT requires a tape (in the $20 range) for every 45 minutes of 44.1-16 recording...."
Will this mean I would have to buy other hardware to use ADAT on my PC?
Apr 01, 2005 11:37 am ADAT Recorders use a VHS style tape, but that's not what Grum is talking about. He's talking about using and ADAT interface to record to his computer.
Two totally different things.
Apr 01, 2005 11:50 am wow jmail!!! awsome insite into the world of ADAT.....i've got an Alesis HD24, here at the store, that has two harddrive bays....that seems pretty cool.
peace
wyd
Apr 02, 2005 05:39 am I tell ya, when we did our re-union thing, the fellow with the XT20 ADAT walked away with the best sounding recording. If I'd of had ADAT on my interface, we could have done 16 tracks easy (at 48kHz, 20 bit) on my computer. The disadvantage the tape has, of course, is the access (and it's delicate). When we wanted to listen, we had to rewind. Then fast forward and hope we didn't record over something we wanted to keep. And, of course, at $20 a pop for the tapes, we were rather overly frugal and didn't record everything on it and missed some good natural takes. But the thought of an interface "expanding" by 8 inputs with ADAT... my only question is, is why is ADAT so expensive? proprietary? quality? 'cause they can?
Apr 03, 2005 11:34 am I have to just vent, I guess in ths thread. I am sadly dissapointed in Alesis for hanging on to the ADAT interface protocal in the development of their HD24 unit. As per above if I want to move to 96khz I will have to halve my available channels per the ADAT interface bandwidth which I do not use. As a mobile unit for recording on site the HD24 is da-bomb. Twenty four channels of A/D with two hard drives of space, no need to cary a monitor as it has a 'meter bridge' on the face. It is a rock solid unit in terms of structural integrity adverse to carting around a laptop or rack puter with a monitor.
It is true that the other postulates of the origional ADAT machines e.g. tape wow and flutter, constant maintenance per VCR technology, tape cost, etc. have made the tape based machines pase'. It is a shame that Alesis did not dump the interface protocal entirely with the development of this new machine. It only resembles it's predicessors in terms of the light pipe interface.
The other bone headed move was to make the ethernet interface 10M. I mean come on!; What additional cost would have been incurred with either a 100M or 1G nic?
I would imagine that the marketing approach is to replace all existing tape machines with the HD unit, but I am quite sure that will not happen per the move of the industry into higher sample rates.
Oh well, end of vent. Just seems goofy to me.
Apr 03, 2005 09:11 pm For my way of thinking, light pipe should be able to carry so much more than "8" tracks or channels of data. Have you ever seen a telephone fibre optic cable? They carry many times more the amount of data, and they're quite a bit smaller. Bandwidth? I don't know, but you would have thought that the ADAT light pipe would have "matured" a little more gracefully, wouldn't you? The S-mux "fix" (or whatever they call it) reminds me of the phone company commercial a few years ago with the kids using the tin cans & string for "communication", and the voice over goes "need more bandwidth?" and they hand the kid another tin can...
Apr 03, 2005 10:56 pm Sorry Grum, we got distracted there. The ADA 8000 is an 8 analog input, 8 channel ADAT out (over light pipe) device, and was intended as an extension or expansion of some of the Behringer mixers, not as a standalone interface. It's got pre-amps and ADACs, but no direct interface with a computer. Any computer interface (PCI, USB, firewire) with ADAT light pipe should be able to "talk" with the 8k. Some of us refer to anything that uses the ADAT light pipe communication protocol as ADAT, and we really shouldn't. ADAT is "Alesis Digital Audio Tape". I forget what they call their proprietary protocol for the light pipe. Some equipment from other manufacturer's, such as Behringer and Tascam, etc., use it.
Apr 04, 2005 12:22 am Ya Jmail, you got it pegged. I actually did cut my teeth on telephony with GTE and IBM for probably 13 years or there-abouts; And your darn streight about the 'toy' lightpipe bandwidth on the ADAT interface.
And yes, on topic with Grum, if you want to go ADAT lightpipe any card that will accept the lightpipe and convert it to a digital format the the computer will recognize will work just ...well fine... I guess. It will work.
I see Yamaha is pushing their M-net concept for firewire interface now. Yet another standard in the making. Mackie has their firewire optional interface for their onyx mixers that offer a huge number of channels simultaniously as direct outs before their eq stage and inserts. That's a little wierd too. Beyond that I guess there's the Delta 1010 and 1010lt with 10 input to the Godbox. Kinda tough to find a reasonable interface that will adquately handle a well miced kit at present. That is in my mind a constraint point. I like two overheads, two (top&bottom) on snare, Two (skin&beater) on kick, one per tom (typical kit 3) and one for high hat. That's 10 mics for a 'standard' kit. There's a big void between the home studio cards and the big boys yet that doesn't make a lot of sense.
Apr 04, 2005 12:54 am Thats were the mid-range interfaces come in. Like ESI and MOTU with their dedicated A/D D/A i/o interfaces you can have some of the cake and eat it too. One PCI card can accomadate up to 4 interfaces, so adding on is not a problem when the time comes. MOTU has a pretty reasonably priced 24 channel interface that is stable as all get out.
From what I have seen though, I agree with you Walt on the entry level stuff being a bit shy of units like that. But then again, the small market for them hasnt prompted the companies to want to build them. And the cost of building something over 8 channels of A/D D/A i/o is not a cheap prospect either. But that said, the price differance between and Appogee Rosetta and the MOTU 24I/O is pretty substantial. And the audio quality I have heard from them both is very comprable. But the price is in the name I guess, you tell someone you have Appogee i/o and they get all drooling and what not. Its the same as saying you have PT in your studio, people just get excited over a silly name.
Apr 04, 2005 09:10 am I have decided not to get the ADA8000 because of its routing restrictions, but I have decided to get the Behringer UB2442FX-Pro Mixing desk at pretty much the same price. This along with the M-Audio 1010 with is 8 analogue input should work with the direct outputs on the back of the UB2442FX-Pro. Does anyone know of this setup or am I the first to try this, and finally will this work in recording 8 separate mic inputs (Drums) into my PC.
Apr 04, 2005 09:59 am Well, nutz, and I just found a link you might have been interested in:
studio-central.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=19265
I don't know if it'll work from here, but it's a user's review of the ADA unit on another board. (hope you don't mind, dB. Delete this if you do.)
I'm not familiar with that equipment, but it looks like it should work. From what I've read here and other places, M-Audio seems to be rather reliable; Behringer kind of spotty.
Apr 04, 2005 10:23 am Cheers mate... In conclusion what method would you choose, the behringer ADA8000 with a Sound card that has ADAT capabilities or
Going analogue and having the M-audio 1010 with a desk like the UB2442FX-Pro...
Thanks for all the help!!!
Apr 04, 2005 10:34 am I would go with the M-Audio and a UB2442FX-Pro.
OR...
If all you are looking at is the ability to record 8 tracks into your computer, and do not need an external mixing consol (8 direct ins) you might want to consider an 8 in/ 8 out preamp. I am going that route.. I found a Nady piece for 99 dollars... 8 in/8 out, phantom power on all channels. Depending on the quality you are looking for, you would probably be looking for a preamp that is higher quality, but the preamp route is another option.
Apr 04, 2005 10:46 am That sounds great, I really don't need the Mixer just seemed the only way. I'm looking into the Nady PRA8 (just found it on the net) looks like this would do the job great!!! Cheers
Apr 04, 2005 10:50 am that is the exact preamp I am buying. (see above description). $99.95 Musicians friend.
Apr 04, 2005 12:10 pm Can't get this model in the UK, but there is this one from SM Pro Audio
www.dolphinmusic.co.uk/pa...97/category_id/
looks like the same thing!!! Thanks people looks like I'm gonna get me one of these!!!
Apr 04, 2005 12:30 pm Ya still need an interface to get to the computer, tho. SM Pro also has another pre-amp just above that one in cost that has an optional ADAT out for another $100US, approx. I have no idea as to the quality of their stuff. Your M-Audio 1010 (no ADAT I/O, tho) choice would be logical with your SM pre-amp choice. A mixer purchase later would allow you to "sub" down more mics to your computer. And you wouldn't need mic pres on all the channels; you could use the SM pre-amp to get mics in to line levels on the mixer... all kinds of options out there, isn't there?
Apr 04, 2005 12:38 pm Personally, the entire intent behind going Pres to interface is that EVERY mic will be recording on a different track in my recording program. I do not want them to mix before recording.
Apr 04, 2005 01:10 pm More control that way, sure, but ya gotta start somewhere. I want a MOTU with all kinds of add-ons, but all I can afford right now... baby steps for me still. I've got an interface with 8 analog ins, (2 pres) and ADAT that I plan to use with an el-cheapo 8 channel pre in the future. In the meantime, if I need more ins, I borrow a mixer... and anything else I can get my mitts on. I've even used my tape decks as mic pres. Not very elegant, but it works. All I've got for mics is 2 SM58s. That's my next target area.
Apr 04, 2005 04:29 pm I have the 1010 and UB set up and I'd suggest taht over just a preamp for a # of reasons > Flexability is the for most reason, I like having everything plugged in to one scource, I have external pre's as well but the mixer is kinda the hub for everything . the 2442 is grat for the price and the direct out's is what sold me on it . I'm looking at getting another 1010 becuase i have a bit more I cna still hook up and on rare occations I record the entire band live and need all the inputs (not the best idea but it gets that live vibe in the room) .
Apr 04, 2005 11:23 pm Go with Geoff's suggestion. The mixer and the 1010 together will give you much more in the long run and to start with. Then if you fell the need down the road you can add a multi channel pre-amp.
Apr 05, 2005 03:49 am cheers guys... you have all given me some great direction!! all boils down to budget now!!! Thanks again.
when using the direct outs on the Behringer desk, what features will I be able to use, could I still go via the Aux (onboard FX), eq, mute, solo etc....
Thanks again!
Apr 06, 2005 11:33 am Geoff can you help me on this?
'when using the direct outs on the Behringer desk, what features will I be able to use, could I still go via the Aux (onboard FX), eq, mute, solo etc....
Thanks again!
Apr 06, 2005 11:35 am should be able to use everything...and after all that it gets sent directly out of the board...I may be wrong, but I believe it will all work as usual, it's just a different way to bus the finished signal.
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.