Topic: TASCAM DR-680 portable 8-track - announced at NAMM

[Chuck]

So now that these have been in the field for a bit, how does everyone feel about changing levels 1 track at a time?

Does it work alright?

It certainly isn't ideal! I plan to e-mail them about a possible firmware update to be able to adjust more than one at once. Seems it would be possible in firmware.

I don't find it all that bad changing the gain one channel at a time. I had to do that with my V3... It does get tricky with multiple inputs though. I've started to log how much gain I'm using at various venues and what levels to use with each set of mics I have. That gives me a good reference point to start with, so I'm not changing the gain on all inputs that much.

A far as firmware goes...
I'd like to change the "2db from clip" indicator to a real clip indicator.

[igor]

Hello, wanted to ask something about syncing the DR-680 with a soundcard with the AES/EBU standard (in my case the ULN8).

I can record up to 8 tracks in Logic Audio with the ULN8. Would be interesting to be able expanding this with 6 tracks more from the DR-680. The problem is how to sync the files recorded in Logic and the 6 tracks of the DR-680 as accurate as possible (of course one can look at the waveform, but that is not what I mean).
Is it possible to slave the DR-680 through AES/EBU in a way that all files (both recorded with the ULN8 in a multitrack software have the same timecode stamped in the BWF files, than import the DR-680 files and sync the files?

Thanks a lot...

[kirk97132]

No the 680 needs to be the master clock or first in the chain and everything syncs to it

[igor]

So if I slave the ULN8 (connected to my Macbook through firewire and running Logic Audio) with the DR-680 as master, and I push the rec button of the DR-680, the whole setup starts recording? And syncing later on is as simple as aligning the beginning of the files recorded in Logic with the beginning of the files recorded with the DR-680? No latency?

I don't have the DR-680 (yet), so I cannot do the test.

[kirk97132]

There is no firewire on a 680. 

[igor]

There is no firewire on a 680.

Maybe I didn't explain the situation good enough...   

I'll start again.
I am trying to figure out how to lineup the files of a same recording session where the musicians are playing all together, recorded in two separate systems: one is the ULN8/Macbook/Logic Audio and the other the 680. Maybe I would record the drums with the 680 and the other instruments with the ULN8.
So, after the session, I would copy the files from the 680 to my Logic project, but of course I don't have any sync point to align the files... and I was thinking if connecting somehow the ULN8 with the 680 through AES/EBU could give a solution...

Thanks,

[Todd R]

No the 680 needs to be the master clock or first in the chain and everything syncs to it

It seems like the opposite might be easier.  Send the AES digital out from the ULN8 to the 680 for its digital input.  The 680 records those channels and uses the clock from the AES signal to clock the other 6 channels.  This is how the 680 works from what I understand, though I haven't tried it out -- use a digital input on the 680 and those 2 channels and the rest of the 6 other channels are clocked to the incoming source.

I don't know about latency, but it shouldn't matter anyway -- the 680 won't start recording when the ULN8 does, you'd have to start it manually.  In post, you'd have to line up the 6ch of the 680 with 8ch of the uln8, but the clocking would all be the same.

I don't know enough about the uln8, but if you can configure it to send out just 2ch of audio out the AES output, that should make things easy -- the uln8/mac combo would record those 2ch and then the 680 would record the same 2ch with the same clocking from its digital input.  So the two 2ch files from each recorder would be identical, other than the different start times and thus one source having more dead air recorded up front.  That should make lining up those 2 sources, and in turn lining up the remaining 6ch recorded on the 680, very easy.

[Todd R]

I was composing my post when your latest came in, but if it helps clarify:  if you send 2ch from the ULN to the 680 and have both systems record those 2ch, the two different recordings would be identical for the bulk of the time of the recording (and clock synced), other than the difference in dead air in the recordings.

This should make aligning the recordings very easy since the music portion of the recording is identical.  Once you are able to line up the two nearly identical 2ch recordings, this will line up the remaining 6 channels recorded on the 680.  You'd have to line up by eye I suppose in your post-processing software, but that should be very accurate since the two files will be identical down to the individual sample once you zoom in.

[igor]

This should make aligning the recordings very easy since the music portion of the recording is identical.  Once you are able to line up the two nearly identical 2ch recordings, this will line up the remaining 6 channels recorded on the 680.  You'd have to line up by eye I suppose in your post-processing software, but that should be very accurate since the two files will be identical down to the individual sample once you zoom in.

Yes, I was considering this option and it should work, just as you mention it. If it is only one or two takes, no problem. But if there are a lot more, things will get a little bit nasty...
Therefore I was wondering if there was a less time consuming and more "sophisticated" way of lining up the files.
I know that you can timestamp the BWF files recorded with the ULN8. But I do not know if you can pass this information through AES/EBU to the files recorded with the 680.

Anyone has tried this out yet?

[rastasean]

it is unlikely that those who have the dr 680 have tried this but I could be wrong.

If you're looking to do multitracking with software, check out the zoom r16. While it doesn't have any optical out, there's usb to connect to your daw and interface with it.

the zoom r16 my not suit everyone but with a little planning, you could record songs quite well.

[darby]

the 680 has USB... so what's your point?

[rastasean]

the 680 has USB... so what's your point?

If you're referencing me, I'm just bringing up another machine that may work better for multitracking with a computer.

[yert33]

Soooooo..... tell me why I made the better choice buying the DR-680 ($850.00)instead of the Zoom R16 ($400)?

[Chuck]

Soooooo..... tell me why I made the better choice buying the DR-680 ($850.00)instead of the Zoom R16 ($400)?

I haven't used the Zoom device, so...

The Tascam looks like a field recorder. The Zoom looks more like a studio device, though it does run on batteries. I know that the Tascam sounds good and is reliable. The Zoom only provides phantom power to two mics at a time. The DR-680 is smaller and appears easier to transport.

The Zoom would be pretty cool if it had 16 channels with good pre-amps and phantom power, but it sounds like the pre-amps aren't all that great...

http://www.amazon.com/Zoom-R16-Multitrack-Controller-Interface/dp/B002I7TJNW

[yert33]

I haven't used the Zoom device, so...

The Tascam looks like a field recorder. The Zoom looks more like a studio device, though it does run on batteries. I know that the Tascam sounds good and is reliable. The Zoom only provides phantom power to two mics at a time. The DR-680 is smaller and appears easier to transport.

The Zoom would be pretty cool if it had 16 channels with good pre-amps and phantom power, but it sounds like the pre-amps aren't all that great...

http://www.amazon.com/Zoom-R16-Multitrack-Controller-Interface/dp/B002I7TJNW

I feel better already!!