Alesis HD24 problem

[Rick Ruskin]

I just got a used HD24 yesterday. Both supplied drives mount and
operate fine in Bay # 1 but when in Bay 2 they mount and then
dismount. Afterward, the display says "check jumper setting." I find
nothing in the manual about a different jumper setting for Bay 2. The
only thing mentioned is that all drives should be set for
master/single. Any one know what's going on here?
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[Frank Stearns]

Rick Ruskin <lio...@isomedia.com> writes:

>I just got a used HD24 yesterday. Both supplied drives mount and
>operate fine in Bay # 1 but when in Bay 2 they mount and then
>dismount. Afterward, the display says "check jumper setting." I find
>nothing in the manual about a different jumper setting for Bay 2. The
>only thing mentioned is that all drives should be set for
>master/single. Any one know what's going on here?
>Rick Ruskin

Hi Rick -

Might be an incomplete mating of the caddy into the receiver.

Possibly the drive 2 connector has shifted slightly out of alignment - it's hard to
judge by eye, though. The caddy/mating system has been somewhat notorious for not
always getting a perfect, solid connection. You could try loosening the mounting
screws inside the machine, sliding the mating assembly foward a touch, then
retightening. (Beware cheap screws; use a correct screwdriver.) Could also be that
the front panel frame is off just enough to prevent a full seating on bay 2.

For many this has been intermittent based on several tolerances being slightly off.
Many have solved this by putting small washers on the screws that tie the connector
to the caddy. The washers go between the connector and frame such that the caddy
connector is lifted out just a little more (single washer thickness is usually about
right). This causes more full seating of the the caddy into the host connector.

While I never had any connection problems with the drives on my HD24XR, I have done
the washer mod and all the caddies that have had the mod feel way more secure
when they seat.

It's a great machine, with many good features for the money, but this part of its
execution isn't the best. Be gentle with it, don't force it, but try giving it just
a little help in this area and see if that doesn't clear the problem.

Hope that helps,

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

--
.

[DienerMusic]

You might want to visit the HD24 yahoogroup. There are a few known
problems involving the physical connection of the drive to the bay.
One fix involves adding plastic washers to the caddy behind the
multipin connector. Essentially the drive is not making full contact
so it dismounts. I've had problems with a particular drive/caddy, and
haven't been able to determine if it's the drive itself or the caddy.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't! Also the HD24 appears to
prefer some brands of harddrive over others. Good Luck!

[Peter Larsen]

DienerMusic wrote:

> You might want to visit the HD24 yahoogroup.

Indeed, strongly recommended! - also consider that the drive bays are not
designed for the road, either take the drives out during transport or
transport the unit "drives up".

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Rick Ruskin]

I've tried all auggestions and nothing helps so far. I have
determined that any drive in bay 2 is not getting power. Swapping the
power connectors makes no difference. All ribbon connectors are
tight. Any ohter suggestions as to what the cause(s) might be?

Rick Ruskin

[Scott Dorsey]

Rick Ruskin <lio...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>I've tried all auggestions and nothing helps so far. I have
>determined that any drive in bay 2 is not getting power. Swapping the
>power connectors makes no difference. All ribbon connectors are
>tight. Any ohter suggestions as to what the cause(s) might be?

The meter will tell you. The meter is your friend. Track from the power
pins on the connector on back.

Odds are there is a fuse or a "safety resistor" that is gone, assuming
you don't have a timer to delay power on for the drive.... in which case
the timing circuit is suspect too. The meter will tell you for sure.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

On Oct 23, 6:03 pm, Rick Ruskin <lion...@isomedia.com> wrote:

> I've tried all auggestions and nothing helps so far. I have
> determined that any drive in bay 2 is not getting power. Swapping the
> power connectors makes no difference. All ribbon connectors are
> tight. Any ohter suggestions as to what the cause(s) might be?

That kind of points to the drive bay. The one that's used in the
Mackie hard disk recorders has a little circuit board inside with
several components on it. I've had one fail on me, and a couple of
others have, too. If the cables reach, you could swap them and see if
the same drive bay (with the cables swapped, the "other" drive with
respect to the recorder) still has the problem.

You will probably have to deal with Alesis to get a replacement.

[Romeo Rondeau]

http://www.samedaymusic.com/product--ALECADDY

[Richard Crowley]

"Rick Ruskin" wrote ...

> I've tried all auggestions and nothing helps so far. I have
> determined that any drive in bay 2 is not getting power. Swapping the
> power connectors makes no difference. All ribbon connectors are
> tight. Any ohter suggestions as to what the cause(s) might be?

Remember that the HD24 actively switches drive bay power
on/off under control of the computer firmware. It is possibly a
problem with the power switching mechanism. I have not looked
closely enough to know exactly what that is.

[Mike Rivers]

> Mike Rivers wrote:
>> You will probably have to deal with Alesis to get a replacement.

Romeo Rondeau wrote:
> http://www.samedaymusic.com/product--ALECADDY

If that was the part he needed, he could tell because the "faulty" drive
wouldn't work in either hole. What he might need is the part that's
installed in the recorder, not the enclosure for the bare disk drive. I
wasn't aware of the firmware-controlled power switching for the disk
drives that Richard mentioned. That could be a nasty problem to find
since it's difficult, without getting pretty far into the inner
workings, whether it's a hardware or a firmware problem. And if it's a
firmware problem, it could require a replacement or reprogramming of an
EPROM,

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me here:
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
(mriv...@d-and-d.com)

[Rick Ruskin]

This problem solved. Bad transistor on the drive bay pc board.

New problem: No signal at input of tracks 21 & 22. A/D converter for
that position is toast. Part # is AL1101. Can these be purchased
individually or will I be forced to buy an entirely new A/D assembly?

[Mike Rivers]

Rick Ruskin wrote:

> This problem solved. Bad transistor on the drive bay pc board.

Good work. I have a dead Mackie (Lian Li RH-58) drive bay here. I
probably should figure out what's wrong with it and fix it.

> New problem: No signal at input of tracks 21 & 22. A/D converter for
> that position is toast. Part # is AL1101. Can these be purchased
> individually or will I be forced to buy an entirely new A/D assembly?

It's a Wavefront part, which is Alesis Semiconductor. If you can find a
distributor that carries the chip, you should be able to buy it
separately. Did you check the DigiKey catalog?

[etim...@gmail.com]

Guys II have a problem. after transfer with alesis interface theres nuthin really there.

[Scott Dorsey]

<etim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Guys II have a problem. after transfer with alesis interface theres nuthin really there.

Transfer from what to where?

You have a computer and you played something through lightpipe into the HD24
and nothing was recorded to disk?

You had a file on the HD24 and you played it through lightpipe into a computer
and the computer didn't see anything?

You can record and play through the analogue inputs? Or did this happen when
using the analogue inputs?

[Mike Rivers]

On 7/25/2016 11:01 AM, etim...@gmail.com wrote:
> Guys II have a problem. after transfer with alesis interface theres nuthin really there.

When you play back the recording, do the meters move? If so, there's
sum'thin there. The HD24 uses its own format on the hard drive, so you
need a program in order to copy recordings to a computer as WAV files.



--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[etim...@gmail.com]

I'm just ranfering them to the computer to use in DAw program.

[etim...@gmail.com]

On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 10:20:18 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:

I'm wanting to transfer to computer thru 1394 interface

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <0169673c-a822-4ac9...@googlegroups.com>,

<etim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 10:20:18 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> <etim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Guys II have a problem. after transfer with alesis interface theres nuthin really there.
>>
>> Transfer from what to where?
>>
>> You have a computer and you played something through lightpipe into the HD24
>> and nothing was recorded to disk?
>>
>> You had a file on the HD24 and you played it through lightpipe into a computer
>> and the computer didn't see anything?
>>
>> You can record and play through the analogue inputs? Or did this happen when
>> using the analogue inputs?
>

>I'm wanting to transfer to computer thru 1394 interface

Okay, then you need a device to turn the lightpipe signal into a firewire
signal, then you need a computer with an operating system and some application
that can read from the firewire. Do you have these things and if so what
kind are they?

[Mike Rivers]

On 7/25/2016 6:08 PM, etim...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm wanting to transfer to computer thru 1394 interface

The HD24 connects to a computer through Ethernet (and it's only
10BaseT). Are you talking about the Fireport adapter that plugs into the
back of an HD24 drive? Have you RTFM? You can still get a copy from the
secret Alesis obsolete gear web site:
http://67.192.162.144/fireport

You can also get the software that you have to use with it from the same
web site. It's not just plug-and-play.

[Frank Stearns]

Mike Rivers <mm1...@yahoo.com> writes:

>On 7/25/2016 6:08 PM, etim...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I'm wanting to transfer to computer thru 1394 interface

>The HD24 connects to a computer through Ethernet (and it's only
>10BaseT). Are you talking about the Fireport adapter that plugs into the
>back of an HD24 drive? Have you RTFM? You can still get a copy from the
>secret Alesis obsolete gear web site:
>http://67.192.162.144/fireport

>You can also get the software that you have to use with it from the same
>web site. It's not just plug-and-play.

And, that software will *not* run under win 7. XP is the last workable OS for the
Alesis transfer software.

However, do a web search for "HD24tools". A fellow in Europe has developed
replacement software by that name that will work with newer operating systems. Also,
it'll work with a wider range of configurations, such as inboard docking stations
rather than the external fireport (but I'm not 100% sure on that last one; I still
have and use my original Alesis fireport for transfers).

Also be aware that an HD24 Yahoo group exists; lots of helpful folks over there.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--
.

[Frank Stearns]

If such a thing existed, it would be a painful method, as it would likely be
a real-time transfer.

Slipping the hard drive out of the HD24 (as it's designed to do), connecting it to a
computer via a docking station that talks to your DAW, can be a blindingly fast way
to do the transfer.

The new 3rd party software is very fast; I get rates that are probably better than
50x real-time for transfers. (The original Alesis transfer software was probably
around 20-25x.)

Of course, straight-ahead use of WAV files on standard-format drives would be nice,
but back in the day drives were not fast enough to support this. And, even then, I
still like the proprietary formatting Alesis does for multitrack audio recording.
Many potenial gotchas are taken out of the disk equation when multitrack audio is
what the format was designed to do.

[Ron C]

I used an ADAT HD24 in my old venue ~~10 years ago.
I used ADAT connect software with usb hardware to transfer
my data.

Quick check, it works with:
Windows 9X / ME / NT / 2K / XP / 2003 / Vista / XP 64 bit / 2008 / Vista
64 bit / 7 / 7 64 bit / 8 / 8 64 bit / Android / Server 2012 / OS
Independent / 8.1 / 8.1 64 bit / 10 / 10 64 bit / Linux / Mac / All / Unix

I never bothered to try the 10 base T or light pipe
download options.

I had no problem down loading several hour multi tracks
to my pc for processing.

==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

[Frank Stearns]

Ron C <r.c...@verizon.net> writes:

>On 7/25/2016 8:12 PM, Frank Stearns wrote:

snips

>I used an ADAT HD24 in my old venue ~~10 years ago.
>I used ADAT connect software with usb hardware to transfer
>my data.

>Quick check, it works with:
>Windows 9X / ME / NT / 2K / XP / 2003 / Vista / XP 64 bit / 2008 / Vista
>64 bit / 7 / 7 64 bit / 8 / 8 64 bit / Android / Server 2012 / OS
>Independent / 8.1 / 8.1 64 bit / 10 / 10 64 bit / Linux / Mac / All / Unix

When you say "quick check", what did you do? FSTconnect will load and *looks*
like it might work, but when push comes to shove, it does not -- at least least with
Win7 64 bit.

IIRC, it refused to see the 1394 connection (even running as Admin); probably a
driver issue to get to the actual fireport hardware. Sometimes you get lucky with
ancient drivers for which no updates exist, often you don't.

>I never bothered to try the 10 base T or light pipe
>download options.

Very wise. That's a good way to make yourself insane -- loading dozens of Gbytes at
something a little less than 10 Mbits/second (10 baseT). And that's when you got the
connection to hold without mysteriously disconnecting. Tried 10 base T one time,
which immediately prompted getting the fireport.

>I had no problem down loading several hour multi tracks
>to my pc for processing.

But did you do that with a modern OS? You mentioned "10 years ago" above...

[Mike Rivers]

On 7/25/2016 8:12 PM, Frank Stearns wrote:

> Of course, straight-ahead use of WAV files on standard-format drives would be nice,
> but back in the day drives were not fast enough to support this. And, even then, I
> still like the proprietary formatting Alesis does for multitrack audio recording.
> Many potenial gotchas are taken out of the disk equation when multitrack audio is
> what the format was designed to do.

The Mackie and TASCAM hard disk recorders had no problem writing WAV
files on hard drives. The TASCAM wrote contiguous files, the Mackie
recorded into memory and saved the recording in 10 minute chunks, which
a lot of people didn't like once DAWs came along and they wanted to use
it for something other than a substitute for a multitrack analog
recorder. The pieces fit together seamlessly, though TASCAM used this
"work around" to make a point about the Mackie couldn't record WAV files
of any length.

It's good to know that either documentation was available or the disk
format was sufficiently hackable for someone to develop new software for
it. That was never the case with the Mackie recorders.

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
>
>>Okay, then you need a device to turn the lightpipe signal into a firewire
>>signal, then you need a computer with an operating system and some application
>>that can read from the firewire. Do you have these things and if so what
>>kind are they?
>
>If such a thing existed, it would be a painful method, as it would likely be
>a real-time transfer.

A bunch of them exist, and yes, it's realtime. What's wrong with realtime?

>Slipping the hard drive out of the HD24 (as it's designed to do), connecting it to a
>computer via a docking station that talks to your DAW, can be a blindingly fast way
>to do the transfer.
>
>The new 3rd party software is very fast; I get rates that are probably better than
>50x real-time for transfers. (The original Alesis transfer software was probably
>around 20-25x.)

What is this software? The only software I know of is the Alesis software.

[Frank Stearns]

klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

>Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Okay, then you need a device to turn the lightpipe signal into a firewire
>>>signal, then you need a computer with an operating system and some application
>>>that can read from the firewire. Do you have these things and if so what
>>>kind are they?
>>
>>If such a thing existed, it would be a painful method, as it would likely be
>>a real-time transfer.

>A bunch of them exist, and yes, it's realtime. What's wrong with realtime?

Well, if you had, say, 15-20 hours of 24 track from a 3 day location session, or
maybe 4-6 hours of a rehearsal plus performance from some other event, that's a LOT
of transfer time.

When you can get all that into the editor/mixer in a few minutes and get right to
work, that's a little better, at least for my workflow.

>>Slipping the hard drive out of the HD24 (as it's designed to do), connecting it to a
>>computer via a docking station that talks to your DAW, can be a blindingly fast way
>>to do the transfer.
>>
>>The new 3rd party software is very fast; I get rates that are probably better than
>>50x real-time for transfers. (The original Alesis transfer software was probably
>>around 20-25x.)

>What is this software? The only software I know of is the Alesis software.

HD24tools from Mark Brovaart in The Netherlands. In some ways I don't like it as
well as the original Alesis software, but he does have a preview mixer, a way to
select what to transfer based on stop/start points, and a full suite of recovery
tools should your HD24(xr) have an issue and mess up the disk. In over 10 years
I've never had a disk issue, but it can be a disaster if you're recording and the
power glitches (I *always* have my machines on a UPS), or if you're in a super loud
environment and the drive hiccups from vibration. (Thankfully, I never do that kind
of work.) In either case, HD24tools has methods and tools to recover that data.

And, the transfers are blindingly fast. As noted, at least twice as fast as the
Alesis software.

Frank
Mobile Audio

[Ron C]

All the ADAT hardware belonged to the venue so I haven't used
any of it since I left there.

Anyway, the quick check was just a Google search. I found this

<
http://drivers.softpedia.com/get/Other-DRIVERS-TOOLS/Others/Alesis-HD24-HD24XR-FST-Connect-105.shtml

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
>klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>
>>Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Okay, then you need a device to turn the lightpipe signal into a firewire
>>>>signal, then you need a computer with an operating system and some application
>>>>that can read from the firewire. Do you have these things and if so what
>>>>kind are they?
>>>
>>>If such a thing existed, it would be a painful method, as it would likely be
>>>a real-time transfer.
>
>>A bunch of them exist, and yes, it's realtime. What's wrong with realtime?
>
>Well, if you had, say, 15-20 hours of 24 track from a 3 day location session, or
>maybe 4-6 hours of a rehearsal plus performance from some other event, that's a LOT
>of transfer time.

Yes, but transfers can be done unattended, so they don't eat into your billable
time unless they're blocking up a piece of equipment that needs to be used for
something else.

Where it becomes a problem is with stuff like DAT transfers which can't be done
unattended because you need to be on the lookout for dropouts.

>>What is this software? The only software I know of is the Alesis software.
>
>HD24tools from Mark Brovaart in The Netherlands. In some ways I don't like it as
>well as the original Alesis software, but he does have a preview mixer, a way to
>select what to transfer based on stop/start points, and a full suite of recovery
>tools should your HD24(xr) have an issue and mess up the disk. In over 10 years
>I've never had a disk issue, but it can be a disaster if you're recording and the
>power glitches (I *always* have my machines on a UPS), or if you're in a super loud
>environment and the drive hiccups from vibration. (Thankfully, I never do that kind
>of work.) In either case, HD24tools has methods and tools to recover that data.
>
>And, the transfers are blindingly fast. As noted, at least twice as fast as the
>Alesis software.

That is extremely cool. I work often with a guy who uses the HD24 and I don't
think he knows about this yet either, so I will definitely prod him about it.

I'm also pretty sure the original poster in this thread doesn't know about it
and would benefit from it too.

[Frank Stearns]

Ron C <r.c...@verizon.net> writes:

>On 7/26/2016 6:33 AM, Frank Stearns wrote:
>> Ron C <r.c...@verizon.net> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/25/2016 8:12 PM, Frank Stearns wrote:
>>
>> snips
>>
>>> I used an ADAT HD24 in my old venue ~~10 years ago.
>>> I used ADAT connect software with usb hardware to transfer
>>> my data.
>>
>>> Quick check, it works with:
>>> Windows 9X / ME / NT / 2K / XP / 2003 / Vista / XP 64 bit / 2008 / Vista
>>> 64 bit / 7 / 7 64 bit / 8 / 8 64 bit / Android / Server 2012 / OS
>>> Independent / 8.1 / 8.1 64 bit / 10 / 10 64 bit / Linux / Mac / All / Unix
>>
>> When you say "quick check", what did you do? FSTconnect will load and *looks*
>> like it might work, but when push comes to shove, it does not -- at least least with
>> Win7 64 bit.

snips

>Anyway, the quick check was just a Google search. I found this

>http://drivers.softpedia.com/get/Other-DRIVERS-TOOLS/Others/Alesis-HD24-HD24XR-FST-Connect-105.shtml
> >

That's version 1.05, which I though I was running, but maybe it's actually 1.04.

I'll give this a try, see what happens.

Thanks for the link!

[Frank Stearns]

klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

>Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:

>>klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

snips

>>Well, if you had, say, 15-20 hours of 24 track from a 3 day location session, or
>>maybe 4-6 hours of a rehearsal plus performance from some other event, that's a LOT
>>of transfer time.

>Yes, but transfers can be done unattended, so they don't eat into your billable
>time unless they're blocking up a piece of equipment that needs to be used for
>something else.

Yes, that's a part of it.

>Where it becomes a problem is with stuff like DAT transfers which can't be done
>unattended because you need to be on the lookout for dropouts.

Call me paranoid, but I don't like to leave such things unattended, even on
"non-dropout" hard drives. Plus, not sure if I really could completely leave it
alone because I tend to segment the data in 30-40 minute chunks. This means I'd need
to stop what I'm doing that's billable, go to the transfer setup, get fiddly with
changing to a new segment and restarting the transfer capture -- every 30-40
minutes.

It's nice to buzz it ALL off in 5-10 minutes and be done with it. I don't mind the
segment changes there because I'm thinking about it, the fields are mostly prefilled
from the previous transfer, and the segment increments are only a minute or less
apart at those high transfer rates.

>>>What is this software? The only software I know of is the Alesis software.
>>
>>HD24tools from Mark Brovaart in The Netherlands. In some ways I don't like it as
>>well as the original Alesis software, but he does have a preview mixer, a way to
>>select what to transfer based on stop/start points, and a full suite of recovery
>>tools should your HD24(xr) have an issue and mess up the disk. In over 10 years
>>I've never had a disk issue, but it can be a disaster if you're recording and the
>>power glitches (I *always* have my machines on a UPS), or if you're in a super loud
>>environment and the drive hiccups from vibration. (Thankfully, I never do that kind
>>of work.) In either case, HD24tools has methods and tools to recover that data.
>>
>>And, the transfers are blindingly fast. As noted, at least twice as fast as the
>>Alesis software.

>That is extremely cool. I work often with a guy who uses the HD24 and I don't
>think he knows about this yet either, so I will definitely prod him about it.

Yes, several of Mark's new features are very handy. I've just found that the new UI
is a little clunky at times. But hey, it's free.

>I'm also pretty sure the original poster in this thread doesn't know about it
>and would benefit from it too.

And perhaps he'd want to join the HD24 group. Lots of good resources there. The HD24
is indeed an aging platform, but several design aspects are really spot on and no
one has as yet duplicated them. Heck, how many machines feel as close to an
analog Ampex or Studer as the HD24? (And in a much smaller footprint.)

The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input flexibility isn't nearly
as useful as the HD24.

And the sonics of the HD24XR, with the upgraded A-Ds, are excellent. If you're
really over the moon, get Jim Williams to upgrade the analog side (assuming he's
still around and doing that kind of work). For me, I use the A-Ds in the Grace
preamps and send the HD24XR digital. But I used to record through its A-Ds and then
mix analog playing back from its D-As. Very, very good sound.

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
>
>And perhaps he'd want to join the HD24 group. Lots of good resources there. The HD24
>is indeed an aging platform, but several design aspects are really spot on and no
>one has as yet duplicated them. Heck, how many machines feel as close to an
>analog Ampex or Studer as the HD24? (And in a much smaller footprint.)

RADAR!

There's a Tascam machine that people like and which I have considered, but
I really, really like the way RADAR feels.

>The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input flexibility isn't nearly
>as useful as the HD24.

Yes, it's sort of a special-purpose device for sound reinforcement guys who
are looking to do recording on the side, much like the Cymatic.

[Frank Stearns]

klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

>Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
>>
>>And perhaps he'd want to join the HD24 group. Lots of good resources there. The HD24
>>is indeed an aging platform, but several design aspects are really spot on and no
>>one has as yet duplicated them. Heck, how many machines feel as close to an
>>analog Ampex or Studer as the HD24? (And in a much smaller footprint.)

>RADAR!

Yes, indeed. But, unfortunately, at 8-10x the price of the HD24XR, and with a much
larger footprint. But that's understandable; the Radar had a real editing system
built in, not the clunky "toy" editor in the HD24XR. (Meant nothing to me, though;
always edited in the DAW.)

While I've not personally done the shoot out, multiple sources report that the
later-generation HD24XR was on par with the Radar sonically. And, if you got the Jim
Williams mods done to the analog I/O side of the HD24XR, sonics were supposed to be
a touch better than the Radar.

>There's a Tascam machine that people like and which I have considered, but
>I really, really like the way RADAR feels.

Tascam looks awfully "computer-y" to me. That's not what I want in the field. Played
with a Radar once and it's nice, but the size/weight and $16K price tag back in that
day kept me at bay.

>>The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input flexibility isn't nearly
>>as useful as the HD24.

>Yes, it's sort of a special-purpose device for sound reinforcement guys who
>are looking to do recording on the side, much like the Cymatic.

Exactly. On your FOH console pick up your analog direct outs, insert loops, or more
ideally, your Dante data, and away you go. But also a little pricy at $4K and
whatever version you bought (some version of analog in or some version of digital
in) you were stuck with. The HD24XR could do, in channel pairs, analog or digital
in -- and be had new for $2K. A rather remarkable value for what it did.

[Mike Rivers]

On 7/26/2016 3:09 PM, Frank Stearns wrote:
> The HD24
> is indeed an aging platform, but several design aspects are really spot on and no
> one has as yet duplicated them. Heck, how many machines feel as close to an
> analog Ampex or Studer as the HD24? (And in a much smaller footprint.)

Well, there's the Mackie (the HDR24/96 has about the best editor I've
ever used, something an Ampex or Studer doesn't have), and Radar is
still around. It's always sounded good, and its user interface keeps
improving. You can run Pro Tools on the current version if you prefer
that GUI.

> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input flexibility isn't nearly
> as useful as the HD24.

It's not a studio machine in the sense that you can't punch in. Cymatic
has a new 24-channel one that's similar in function to the JoeCo and
somewhat cheaper. The JoeCo offers the greater choice of input options,
so it's a good choice (as long as you've bought a few accessory I/O
cards) if you don't know what you'll be connecting to until you get there.

[Les Cargill]

Frank Stearns wrote:
> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>
<snip>
>

> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input flexibility isn't nearly
> as useful as the HD24.
>

I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
it has a full display.

It's a shame Fostex didn't move forward with a true successor to the
VF16. I know they've had odds and sods in that direction but that
market's down to bare bones.

<snip>
>
> Frank
> Mobile Audio
>

--
Les Cargill

[Mike Rivers]

On 7/27/2016 12:16 PM, Les Cargill wrote:

>> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input
>> flexibility isn't nearly
>> as useful as the HD24.

> I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
> Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
> it has a full display.

If you needed 24 channels, or even 9 channels, would that convince you?

What's attractive about a stand-alone recorder for situations where you
only need capture is less haywire. Your laptop computer with an
interface and A/D converter is three boxes with a lightpipe connection
(two if you want to run at 96 kHz sample rate as many do these days)
plus USB or something similar to get from the computer to the interface.
More boxes to fall off the table and more connections to come loose.

That may not be a big deal when you're setting up essentially a control
room at a remote location - you have a certain amount of control over
where you can put things and who wanders by a little tipsy and jostles
your stack of gear. You could do a little damage control by racking up
the interface and converters so you only need to connect the analog
inputs (you'd have to do that with the stand-alone recorder anyway), and
have just one cable going to the laptop computer. And while you have a
built-in UPS for the computer, you don't for the interfacing hardware.

The TASCAM X-48 is probably the most advanced of the dedicated
multitrack recorders. It has a mixer built in so you can set up a
monitor mix and solo channels with only a little more clumsiness than if
you had a console on the gig.

[Scott Dorsey]

Les Cargill <lcarg...@comcast.com> wrote:
>Frank Stearns wrote:
>> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>>
>> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input flexibility isn't nearly
>> as useful as the HD24.
>>
>
>I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
>Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
>it has a full display.

The thing about the JoeCo and the Cymatic is that they aren't computers,
they are appliances. You put them into the rack and cable them up and forget
about them. They just work.

>It's a shame Fostex didn't move forward with a true successor to the
>VF16. I know they've had odds and sods in that direction but that
>market's down to bare bones.

Agreed.

[Les Cargill]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 7/27/2016 12:16 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>
>>> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>>> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input
>>> flexibility isn't nearly
>>> as useful as the HD24.
>
>> I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
>> Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
>> it has a full display.
>
> If you needed 24 channels, or even 9 channels, would that convince you?
>

It might, if you really need 24 for live audio capture.

> What's attractive about a stand-alone recorder for situations where you
> only need capture is less haywire. Your laptop computer with an
> interface and A/D converter is three boxes with a lightpipe connection
> (two if you want to run at 96 kHz sample rate as many do these days)
> plus USB or something similar to get from the computer to the interface.

I know. It's not that bad. Compared to what you'll have to go through to
get a split, it's two, maybe three wires total.

> More boxes to fall off the table and more connections to come loose.
>

So rack it, at least the two 1/2 RU boxes. Might Velcro the laptop to
the rack while you're at it.

> That may not be a big deal when you're setting up essentially a control
> room at a remote location - you have a certain amount of control over
> where you can put things and who wanders by a little tipsy and jostles
> your stack of gear. You could do a little damage control by racking up
> the interface and converters so you only need to connect the analog
> inputs (you'd have to do that with the stand-alone recorder anyway),

Yup.

> and
> have just one cable going to the laptop computer. And while you have a
> built-in UPS for the computer, you don't for the interfacing hardware.
>

UPS-ii are pretty easy these days.

> The TASCAM X-48 is probably the most advanced of the dedicated
> multitrack recorders. It has a mixer built in so you can set up a
> monitor mix and solo channels with only a little more clumsiness than if
> you had a console on the gig.
>
>

I hadn't seen the X-48 before - that seems quite a good choice.

I'm thinking many of the PreSonus boxes offer even more than that. If
you can trust them.

--
Les Cargill

[Mike Rivers]

On 7/27/2016 6:49 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
> I hadn't seen the X-48 before - that seems quite a good choice.
>
> I'm thinking many of the PreSonus boxes offer even more than that. If
> you can trust them.

Are you thinking about a PreSonus mixer? Or one of their multi-channel
interface boxes? The mixer can be both your mixer and your interface to
the computer. Just one cable between the mixer and the computer is all
you need. But if there's PA involved, either you'll need to get a split
from the PA mixer anyway, or convince whoever is providing the PA, if
it's not you, to use your mixer. Some pretty high profile artists are
using those mixers for their tours when it's a show that it can handle.
32 channels isn't very expensive. But then you have shows like Rush,
with 90 inputs for a three piece band.

[Trevor]

On 28/07/2016 8:49 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
> Mike Rivers wrote:
>> On 7/27/2016 12:16 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>
>>>> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>>>> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input
>>>> flexibility isn't nearly
>>>> as useful as the HD24.
>>
>>> I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
>>> Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
>>> it has a full display.
>>
>> If you needed 24 channels, or even 9 channels, would that convince you?
>>
>
> It might, if you really need 24 for live audio capture.

I have been using cascaded MOTU Ultralites with a laptop for years,
recorded hundreds of concerts with only one minor mishap, which was
entirely user error. Not at all convinced I could have had any less
problems with a hardware setup, but I do love the greater flexibility of
a computer solution. No need for lightpipe though, didn't that pretty
much go out with DAT? Even Firewire is dead now.

Trevor.

[Les Cargill]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 7/27/2016 6:49 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> I hadn't seen the X-48 before - that seems quite a good choice.
>>
>> I'm thinking many of the PreSonus boxes offer even more than that. If
>> you can trust them.
>
> Are you thinking about a PreSonus mixer? Or one of their multi-channel
> interface boxes?

I am not 100% sure. Probably the mixers.

> The mixer can be both your mixer and your interface to
> the computer. Just one cable between the mixer and the computer is all
> you need. But if there's PA involved, either you'll need to get a split
> from the PA mixer anyway, or convince whoever is providing the PA, if
> it's not you, to use your mixer. Some pretty high profile artists are
> using those mixers for their tours

Yup. Although I question the reliability of those as well. I saw one in
use where a "vocalist pedal" thingy would crowbar it. The "vocalist
pedal" was throwing something that gave the PreSonus a reason to shut
down now and again - probably supersonics or DC.

You probably don't want that.

I've just stopped telling people to stop using those "vocalist pedals".
It's a lost cause.

> when it's a show that it can handle.
> 32 channels isn't very expensive. But then you have shows like Rush,
> with 90 inputs for a three piece band.
>

So 80 for Peart and 10 for the other guys, huh? :)

I don't think those guys are all that cost constrained.

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill]

Trevor wrote:
> On 28/07/2016 8:49 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Mike Rivers wrote:
>>> On 7/27/2016 12:16 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>>>>> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input
>>>>> flexibility isn't nearly
>>>>> as useful as the HD24.
>>>
>>>> I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
>>>> Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
>>>> it has a full display.
>>>
>>> If you needed 24 channels, or even 9 channels, would that convince you?
>>>
>>
>> It might, if you really need 24 for live audio capture.
>
> I have been using cascaded MOTU Ultralites with a laptop for years,
> recorded hundreds of concerts with only one minor mishap, which was
> entirely user error. Not at all convinced I could have had any less
> problems with a hardware setup,

I'd agree - once you got all the systems engineering done. I've used an
Acer Aspire One with a Focusrite cheapo plus a Behringer ADA8000 a
dozen or so times; never lost a single bit.

> but I do love the greater flexibility of
> a computer solution. No need for lightpipe though, didn't that pretty
> much go out with DAT? Even Firewire is dead now.
>

Lots of prosumer stuff still uses Lightpipe to get 16 tracks outta one
USB 2.0 spigot in a 1/2 RU box plus 8 more in another 1/2 RU box.

It's alive and well.

> Trevor.
>

--
Les Cargill

[Scott Dorsey]

Les Cargill <lcarg...@comcast.com> wrote:
>Mike Rivers wrote:
>> On 7/27/2016 12:16 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>
>>>> klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>>>> The JoeCo box is kinda there, but it's spendy and the input
>>>> flexibility isn't nearly
>>>> as useful as the HD24.
>>
>>> I'm not convinced that a good laptop plus an 8 ch interface with
>>> Lightpipe and 8 channels of Lightpipe A/D isn't better, simply because
>>> it has a full display.
>>
>> If you needed 24 channels, or even 9 channels, would that convince you?
>>
>
>It might, if you really need 24 for live audio capture.

24 is not very many channels. Often if there are multiple acts, they'll
split the console up so that the first act gets the first 24 channels and
the second act gets the next 24 channels, so that both can soundcheck before
the event and be set up. Digital stuff has reduced this a lot, but even
in the digital world it often continues so that each band can be preset into
their own snakes.

Then you get events where you have the console split into sections or you
have multiple consoles. I'll often work gigs where I am mixing an orchestra
feed while the guy to the left of me is mixing some jazz soloists and the
person to the right of me is mixing the narration and effects, all winding
up as part of the same 2-bus at the end.

The thing with both of these kinds of gigs is that there aren't a lot of
channels being used at the same time, but there are a lot of channels out
on the board. So if you have a guy in a truck handling the record feeds,
he can repatch everything at every set change so that he gets everything
active in that set to tape without any of the other stuff.

The whole point of these portable recorders, though, is to just run everything
to media and not need the guy in the truck repatching. So it's not unusual
for a larger festival stage to have three or four Joeco recorders racked up
together.

At 1U each, four of them still take less space than a DA-88....