[ddots-l] Re: emergency help needed on an audio interface

In this case, when Scot talks about the FW1884 being inferior, he is
speaking in terms of capacity and audio quality, and is holding it up
against interface combinations like those from Lynx and RME. These pro
interfaces handle dozens of simultaneous I/O channels at 24-bit 192kHz.
Also, while the I/O quality of the FW1884 is great for a nicely equipped
project studio, the mic preamps and A/D/A converters are nowhere near
the quality of these other interfaces. These are the "Pro" interfaces
now. Of course, most people hear will never be tracking 24 live sources
at once at 24/192, and don't have $10000 to spend on a DAW, so the
FW1884 can do what they need. Also, if you're willing to have someone
retrofit your FW1884, you can improve the quality of the preamps and
avoid the bug where you can accidentally blow out your FW1884's preamps
by plugging in a condenser mic. However, the average customer gets a
little nervous when they are ordering a new daw, and you start talking
about the desirability of after market retrofits.
 
Here is the site for the retro fit
http://www.jb-2000.net/fw1884/
 
Personally, I'd be happy if we could sell the FW1884 to all of our
project studio customers that aren't on shoestring budgets. One unit.
One cable. One driver. Your control surface, audio interface, and MIDI
interface all ready to go.
 
Bryan
________________________________

From: ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Damon Fibraio
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:23 PM
To: ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ddots-l] Re: emergency help needed on an audio interface



Hmmm. Am I the only one a little unnerved by this message?

 

For one, sound on sound magazine gave the tascam fw1884 good marks in
their review of the unit. For my needs, it has worked really well. I
don't know what issues this device has. Are there better surfaces out
there? Probably, but I had started with a sac2k, went to a us2400 and
now have the fw1884. I didn't want a separate interface and control
surface, but I am getting one anyway in the end. I didn't like the cheap
plastic feel of the Mackie and for what they charge for that interface,
they should be ashamed of themselves, honestly, or maybe I need to get
more oxygen into my brain. I have a ymaha 01v96 digital mixer, which I
would not even try to make work with sonar as Yamaha could care less
about making a sonar template for it. And you'd need the m-lan board to
make it equivalent. I want to make music, not spend my life programming.
I have been playing for 30 years and maybe I am not pro like U-2 or
Madonna, but my work speaks for itself, and you can hear it at
www.keyboardguy.com. I don't think I am hot stuff, but I think I do
pretty damn good work. All I want to do is buy the best system I can for
the money my cousin and I have to record my music with and get pro
sounding results. I have invested thousands of dollars and run into
accessibility issues constantly as the rest of you have, I have traded
in gear and lost money due to inaccessibility issues, and all I want is
to get this studio working so I can make music. I am tired of the delays
and I just want to get it right. I am sure the rest of you would feel
the same.

 

--

Damon Fibraio

screen names -- aol: dfibraio...msn dfibraio@xxxxxxxxxxxx skype:
dfibraio

personal music site: http://www.keyboardguy.com.

Internet Radio station: http://www.nhbradio.com

myspace: http://www.myspace.com/nhbdamon

Internet radio show every Wednesday night from 8 to 11 pm eastern

 

From: ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Scott Chichelli
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 2:46 PM
To: ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ddots-l] Re: emergency help needed on an audio interface

 

 

 

From: Scott Chichelli [mailto:4daw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:48 PM
To: 'ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: 

 

HI Bill,

 

As i had mentioned in my last email to you, concerning the 1884.

 

part of the issue we feel is the onboard sound of the motherboard we use
on the LE systems (the one most often bought by you guys)

this issue should be resolved by changing the motherboard to a different
one. the one we use in our new Qube system.

 

for some reason the onboard audio is not compatible with the 1884. this
is the only possible answer. and again solved by switching to the other
motherboard we use.

the Core 2 Pro systems do not have this issue as they use a different
motherboard as well.

 

mind you 99% of systems we sell are to the sighted who have no use for
the onboard Audio. We have no use for onboard audio and therefore do not
test onboard audio compatibility

to anything or for anything. in any "tweak for Pro audio"
recommendations, the onboard is always recommended to be turned off.

Roseberry simply got lucky as he uses a different motherboard than we
do. it was in no way shape or form having anything to do with knowledge
of pro audio and how to build systems for them.

the fact that Roseberrys system supposedly worked with the Tascam when
ours did not was the clue to it being the onboard audio.

as we know Roseberry builds a good box and is one of the few "pro audio
builders" we actually respect. the other is Sonica.

 knowing his Audio tweaks are close to ours that left only 1 variable.
the motherboard used.

again with the motherboard we use in the LE system its 100% compatible
with all things pro audio (except Jaws and Tascam)

 

as for the 1884 and Tascam.

our systems work with any pro audio device out there, without Jaws, the
tascam works as well (which is not that well) as it can on our system
compared to any other.

we have never considered the 1884 to be a good interface, it has
numerous issues and tascams support is even worse with the warranty
worse again (45 days).

 

Tascam and Frontier Design (the company who actually designed and wrote
drivers for the tascam line of interfaces had a huge falling out over
this.

we also told the gentleman who returned his system to us (the only one
in the last 18 months) from the very beginning, prior to his purchase
that we did not support the Tascam and Jaws that he was on his own

using that interface.

 

as to the comments below by Sean and Phil.

typical of a forum, there are always 1 or 2 self appointed knowledge
gods whose own ego's get in the way of the truth and any useful
information they may have to offer.

 

i build and support 800 systems a yr for Pro Audio. My client list is
absurd, (Frank Filepetti, Chuck Ainlay, U2, Madonna, the Grand Ole
Oprey, Disney, Universal Pictures, Lakewood church and i could go on)
not to mention the majority of audio interface companies support teams
call us up for verification of support issues, we are Beta for most of
them and the majority have systems from us.

 

 And to be frank anyone who thinks the tascam 1884 is a pro interface is
NOT a pro.

the Yamaha 01V is light years ahead of the Tascam unit and i barely
consider the 01V a quality unit. not to mention both are very aged

a Pro set up would consist of a separate Audio interface such as RME,
with a control surface like the MCU PRO and a separate Mixer (insert any
number of mixers like Toft, Sound traks, Sound Craft, Neve, APi, SSL,
etc)

 

So i take their comments with a grain of salt or rather just ignore them
for what they are Armchair punters.

 

Since i understand the tascam unit has one of the few easily read
control panels by Jaws is the only reason i even recommended the fix or
consider supporting such an inferior unit

for your clients. IF it makes their life easier then we are willing to
assist.

 

feel free to copy and paste this in to your forum

 

and as an FYI you can add

ask Greg Lukens (most likely the most respected sightless guy in the
industry) what he thinks of ADK

he has bought at least 20 systems from us.

 

thanks

Scott

ADK

Other related posts: