Thoughts on Roland's VS digital recorders

[rjx]

I did a search here at GS, but I didn't really find anything. I'm sure I could find info on google, but I would like to get my info from other sluts!

I am not a studio owner or engineer, I'm just a producer. I make music with synthesizers, samplers & drum machines.

I usually use my G5 but I would like to get away from computer recording altogether. My demands are simple. I track 1-2 channels at once, and I playback about 12 - 18 tracks at once. I edit waveforms and do lots of copy n pasting.

I am very interested in the VS1680 and VS1880. As far as I know neither of these models have USB or VGA support?? USB is prefered (or I could use an external CDRW), VGA I would of course like to have but it isn't necessary for me.

^^ These two models are attractive to me because they are both cheap $375 - $575 (used), and they offer me 16 - 18 tracks of playback.

I have outboard (Fatso, EQ-1NV, Eventide, Lexicon, etc) that I would like to mix with using the digital recorder.

For the price, what do you think? Do you have suggestions for digital recorders from other manufacturers that I might be interested in? I am just starting to learn about these. Thanks!

[rowdy322]

I have used many digital multi-tracks, including Roland, Yamaha and now currently have the Korg 16XD and it is superior IMO to the Roland, especially on ease of use.That is a little out of your range, but a used Korg MK11 may not be.They are really easy to use.Roland can be a big learning curve.Also, I feel sonically the Korg has the edge.Of course always my .02.

[rjx]

rowdy32

Thanks for the suggestions! I am looking into them right now.

[rynugz007]

If you do a lot of editing i dont know why you would switch from a computer/software combo to an all in one box. The editing features on the rolands cant touch what you can do in cubase or protools or whatever daw your using. You'll spend hours working on something in the roland that will take you a matter of minutes in cubase.

However, with the exception of the shitty editing features they are great machines and pretty easy to use. I had a 1680 and a 2480. Oh yeah, they dont crash either.

But you couldnt pay me enough to sell my cubase rig and by a roland again.

[Jonathan Starr]

I've still got my old VS-2480DVD and it was a great learning tool and pretty good for tracking with the addition of good preamps & A/D.

For editing or mixing it was terrible, and the smaller models would be much worse since they don't have the outboard video monitor. Waiting for the hard drive to switch projects or directories or make backups or bounce to disk was so slow and tedious, I used to keep a novel handy to pass the time.

[Rmorph]

I have a vs2480 (4 years and counting).

thumbsup Frikkin Godsend. Beautiful machine.

Recording tracks takes 5 minutes of common sense from the moment you power the beast on for the first time.
Hows that for a learning curve?

I go to it when I'm in a hurry or recording live. I've used it as: Studio Console/midi console/Live band recorder/front of house console/monitor mixer etc... I also learn something new about it every time I switch it on. It's that deep.

The sound is not shoddy at all. To my ear the pres are superior to the Mackie Onyx - They are invisible, and better than the Akai DPS for that reason. Anyone who can't get a good sound out of one of these boxes has turds in his ears.

Don't take my word for it:
One of these machines scored the "Best Bluegrass Album" Grammy. The tech for this posts at VSplanet.

Check out www.VSplanet.com for tips and tricks. That web site is also a damn good reason for getting a VS. The best gear support site on the internet.


Long story short: I love my VS.

[ronyrrr]

i've owned a vs1680 and worked on the 2480 units.

good units for: tracking ideas, sound quality is pretty good, and those systems never crashed on me so i'd say it's very stable.

now for the bad stuff: editing functions are horrible, it takes forever to swicth between songs/sections/drives, and burning cd's can be soooo slow that it's almost painfull. i bought the 1680 used on ebay for just under 1000 and when i sold it a year ago i got 450 for it. I wish i would have gotten Pro Tools or Cubase back in the day instead of the 1680. i looked at it as investment in learning how to record with one of those all in one recorders but i've since then moved on the Pro Tools, Cubase, Nuendo. my suggestion to anyone looking at the Roland VS stuff is to look at an mbox or a used digi 001 for the same price. they'll cost about the same and it's a smarter move IMO because the Roland stuff isn't moving forward and advancing...hence the reason why the VS 1680 is 400 bucks now and will probably be worth 200 bucks next year! i have to agree with jonathan starr and rynugz007. Go with PT (mbox) or cubase (presonus interface).

[digibird]

Originally Posted by rynugz007

If you do a lot of editing i dont know why you would switch from a computer/software combo to an all in one box...
you couldnt pay me enough to sell my cubase rig and by a roland again.

Exactly. Don't go backwards., move foward. Cubase SX3 and RME, or SX3 and EMU 1820m = rock solid & light years ahead of Roland.

[ramjet]

hi

i have just sold my 1680 and bought pro tools. yes they don't crash and have ok sound quality but as far as editing goes like itt has been said it blows. but know for the good stuff, i bought mine of a guy who used them i his studio and he made some absolutly wicked albums on them. so they are useful but a bit of a dinosaur now

cheers

[autodidactic]

I don't know anything about the multitrack recorders but didn't the Roland VS series come bundled with logic or sonar? I know that with logic pro 6 there are options for core audio, DAE, and Roland VS in the audio driver select window. So it seems there is a way to get the best of both worlds. I don't know how logic or sonar would interface with the VS though, but maybe somebody else could chime in with some info on how that would work.

[rjx]

Thanks for all the comments.

I use digital performer and I LOVE that. But I am not good with configuring / problem solving computers and I from time to time run into road blocks that take me forever to get passed. Right now I am not able to record anything in my G5 cause I am a stupid !@#$ when it comes to setting stuff up. I was working with a tech from Lynx (I use a lynx card) and I tried everything he told me to (or so I thought) but nothing was working.

I might be giving up the luxury of digital performer, but as least I wouldn't go for long periods of time of not being able to record

I'd really like to continue with digital performer and my mac though.

[rowdy322]

I use Pro Tools, Digital Performer, Cubase and my Korg 16XD.I use a Motu 896HD to interface with my DP 4.61.What kind of problems are you having? I use my powerbook G4 with no problems at all.

[davenutz]

Originally Posted by Rmorph

The sound is not shoddy at all. To my ear the pres are superior to the Mackie Onyx - They are invisible, and better than the Akai DPS for that reason. Anyone who can't get a good sound out of one of these boxes has turds in his ears.

the 3 DPS series machines all have different circutry in them. In particular, the DPS24 has very neutral, transparant preamps...easily on par with the VS series. Ive compared them side by side, and no difference was audible. They are infinitely better than the pre's in digi LE hardware, and on par or better than the pre's in the mackie DXB(both use Burr-Brown chips, so its entirely possible that the pres are the same.)



Coming from a DPS24 originally, i would say that standalone hardware is on the way out. You are boxing yourself in to hardware that cannot be upgraded or expanded beyond what the original unit is capable of. If you go with a host based DAW, remember that it isnt a crime to not upgrade every year...there are still people running PT 5.1 on G3s.

[digibird]

Originally Posted by rjx

Thanks for all the comments.

I use digital performer and I LOVE that. But I am not good with configuring / problem solving computers and I from time to time run into road blocks that take me forever to get passed. Right now I am not able to record anything in my G5 cause I am a stupid !@#$ when it comes to setting stuff up. I was working with a tech from Lynx (I use a lynx card) and I tried everything he told me to (or so I thought) but nothing was working.

I might be giving up the luxury of digital performer, but as least I wouldn't go for long periods of time of not being able to record

I'd really like to continue with digital performer and my mac though.

Do you know of a local person fluent in MAC/DP/Computer geek stuff? It'd be worth it to pay someone to trouble-shoot/bulletproof your system. Once they have you up and running, never take that machine online, never upgrade anything just for the hell of it, don't change out hardware unless it dies, etc.

You've got such a nice world there, I'd hate to see you give it up. Really nice front end to DP, too, with your MP1NV and FATSO & Lynx... Remember a lot of computer problems can be solved at online forums, too, but it does take time and patience.
Good luck in your quest, and I sincerely wish you a stable computer environment for your DP rig. Hang in there...

[shift]

Dude i don't know how many times i have crossed this path myself....

Basically you have an excellent setup for music production, good program good machine, good interface.....

Therefore with out being harsh i would say save your money or put back into your daw.....

Now on the contradiction (which is where i hang myself evrytime)...
They run good plugins, they have VGA hook up for a monitor, you can bus audio to DP via "RBUS" and you can track bands with no problems and no latency and no stress of crashes.....

But if you plan on composeing by yourself you IMO are better of staying away from the Vs....

Only because you have so much more "editing control" which is once again IMO a fair chunk of the "writting process".....

The only reason i am contemplating it is because i would like to perhaps do some live work at some stage...
I also like the idea of just firing the big girl up and laying some ideas....

But it is alot of money...

I have heard some pretty F$&King amazing peices done, and funnily enough
i think "Right Said Fred" also used one ... lol...

Anyway fix your Mac and get DP happening. You will really enjoy it..

Good luck mate

[No4PCs]

You can track all your music in a vs or in the akay, do the mix by yourself for reference, burn the tracks individually in the dvd drive of your vs then go to a pro studio with a ssl and protools/logic to make the final mix. Why not?

[popmann]

I had a 1680 for years...ass--pure ass. They say they've improved this and that with the 2480, but the 1680 sounded SOOO bad, I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt. Sorry, my ancient 1604 mixer sounded FAR better.

I've heard some good things done with the 2480. It's certainly capable. I would NEVER buy one at new prices (which haven't gone down in the 8 years they've been available...but, if you can get one for cheap, cool.

Editing. Ehh...I disagree with everyone that it awful. It's a different paradigm...people who watch a lot of TV are just visual, IMO. It's realtively capable. The afforementioned Akai is MUCH easier to do most any edit on.

The Akai DPS24 (what I use), IMO, sounds better, too. With the exception of FX...but, as a recorder/mixer it's a better sounding unit.

Don't buy anything other than the 2480 in the VS series. All the others have ******** limitation...in export or bit depth or FX capability...something is hobbling all the others. Other than the optical drive (type and presence), I don't think there's any diff in the 2480 relaesed 7 or 8 years ago and the "modern" 2480DVD.

[roxxon]

I have a Roland 1880 and a Tascam 2448...
They have their good points...
But...beware!


I'm thinking about going back to 24 track analog!



I'd rather use Cubase.


The manuals are brutal!
There is a learning curve and it can be steep for some.
I went from good anolog tape machines to the VS.


The best VS units are the later 24 track models.
They have better converters and pres than the older VS units.

The VS units are compact and great to carry around from place to place.
If you are looking for different room sounds, the VS can be cool.
But editing and mixing on the VS gear takes a lot of practice.


For under a grand a VS 1680, 1880, or 1824 is a fair deal, providing that they come with 2 FX cards and the CD burner.

VS studio's biggest weaknesses?
The pres are medicore.
The older units should have been fitted with a VGA out for a real monitor.
The older unit's hard drives are too small, and must be upgraded.

[preben]

Some years back I used to have a 1680. NEVER EVER any problems whatsoever. The thing just works. And it's easy to work. USELESS for editing. Basic vocal comping can be achieved but anything beyond that is a MAJOR PAIN - if not impossible.

A technofobic friend of mine still uses his for tracking - digitally hooked up to a preamp with s/p-dif outs and going digitally into the VS. Works for him. Be careful to dither down to 20bit on the digital side of the pre though - I believe the 1680 is 20bit max. Maybe somebody can confirm this..?

[digibird]

Originally Posted by rynugz007

But you couldnt pay me enough to sell my cubase rig and by a roland again.

Exactly. Truer words were never spoken. I am with you, my Cubase brother.

[craigmorris74]

I used the roland VS series for 4 years and it was nothing but torture and uncertainty. They crashed hundreds of times and went through no less than 4 hard drives (this is with different units). On top of that, the editing sucks. When I switched to Sonar, I finally wasn't in Kansas anymore.

[popmann]

Be careful to dither down to 20bit on the digital side of the pre though - I believe the 1680 is 20bit max. Maybe somebody can confirm this..?

It is NOT. It is fully 24bit internally. It's converters are 20bit.

[popmann]

Honestly...I don't know what kind of "edits" everyone is performing that were so torturous on the Roland. I comped tracks--including multimic'd drums...I trimmed the "silence" around my tracks...the only kind of "editing" I ever heard anyone have issues with was the type where you're trying to rearrange the song. Which should be done, IMO, before you hit record. If you want to build arrangements using audio looping/editing/timestretching, you needa computer--not a recorder.

The only major editing flaw I ever found was the min chunk size of their RDAC...otherwise, not sample level editing--therefore no removing a rogue bass string/fret click, or pulling a second kick hit out of a tha-thump pattern. Of course, other stand alones (like the Akai) don't suffer from this problem.

You couldn't pay ME enough to use software to record. Actually--you could...enough to include an SSL and rack of gear to montior and mix it...and a dedicated engineer to keep the computer backed up and running.

[DCtoDaylight]

Originally Posted by autodidactic

I don't know anything about the multitrack recorders but didn't the Roland VS series come bundled with logic or sonar? I know that with logic pro 6 there are options for core audio, DAE, and Roland VS in the audio driver select window. So it seems there is a way to get the best of both worlds. I don't know how logic or sonar would interface with the VS though, but maybe somebody else could chime in with some info on how that would work.

This experiment died a quick death. It was basically just a MIDI map of controllers but never worked right.

As far as the VS series goes - I'm pretty in line with the consensus here. I used an 880 and 1680 for a long time, and they are definitely capable of making a pro-sounding recording. I did some mastering from mine in a Fancy Studio, and the guys there were honestly impressed with the sound of the unit.

The user interface definitely has idiosyncracies, and the comments about slow disk operations and CD burning, and terrible manuals, are right on. But if you have any experience at all, you should be able to start recording right away, as someone noted.

I switched to computer-based recording a few years ago and have generally liked it. It's not as stable as the VS machines, but VS software set a very high standard for robustness. In over a decade, I had exactly two crashes, both due to external forces (heat, dying disk drive). Never lost a single bit of data and the things always started up and went about their business.

It sounds like computer management and configuration aren't your favorite subjects, and I totally agree - that's why I went for so long with the Rolands and was very happy. And lately I've had a couple of dumb issues that have made me think fondly of an all-in-one box. They don't do quite as much for you as computer-based systems, but they are more immediate and less likely to behave strangely.

You could just grab one and give it a try on a project or two; if you don't like it, re-sell it. If it works for you in your situation, don't worry about whether you're moving backwards or forwards - just make music!

[Dot]

Originally Posted by rjx

I am not a studio owner or engineer, I'm just a producer. I make music with synthesizers, samplers & drum machines.

Most people get into VS recorders because they're recording real instruments. With the kind of music you're doing you oughta just go for some software/computer based system.

The 1680 is really not a serious machine, IMO. The pres really suck, and anything you track through them is going to sound muffled and fuzzy. If you want to step up to the 2480, that's a vast improvement. If you really wanna get out of your computer, find a used 2480 on Ebay. And make sure it includes at least two VS8F2 effects cards. YOu can probably do that for about $1500.

I usually use my G5 but I would like to get away from computer recording altogether.

Unless you're prepared to spend a hell of a lot more than $375 - $575 - that G5 is going to be about the best friend you have toward making some good recordings.

Post over at http://www.vsplanet.com with any of your VS questions.

[drummerboy1533]

I owned the VS1824(the inbetween,odd-child to the 2480 series) because I was an amatuer then....OK,I still might be! but they are so rediculously low-priced.I have used the 1680 too and the switching features are somewhat different from the 1824 and I like my 1824 now.I hit it with great mics,top outboard mic pres and a Mytek 96AD. WOW what a difference than just going into the onboard pres and shitty little converters.Yes with great front end gear and the VS series you can make great sounding stuff, but I would most agree with everyone else on the manual-lameness,frustrations with certain functions and the slow paced editing.BUT it has NEVER crashed.They do have a rep for reliability... They probable won't impress you clientelle

[thenoiseflower]

I had an 840ex in high school, and allot durring an internship
Th sound was OKAY, not great, but usable, the pres sucked ass, the verb wasnt bad, the eq sounded OK, but it had a stupid EQ GUI was VERY deceiving visualy, as time and experience would tell me, pretty much all EQ gui's are deceiving so, i got over that eventualy.

On MY 840 I used pretty much every feature, I spent 3 years inside that screen, and had no trouble with using time and measure markers for knowing where i was or editing, midi was solid and simple(acctualy I learned all i ever needed to know about midi implementation with that box, an MMC/Smpte converter, 2 emu planet phatts, an otari 5050 8track, little 14 channel yamaha mixer, and then stereo back into the computer it went), I actualy really liked the way editing/looping/aranging stuff was done, pretty intense and definetly a notepad-nessasary application . "play/from/stop/to" - But very simple once you got your paper, pen and coffee.

and get this, all that midi, processing, slaved sync, and a 250mb ZIPdisk for storage -

THE THING NEVER EVER CRASHED
and definetly changed my life forever.

BUT!!!

They are definetly not anyhting I would consider using day in day out ever ever again.

It would just seem a bit, well, crazy.

[snüzz]

i am working with a 1680 and 1880 synched up with a midi cable. i can't afford anything else right now and i think i am getting decent results.most everything i run thru a dbx 586 and a presonus acp-22 so my gear is considered "crappy" by most slutters. my other pre is a presonus mp-20. (no jensens) other than that it's the internal effects in the 1880 that i use in combination. check my results out: www.snuzz.com www.myspace.com/snuzz


i use no external a/d converters just the ones in the unit that everyone says sound muffled and muddy. working in a small 14 x 14 room with a 8 ft ceiling.

[slaves666]

I still use an 1880 I've had since 2001. It is perfect in reheasals to put down new arrangements and ideas during preproduction. My HD in it is a little screwy lately, but other than that, works great.