#91
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #91
Lives for gear
 
AlphaDingo's Avatar
 

Just to fan the flames a bit...if it sounds better with an mp3 comparison wouldn't the difference be even more dramatic in real life?
#92
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #92
Lives for gear
 
johnnyjellybean's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaDingo View Post
Just to fan the flames a bit...if it sounds better with an mp3 comparison wouldn't the difference be even more dramatic in real life?
Not a valid comparison since there would be too many variables.
LX3
#93
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #93
LX3
Lives for gear
 
LX3's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
at full track count and 96khz I make that around 8 meg a second, sustained.
Actually, I think it's closer to 14MB/s... and that's not even considering the fact that it's writing 48 separate files simultaneously.

I was only recording 36 tracks, which I calculated to be around 10MB/s.

But, let's put it this way... over FW400 on a MacBook Pro, any decent modern drive manages 20MB/s sustained without a problem, and a large drive cache (pref 16MB) takes the pressure off when there are spikes.

In theory the internal X-48 drive will go way faster than that thanks to the SATA connection. (Same goes for internal drives on PCs/Macs)

But so much for the theory - as I say, the X-48's internal drive seemed to have more difficulty keeping up than the external firewire drive. Fragmentation? Crummy drive? Who knows.

Usefully, there's a drive benchmarking utility on the X-48 which writes some test files for a minute or so and reports back how many tracks the target drive will support at 48 and 96kHz. On a plain LaCie external firewire drive, it said "48 tracks at 48kHz, 48 tracks at 96kHz". Which surprised me (in a good way), so who am I to argue?

I find people tend to get a bit paranoid about data rates and access times. Modern drives do really shift it. But I agree, 48 tracks of 96kHz is getting into the danger zone for a single drive. And yeah, I've also been burned when unwittingly using FW-IDE bridge boards from certain manufacturers.

Like Pyramix, the HD24 makes a big deal of the fact that all the data is interleaved, so it's only reading/writing to a single file. But there are plenty of HD recorders like the X-48 that do create separate files for each track, and never miss a beat. The advantage of this is that you can record to an external drive, and just hand the drive to the client at the end of the night. No exporting or translation required. We're so up against it for time on a lot of gigs that this is a real benefit.
#94
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #94
Lives for gear
 
yrplace's Avatar
 

I've used the X-48 for a lot of live gigs and so far it has worked flawlessly (knock on wooden head). Recording to an external drive and then imported the WAV files to another drive on my Mac Pro-tools system. Imported the files into Pro Tools and everything has worked fine.

Haven't tried the OMF export since they made larger files available , but since it takes a long long time to convert the session, I doubt we'll ever do that.

Admittedly we are still using the deck mostly as a backup machine, but I've kept and used the files from the X-48 on a couple of occasions and it sounded great.

Anyone know what the latest software is?

Gotta check the Tascam website....

Be nice if they made the meters a bit more useful.

Mark
LX3
#95
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #95
LX3
Lives for gear
 
LX3's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yrplace View Post
I've used the X-48 for a lot of live gigs and so far it has worked flawlessly (knock on wooden head). Recording to an external drive and then imported the WAV files to another drive on my Mac Pro-tools system. Imported the files into Pro Tools and everything has worked fine.

Haven't tried the OMF export since they made larger files available , but since it takes a long long time to convert the session, I doubt we'll ever do that.

Admittedly we are still using the deck mostly as a backup machine, but I've kept and used the files from the X-48 on a couple of occasions and it sounded great.
Good to know. Any idea what converters are on the analog boards? Have the converters changed since the MX2424?

Quote:

Anyone know what the latest software is?
1.04 I believe.

Quote:

Gotta check the Tascam website....

Be nice if they made the meters a bit more useful.
I agree, the front panel meters are a bit hopeless. If they just bothered to make the last couple of LEDs a different colour that would have helped. The GUI meters are a lot better, but still remain blue all the way to the top, so there's no easily-spotted indication when you're getting close to 0dbfs. Maybe they'll change that with a software update. Of course, if the GUI freezes every few seconds, so do the on-screen meters... not very helpful.

Sorry if I'm sounding negative about the X-48. I like it a lot as a concept, I just hope it fulfils its potential.
#96
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #96
Gear addict
 
svart's Avatar
 

Who cares about converters and which ones are better? Other parts of the boxes make much more difference. How many times does this have to be said? Sheesh people, the MX2424 had top of the line AKM converters when it came out as well as a boat load of "high-end" opamps, coupling caps, etc. It sounded like CRAP. I changed my converters to the newest ones AKM had, only one generation apart, changed the opamps to the newest and fastest available and the box STILL SOUNDED LIKE CRAP. I hard wired the system and monitored through the inputs straight to the outputs which sounded GREAT, but when playing back the thing sounded like I had two towels over each monitor. Obviously the software had a lot to do with how the thing sounded and was surely the weak point of the unit. The actual converter ICs are so perfected these days that any of the better makes and models will work and sound very similar. The analog circuitry feeding them makes much more difference as does the bitstream processing that is done after them than the converters themselves.

Oh and just because of so much trouble that MX2424 put me through, I would never buy a Tascam product ever again let alone even considering testing/comparing anything they make.
#97
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #97
Lives for gear
 
De chromium cob's Avatar
 

HD24XR with Jim Williams Audio Upgrades mods is what you're looking for.
#98
3rd March 2008
Old 3rd March 2008
  #98
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
I forgot that it's 24 bit depth my calculation would have been at 16 bit. Pyramix can record as BWF's or Wavs orAif's as well, in a hand off situation I would be tempted to do that. As to data rates all drives are much better these days, however we have a lot of experience with Long form video much at DVCAM data rates (approx 5-6 meg a second), that 3-4 years ago presented a problem when sustained data rates were quoted at 25 meg a second, around 15 I would think is fairly close to the limit now.

Regards


Roland
#99
15th March 2008
Old 15th March 2008
  #99
Gear interested
 
Krakatowa's Avatar
 

Only problems

I'm probably the newest guy on the block here, but I feel compelled to tell briefly my experiences with the X-48.
I've had this "thing" since firmware 1.00 and I'm still fighting it through 1.04. I have a DM3200 (using TDIF) to the X-48. My problems began early with the system simply locking up and then going to the dreaded Microsoft big blue screen with its assortments of error calls, which I bet that I've seen all that could possibly be displayed. I won't bore you with all the technical jargon, I just want to tell you the vast amount of problems I have had. At first, I just wrote it all off as, it's just brand new and buggy, they'll work it out with me. Ok, fine, they did at the expense of me sending this "thing" out to Calif from Florida twice and with a third one on the way as I type this message. I have had the system completely replaced, had new memory, had a new hard drive installed (if that little thing even warrants being called such), and a new board replacement. I tell you what, I just wish I had it all to do over again. I've watched this thread for a long time, hoping I would see great news. I'm still waiting.
I have had great success with their tech support on the phone but I still have problems. The concept is fantastic but my opinion is, with all the problems I've had and still am having, it's still only a concept at my expense. I'll probably be under attack by some of you, but I'm not posting this to start a pissing contest, I just simply want you all to judge before dropping a few grand into something that may only be turning you into a ginny pig for them.

Last edited by Krakatowa; 15th March 2008 at 02:57 AM.. Reason: formated wrong
#100
15th March 2008
Old 15th March 2008
  #100
Lives for gear
 
yrplace's Avatar
 

That's a drag and I wonder why you're having so much trouble. Maybe we just got lucky but so far the X-48 has worked flawlessly for us on a half dozen remotes. I don't use it in my studio as a DAW, so obviously there are a lot of functions that aen't geting a full workout here.

But just last week I used X-48 to xfr a half dozen 48 track shows that had been originally recorded on Tascam DA-78's.

I ran TDIF cables from the DA-78's to the X-48 used an external clock to the 78's and even turned on the mix engine in the X-48 so I could monitor the xfr. Everything worked perfectly and I then copied the audio files to my Mac and imported the shows into Pro Tools sessions, all without a hitch.

I don't know if it means anything, but are you using an external firewire drive to record to? That's the only way I have ever used the deck.

Good luck getting the X-48 to work.

Mark
#101
15th March 2008
Old 15th March 2008
  #101
Lives for gear
 
huub's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
I have to say that from your comments it sounds like either you use the X48 as a straight 48 channel recorder or a slightly second rate DAW. As you might know from my previous posts I am a Pyramix user and I specifically bought into Pyramix in order to be able to do exactly what you area talking about. I also do a lot of mastering and CD preparation and I specifically wanted to get to a "one machine does it all" situation. Prior to having Pyramix I was previously on Adats, Radar and a Sadie system for the mastering and editing. I could work round almost any situation with that, however the ability to do great multitrack edits and have several versions of a project in different stages of completion, all in a single system, made the decision easy for me. the only problem I had was the lack of VST support on busses which meant that for serious mix projects I had to "bump" the audio to another program like Logic for mixing. Pyramix alsocan use it's own proprietry recording format (Pmf files) which records the audio as a single linear file making it much more efficient for higher track counts. With the latest ver 6 software and their masscore technology the VST issue has been solved and much higher plugin counts can be used in comparison with other DAW's on the market, not the cheapest solution on the market, but one that I'm appreciating more and more.


Regards



Roland
Awful hijack, im sorry Roland have you upgraded to pyramix v6 yet? experiences?
maybe for a new thread though..

Cheers,
huub
#102
23rd March 2008
Old 23rd March 2008
  #102
Gear maniac
 
Mr. Bars's Avatar
 

Is it Native or similar to PT HD ?

Hi everyone. Please, can you explain me is the X-48 native based system?
I work with a lot of hardware outboard, analog mixer through Digi 002 and want to go ahead with ProTools HD1. Is X-48 something similar to PT HD or not? Is it work only on built-in Celeron processor on has additional DSP block...? I can't find info about it on Tascam site. Please, give me advise. In general I want to upgrade my Digi002 sound system to new level sound recorder and player.
Thanks a lot!
Bars.
#103
28th March 2008
Old 28th March 2008
  #103
Gear interested
 

Not Stable x-48

I`got my x-48 about 3 weeks ago and i have "big time" trouble with the machine. If i try to edit any recorded track the x-48 freezes, and i have to restart the machine. There`s impossible to zoom realy close in on a track.
I have tried to send mails to Tascam support in Germany but they say that they can`t help me out here and tell me to contact the Norwegian distributor. What kind of a anwere is that?
The machine was bought secondhand on eaby and came from USA and the Nowegian distributor dont like that.
I have tried to put in new memory and HD and it still won`t work.
I have software 1.04.
Can anybody help me out on this, or am i the only one with this problems?
#104
28th March 2008
Old 28th March 2008
  #104
Gear addict
 
synthetic's Avatar
 

It sounds broken to me. I'm not seeing any problems like that. I'd send it in for service.
#105
29th March 2008
Old 29th March 2008
  #105
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
x-48 was dead before it was born.
Period.
LX3
#106
16th April 2008
Old 16th April 2008
  #106
LX3
Lives for gear
 
LX3's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang View Post
x-48 was dead before it was born.
Period.
Very helpful, that answers all my questions, thanks.

Someone on TascamForums heard from Tascam (not officially of course) that there's a major software update on the way for the X-48 which will add features and improve stability. That's good.

Personally, I'm happy to sit on the fence for now and see where it all goes. Might also do a blind listening test next time I record with one.
HughH
Thread Starter
#107
16th May 2008
Old 16th May 2008
  #107
Gear maniac
 

Thread Starter
Hello,
We just did the Survivor Finale in NY with the X-48 and it seemed to behave itself. The combination of multiple takes into a single file, a bug noticed several times earlier, did not manifest itself for whatever reason. Unit chased code fine, and writing to an external Glyph was fine. As usual it did not really like 2 drives attached - it wouldn't recognize the second. Got rid of the second drive and it was fine.
Usual issues with auto-scroll turning off when zooming.
We always had to check settings when loading projects - tc, sync, framerate, etc. occasionally changed when loading.
Did not test file timestamping - it was ok on our last test.
No DAW or editing checked - we don't use it for that.
v1.04

H
#108
16th May 2008
Old 16th May 2008
  #108
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Wow, this is crazy. All this talk about software and updates.

The reason I go for hardware recorders is to eliminate all that stuff. You should be able to turn on the power and start recording, every time. Otherwise I would just use a computer for recording, and I've been there, done that, and was glad to leave. Sounds like Tascam is selling you a computer with one task, and it isn't even doing that task so well.
#109
17th May 2008
Old 17th May 2008
  #109
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
Wow, this is crazy. All this talk about software and updates.

The reason I go for hardware recorders is to eliminate all that stuff. You should be able to turn on the power and start recording, every time. Otherwise I would just use a computer for recording, and I've been there, done that, and was glad to leave. Sounds like Tascam is selling you a computer with one task, and it isn't even doing that task so well.

However they look everyone is, even the mighty Radar contains a PC board as do most digital consoles. For all the tech savvy people in this industry some need to wise up to exactly what you are buying, what real advantages it has, and what are the real world limitations.

Regards


Roland
#110
18th May 2008
Old 18th May 2008
  #110
Lives for gear
I have been following this debate now, from the beginning, as we are in the market for a new DAW this Summer and, although the Radar ticks me off big time because of the poor zoom-in depth, I must say, all the promises made by Tascam (if only half of what is written here is true) seem to have been just wishful thinking.

Apart fromn Radar, the only system I have used so far that has been 100% reliable is Soundscape, so when we do remotes, we reord on Radar and back-up on Soundscape (or the other way about, depending on the engineer).

It does not look as if we shall be changing this anytime soon!
#111
18th May 2008
Old 18th May 2008
  #111
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Byre View Post
I have been following this debate now, from the beginning, as we are in the market for a new DAW this Summer and, although the Radar ticks me off big time because of the poor zoom-in depth, I must say, all the promises made by Tascam (if only half of what is written here is true) seem to have been just wishful thinking.

Apart fromn Radar, the only system I have used so far that has been 100% reliable is Soundscape, so when we do remotes, we reord on Radar and back-up on Soundscape (or the other way about, depending on the engineer).

It does not look as if we shall be changing this anytime soon!
IMHO Radar (as it currently is) doesn't really offer any real world advantage. Possibly the best thing about the Tascam is that it's a lot for your money. I would say that with things like Pyramix, possibly Sequioa/Samplitude and Nuendo there is becoming less and less reason for stand alone units. As for Soundscape I am unaware of it's current status since its aquisition by SSL. Are they still supporting it, providing updates or is the stripped out hardware all that remains?

Regards


Roland
#112
18th May 2008
Old 18th May 2008
  #112
Lives for gear
Soundscape is very much still out there and supported by the original team in Belgium. It is the only PC or Mac DAW I have tried that has proven to be 100% reliable.

We have most things except Logic and so far, only Soundscape and Radar have never locked out of record, crashed, lost files or done something else that causes heart failure.

I have not found a reliable native system yet.
#113
23rd May 2008
Old 23rd May 2008
  #113
Gear maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peacock View Post
Radar has way better convertors than the Tascam. It sounds alot better than the Tascam
On the Radar,X48 compairison:
That goes with out saying, being that it costs 3 times+the amount.
You get what you pay for.However,you could get better converters
and save some$$
TT
#114
29th July 2008
Old 29th July 2008
  #114
Gear interested
 

a little help digging out of a hole

Okay I did something dumb/lazy a long time ago, and now I'm paying the price. I dumped my whole "album" (15songs, 24 tracks each, 24bit/48khz) from my remaining working DA-78's to my X-48 in one long pass.

I broke it up by using the "save as" command, creating 15 separate .ndr files all referencing the same audio pool. I've been slowly adding/overdubbing tracks as time allows, and the whole file has grown to 46gb+, still with the audio in the same pool.

Obviously this is making for some groansome back-up times. Now (way too late) I'd like to break it up into the 15 separate songs/projects, each with their own audio pool. I cannot figure out any way to do this from inside the X48/DAW.

Here's what ALMOST worked:
1. I exported a song (one without overdubs) as an aaf file with non-embedded audio. Can't do the embedded audio option because the file is too big (because it's taking ALL of the audio for the whole record). Ditto for the OpenTL export.
2. I opened the aaf file in Logic. I had to manually import the associated wav files. I split the files so that I could select the tracks to crop out in the Sample Editor, and cropped each one individually.
3. I saved the file, then exported it as an Open TL to the external drive. So far so good (although excruciatingly time consuming, and worse when there are overdubs which lose their timestamp).
4. I attempted to import the OpenTL file (the only import format the X48 supports). The import failed, giving me the message that the files were in an SDII format, and that the X48 doesn't "yet" support that.
5. I looked at the audio files in File Manager...they show up as wav files.
6. I'm completely flummoxed.

Anyone have any ideas?
LX3
#115
29th July 2008
Old 29th July 2008
  #115
LX3
Lives for gear
 
LX3's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by trevort View Post
On the Radar,X48 compairison:
That goes with out saying, being that it costs 3 times+the amount.
You get what you pay for.However,you could get better converters
and save some$$
TT
Although, so far, it seems like an Alesis HD24XR also sounds noticeably better than the X-48, and the Alesis is cheap as chips (much better metering too, and a heck of a lot easier to use... but no timecode or B-WAV).
Jam
#116
29th July 2008
Old 29th July 2008
  #116
Jam
Lives for gear
 
Jam's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX3 View Post
... but no timecode or B-WAV).
Which unfortunately is the deal breaker, well for me at least.

It seems that there's gap in the market that Alesis should be well suited to bridge.

James
LX3
#117
29th July 2008
Old 29th July 2008
  #117
LX3
Lives for gear
 
LX3's Avatar
 

I agree, I can't live without Broadcast WAV recording any more. There is a workaround that I've used on the HD24, but it isn't pretty... or practical if you have a lot of work on.

Mind you, the X-48 isn't pretty either. Man, that interface does it's damndest to catch you out. But you get used to (most of) it, and develop workarounds for the rest of it.

I think you'll be waiting a looonnngggg time if you're betting on Alesis coming up with a replacement for the HD24. Alesis headed down-market with their product line a few years ago, and I don't think they're interested in making recording equipment any more. The only reason they haven't shelved the HD24 is that it's still selling in its current form!

The point I was trying to make was that the HD24XR proves that it's possible to make a low-cost HDR with excellent audio quality. You don't have to spend Radar money (but it helps). The Tascam is a bit wide of the mark, and its lack of flexibility when it comes to digital interfaces make it very difficult to skirt around the issue with external converters.

I still use one though!
Jam
#118
30th July 2008
Old 30th July 2008
  #118
Jam
Lives for gear
 
Jam's Avatar
 

LX3

I think your assessment is spot on. I've ended up primarily using a Radar as well and they're great machines.

The rub being even if you can afford a Radar or two what do you run as a backup ?

The Alesis is the right price but if the Radar did hick-up you end up having to do three times as much work to get the Alesis files in the right shape to use.

The Tascam does everything you'd want - on paper at least - but apparently doesn't sound great and also doesn't work as advertised.

So a laptop set up, which is great from a ready to mix point of view but makes me very nervous from a reliability point of view.

The other rub being 24 tracks is not enough these days. Lots of gigs seem to be in the 30 to 40 tracks ballpark.

I guess you've been thinking the same things as me as you were all over the Presonus 32 channel interface thread as well !!

Lots of choices but no solution, well apart from a new mortgage and lots of Radars !!

James
LX3
#119
30th July 2008
Old 30th July 2008
  #119
LX3
Lives for gear
 
LX3's Avatar
 

I've been using the M-Audio Lightbridge a bit, and it's been working okay, so I'm no longer in too much panic to get the Presonus.

Plus, as you say, very often 32 tracks isn't enough. So an X-48 and a pair of HD24XRs does the trick for me.

I'm now finding that once you have the X-48 working, it tends to stay working, which is good. Although it's definitely best to avoid messing with the DSP mixer while you're in record.
#120
8th October 2008
Old 8th October 2008
  #120
Lives for gear
Taken from the Tascam website:

Major Update Adds Features to Best-selling 48-track Workstation

Montebello, CA (October 6, 2008): New for the TASCAM X-48 is software version 1.10, an update that adds several user-requested features to the best-selling 48-track digital audio workstation. Among the new features are a new "Big Meter Mode," which changes the VGA display into a meter bridge for live recording and tracking. Other added features include a new "fail safe recording" mode which saves the file every 5 seconds. TASCAM also made improvements to the user interface, automation system and minor bug fixes.

"TASCAM's X-48 has proven to be a popular choice for live recording," said Jeff Laity, Marketing Manager for TASCAM. "Because of its compact size, great sound and reliability, some of the top names in live recording use the X-48. We listened to their requests and version 1.10 is the result of their input."

X-48 version 1.10 is in final testing and will be available as a free update for owners later this year.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
rec to go / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
10
LX3 / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
9
muziekschuur / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
8
bhenderson / So much gear, so little time!
3

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.