Hi all, I am looking at buying either a Fostex DMT 8vl or a
Yamaha MD4s but cant seem to make my mind up. price wise, the fostex is around $250 NZD ($175 US) and the Yamaha $350 NZD ($250 US)Now these are pretty old peices of kit (considering the leaps and bounds of post millenium tech)but considering that I'll only be using them for out of DAW tweaks and not for a finished product, I cant seem to make my mind up. I read the SOS reviews and the fostex does boast Nil compresion (if needed)and the Yamaha uses the seemingley defunked MD Data disks. I'm not concered about 8tracks vs 4 either as this is irrelevant. Basically I am needing some user feedback if poss as my main strength is my music writting ability not the technical expertise.
Any feedback would be great.
Thanks
OLDER DIGITAL TRACKERS - Fostex DMT 8vl vs YAMAHA MD4s
-
- KVRist
- 101 posts since 19 Oct, 2001 from Murka
I've seen the Fostex one for sale on e-Bay for a LOT less than $175 US.
I recommend that you find one of the older 'Roland VS' series recorders. Most of them have effects built in, and gives you virtual tracks, etc...
Consider checking into those first.
I recommend that you find one of the older 'Roland VS' series recorders. Most of them have effects built in, and gives you virtual tracks, etc...
Consider checking into those first.
------------------------------------------------------------------
If the world didn't suck, we'd all fling off.
If the world didn't suck, we'd all fling off.
-
- KVRAF
- 8727 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
$250 
I looked into flicking off my old Ronald VS thingy last year, and basically decided to keep it for the odd miraculous occasion where I might dust it off and use it, mainly because I just couldn't sell it. Lucky if I could get $100 or so. So I'd have to say for either of the models you stated...bargain hard, because I think those are very high prices.
As for the Roland...unfortunately I always found them tedious in the extreme to use. They certainly are capable of alot of things, but setting them up to record, and then doing multiple takes, and then actually rearranging things inside them was a complete and utter pain in the bum. They are not intuitive in the slightest. Even after a full year's use, I still had to have the manual out handy to do anything useful. Although they did have some nice FX for the time...the dub delay is still a lovely wide-open airy delay that I like very much.
Any experience I've had with Yamaha digital stuff is that somehow or other, it doesn't seem to matter what type of gear I listen to, Yamaha digital always seems very "digitally cold" is the only phrase I can think of. From their samplers, FX units (especially reverbs), mixing desks and to HD recorders, they always seem a bit cold and typically digitally thin. It can be seen as character I suppose. Just one I don't like. I always used to think digital is just digital...all noughts and ones. But Yamaha stands out to me as the epitome of the digital=cold debate. Dunno quite why
I don't have much experience with the Fostex DMT8, but I looked briefly into them and was nearly tempted at the time. I plumped for the Roland basically because Roland recorders seemed to have far more FX and features and general bells and whistles. But I regretted getting one...it was a stop gap only for a year, and was what I consider one of my worst purchases ever. From what little I saw of the Fostexes, they appeared alot easier to use.
Fostex have a good name for reliability too.
Not much help, I know, sorry. (Consider the Korg unit if you can find one for sale...they had an 8-track that was similar to the Fostex one and looked easy to use too.)
I'm sure you can knock the price down though. $250 seems way too much.
I looked into flicking off my old Ronald VS thingy last year, and basically decided to keep it for the odd miraculous occasion where I might dust it off and use it, mainly because I just couldn't sell it. Lucky if I could get $100 or so. So I'd have to say for either of the models you stated...bargain hard, because I think those are very high prices.
As for the Roland...unfortunately I always found them tedious in the extreme to use. They certainly are capable of alot of things, but setting them up to record, and then doing multiple takes, and then actually rearranging things inside them was a complete and utter pain in the bum. They are not intuitive in the slightest. Even after a full year's use, I still had to have the manual out handy to do anything useful. Although they did have some nice FX for the time...the dub delay is still a lovely wide-open airy delay that I like very much.
Any experience I've had with Yamaha digital stuff is that somehow or other, it doesn't seem to matter what type of gear I listen to, Yamaha digital always seems very "digitally cold" is the only phrase I can think of. From their samplers, FX units (especially reverbs), mixing desks and to HD recorders, they always seem a bit cold and typically digitally thin. It can be seen as character I suppose. Just one I don't like. I always used to think digital is just digital...all noughts and ones. But Yamaha stands out to me as the epitome of the digital=cold debate. Dunno quite why
I don't have much experience with the Fostex DMT8, but I looked briefly into them and was nearly tempted at the time. I plumped for the Roland basically because Roland recorders seemed to have far more FX and features and general bells and whistles. But I regretted getting one...it was a stop gap only for a year, and was what I consider one of my worst purchases ever. From what little I saw of the Fostexes, they appeared alot easier to use.
Fostex have a good name for reliability too.
Not much help, I know, sorry. (Consider the Korg unit if you can find one for sale...they had an 8-track that was similar to the Fostex one and looked easy to use too.)
I'm sure you can knock the price down though. $250 seems way too much.
-
- KVRAF
- 8727 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
oh yeah...you mentioned a worry about the MD4, and getting hold of MDs. That really might be a problem nowadays. I suspect you might even have to import them from overseas to buy them. Not sure, but I wouldn't want to rely on a defunct system like that.
The Rolands use 100MB Zip optical disks...again, I have a few I bought years back, but I suspect it'd be hard to get them nowadays if I wanted any more.
Not sure what format the Fostex uses. So check out what type of digital outs they've both got. You might actually have to record externally for archiving. Shouldn't be a hassle as long as it's a standard co-ax or optical out though. They'll both have internal HDs, but you will want to archive - if you don't digitally compress, most of those old HD recorders don't hold much more than one full track with all of it's channels and takes etc. And...MD was by default compressed wasn't it (not 100% sure). You may not even be able to record uncompressed audio on the Yamaha unit? Check it out before buying. I can instantly hear a difference between the Roland compressed and uncompressed modes (yet all the blurb steadfastly told us compressed audio was pristine...well, it's not.)
The Rolands use 100MB Zip optical disks...again, I have a few I bought years back, but I suspect it'd be hard to get them nowadays if I wanted any more.
Not sure what format the Fostex uses. So check out what type of digital outs they've both got. You might actually have to record externally for archiving. Shouldn't be a hassle as long as it's a standard co-ax or optical out though. They'll both have internal HDs, but you will want to archive - if you don't digitally compress, most of those old HD recorders don't hold much more than one full track with all of it's channels and takes etc. And...MD was by default compressed wasn't it (not 100% sure). You may not even be able to record uncompressed audio on the Yamaha unit? Check it out before buying. I can instantly hear a difference between the Roland compressed and uncompressed modes (yet all the blurb steadfastly told us compressed audio was pristine...well, it's not.)
-
- KVRer
- 3 posts since 27 Jul, 2003
I don't know if you're on a budget here but I bought a BOSS BR-600 a a couple of month back. It's an eight track using Compact flash cards and have a built in drum machine and stereo mic. I bought it because I was tired of staring at a computer screen while recording guitar/bass as well as for being a bit more portable (letting friends add some guitars/mandolins and other stuff and later bring it over to my computer).
It's a pretty new product but it really feels like quite old technology. For instance, CF cards don't exactly seem to be the flavour of the month. They will probably be hard to get in a few years.
ZOOM has a similar product that is cheaper, has a bass sampler in addition to the drum machine and also MIDI out. It uses SD cards which probably have a bit brighter future.
I started recording my music back in the old portastudio era and working with the BR-600 did bring some good and bad memories from those days back. It's good to have restrictions on how much you can do, but at the same time you soon miss being able to easily edit things and add shorter things to the arrangement at later stages without having to resort to "bouncing" or "ping-pong" as it was called on my portastudio.
/Pär
It's a pretty new product but it really feels like quite old technology. For instance, CF cards don't exactly seem to be the flavour of the month. They will probably be hard to get in a few years.
ZOOM has a similar product that is cheaper, has a bass sampler in addition to the drum machine and also MIDI out. It uses SD cards which probably have a bit brighter future.
I started recording my music back in the old portastudio era and working with the BR-600 did bring some good and bad memories from those days back. It's good to have restrictions on how much you can do, but at the same time you soon miss being able to easily edit things and add shorter things to the arrangement at later stages without having to resort to "bouncing" or "ping-pong" as it was called on my portastudio.
/Pär
-
- KVRAF
- 8140 posts since 13 Jan, 2003 from Darkest Kent, UK
Well, at one time or another, I used to own both an DMT8vl and a Sony MDM-X4 (4 track mini disk recorder).
The Sony was good but I did suffer from corrupt disks a couple of times over the couple of years I had it. Indexes got screwed up or something so they wouldn't play properly... Whether the Yamaha is better in this respect I can't say (though bare in mind Sony invented the MD format so if they can't nail it...
) A friend had the same model and lost a disk or two too.
The Fostex however was no problem at all. Uses standard hard disks so I managed to upgrade it myself (though only recognises 8gb max I think...) Nice quiet analog mixer, easy patching (if you know your way around a mixer) though a little cryptic to use the more advanced editing functions (multi function keys). Day to day recording/mixing/etc easy as pie. Only two tracks at a time recording though. Good clean sound, a friend recorded a whole project on it that sounds pretty darn good imho (certainly compared to the slightly... indistinct sound of the Sony).
Personally I'd get the Fostex for one main reason: the only real moving part is the hard drive and if that goes it's pretty easy to swap another one in (you may have to look around for an older model but in the days of ebay...) If the yamaha MD mechanism goes = pricey repair.
There was another Fostex model after the DMTs, the FD8 and FD4. Basically the same but better spec'ed in the hard drive stakes, different display/styling etc. I've seen FD4s (4 track surprisingly) on ebay for next to nothing.
Personally, I hated the Rolands mentioned here, way too much button pushing imo.
edit: a couple thoughts after reading kritikons post:
The four track MDs use *data* mini-disks, more expensive and probably even rarer than normal audio minidisks nowadays.
The dmt8vl had optical digital in/outs, mastered to a hifi minidisk a few times using them.
It also had an optional scsi interface so that would be an option for backing up the HD.
The Sony was good but I did suffer from corrupt disks a couple of times over the couple of years I had it. Indexes got screwed up or something so they wouldn't play properly... Whether the Yamaha is better in this respect I can't say (though bare in mind Sony invented the MD format so if they can't nail it...
) A friend had the same model and lost a disk or two too. The Fostex however was no problem at all. Uses standard hard disks so I managed to upgrade it myself (though only recognises 8gb max I think...) Nice quiet analog mixer, easy patching (if you know your way around a mixer) though a little cryptic to use the more advanced editing functions (multi function keys). Day to day recording/mixing/etc easy as pie. Only two tracks at a time recording though. Good clean sound, a friend recorded a whole project on it that sounds pretty darn good imho (certainly compared to the slightly... indistinct sound of the Sony).
Personally I'd get the Fostex for one main reason: the only real moving part is the hard drive and if that goes it's pretty easy to swap another one in (you may have to look around for an older model but in the days of ebay...) If the yamaha MD mechanism goes = pricey repair.
There was another Fostex model after the DMTs, the FD8 and FD4. Basically the same but better spec'ed in the hard drive stakes, different display/styling etc. I've seen FD4s (4 track surprisingly) on ebay for next to nothing.
Personally, I hated the Rolands mentioned here, way too much button pushing imo.
edit: a couple thoughts after reading kritikons post:
The four track MDs use *data* mini-disks, more expensive and probably even rarer than normal audio minidisks nowadays.
The dmt8vl had optical digital in/outs, mastered to a hifi minidisk a few times using them.
It also had an optional scsi interface so that would be an option for backing up the HD.