The DijonStock Digital Home Recording Support Forum

Hi everyone I'm new to this forum and the AW1600, I'm a professional musician and I have a goal to produce some tracks for my cd, my plan is to use my keyboard to track some of the music, I'm not an expert engineer but I'm willingly to learn. My question is the AW1600, is it on par with logic or Cubase sonically, can I produce the kind of quality necessary to compete with the software that's out there? Or am I asking too much of this unit? The music I'm producing will be jazz based so I won't need a slew of tracks . What is your honest opinion and experience? Thanks in advance

Hi and welcome to the forum.
Having been a user of the AW1600 for a few years, and now using the AW4416 connected to a PC Daw (Studio one V3 and Pro Tools 10HD) sonically you won`t hear a difference, it`s more of a workflow thing, what works for you is what is best.
Good luck with your recordings.
Enjoy your day.

T.

_________________
https://tmacmusic12.wixsite.com/tmac1

https://tmacmusic12.wixsite.com/tmac

http://www.soundcloud.com/t-mac-12

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmCjAzN ... ture=watch

https://www.reverbnation.com/tmac

You can make some great recordings. Some track and produce all within the AW environment. I am usually in this group.

Others prefer to track upon the AW, as it is convenient to set up and configure, and then move the tracks to a multi track software editor for mixing.

others use the AW as a control surface, via midi, to have real faders and knobs controlling the inputs of the software editor as they track using some other sort of input device directly through the computer sound card. TMac is in that camp.

Lots of combined knowledge here, most questions can be answered.

Welcome aboard.

_________________
Byron

It's partly a matter of personal preference but I like to do the whole procedure on the AW16G. When you look at the specifications like bit rate and bit depth, the sound quality is very good. On the AW1600 you can go 24 bit if that is what you prefer. It adds to the options. Either way, I'm convinced once you get to know the machine a bit, it'll make you happy.

Welcome to the forum!

_________________

---

Don't judge the coffee by its cup.
The proof of the cheese is in the eating

I started with the original AW16G. From there I jumped to the AW2400. No regrets. Nothing against computer based recordings, but I know just enough on the 2400 to do what I need to do. Takes up little room and works great. The 1600 can be had for small money. It's very portable and travels easy. Plenty of inputs for an individual. The general work around at the beginning may be a learning curve, but grab and print a copy of Recording 101. It's how most of us learned. There are still plenty of good people on this forum to answer your questions along the way.

If you can score a good deal on a used unit, get one. Then get a decent monitor system and you should be good to go. I use KRK Rokits and they suit my needs. Others can discuss their setups. Also, take a spin over to Share My Music section to hear some projects done on the unit.

Welcome!

_________________
GSMUSIC: Hey RZ, Im not no upper class american, the gear I own is what I have special to me. My car sucks, my house sucks, my nieghborhood sucks. Does yours RZ? Does it?

rz-land

Thanks for all the input I actually have the AW1600 and everyday I learn something new through trial and error and this forum. I'm learning that this machine is very capable of putting out professional grade CD quality music.

I do agree that you can make good quality CDs with the AW. One of the biggest challenges often comes at the end of the process, when you burn your CD and put it on a player up against Commercially produced music. Many times the complaint is that the AW product is not loud enough in comparison. this is a two edged sword. Many modern CDs and "remastered", reissued material has been produced to be too loud, in my opinion. So, the point here is - do not get trapped in "volume war" mentality. a quieter Cd is very often more enjoyable, if the reason it is quieter is that it has not been over-compressed, especially the final two track mix. Over compression within the mix can be a problem , but it is the final mix compression that can boost volume, so if you rely too much on it to get the final volume, then your product may suffer. the genre kind of dictates what you can reasonably attempt.

So on the one hand, don't worry if your mixdown is too quiet, there are ways to boost it and polish it in further post production. On the other hand, your mix's integrity need promote as strong a stereo bus signal as can be achieved, avoiding "over" on the meters. ( there is a bit of headroom at the top, so hitting over does not translate to digital noise for a moderate spike, but the over level is established for a reason). Take advantage of the many opportunities to stage the gain of any particular signal chain. There is 10 db above 0.0 on the faders. there is also an attenuation dial that can be accessed on both the EQ and the View screens. I believe that on the AW it will only allow you dial a track's volume down (at the head of the signal chain). You may want to do this to balance competing tracks in a mix, so as to keep faders up, where they are most effective.. And don't ignore the make up gain on the DYN section when finding the desired balance .

Long and short - make a project and see how it goes>

_________________
Byron

Thanks Byron, although I plan to learn how go use the mastering tools on th AW1600, for now I will leave that part of the process to the Professionals and just concentrate on getting a great mix.

Belated welcome to the forum, keygod.

I've always concentrated on getting a good mix first, then moved it back to a paired track and "remixed" it using the mastering stuff (which is just basically EQ and compression on the stereo bus), trying to boost the volume as much as possible without taking the life out of the mix.

A word about the mastering stuff to be careful about: As just mentioned, the mastering tools on these machines are simply EQ and dynamics presets applied to the stereo bus. Of course, you can then go in and tweak them as you like. The thing to be careful about is that unless you actually turn them off, they will remain applied the stereo bus. If you move on to another project you may well hear everything you do being put through your last mastering settings unless you take measures otherwise.

_________________
My music: https://www.soundclick.com/bands3/default.cfm?bandID=1215402&content=songs

A very important piece of operational knowledge JM just relayed, regarding the lingering of DYN and EQ settings when moving between projects. While true for all tracks within the machine, it is often the Stereo Bus that is overlooked and then as John says, it has (usually) a negative effect on decisions made as the new project develops.

_________________
Byron

Point well taken... Question, does adding fx and the like add noise to a track? Im hearing noise at the beginning of a track once it's been recorded.

No there should not be noise introduced by EFF, DYN, EQ. Of course it will sound different as you adjust things, but ...noise??? An effect does create distortion and modulations and delays

How would you describe the noise?

If it is a hiss, perhaps the recording is "hot" and it is noise from the preamp, that you hear.

_________________
Byron

yes it is hiss , Im bypassing the 1600's preamps with the direct outs of my soundcraft M8 mixer. The meters didn't that indicate my levels were too hot though?