I do the same thing, John, but I use either my DAW or a ZoomH4 to capture it to audio afterwards...

For as much as these built-in audio recorders add to the cost and complexity of modern arrangers, I don't find their stripped down features of much use. For recording live, for example, an external recorder offers FAR more choice as to what or where you record (keyboard, mixer, mixer with live mikes mixed in, out in the crowd, etc.), and whether you use outboard compression or internal gain limiting, etc.

Plus, I believe that most internal recorders still only do 16/44 as a maximum, and 24 bit recordings allow for MUCH better post production (compression, eq, limiting, etc.) which you HAVE to do to get them up to modern volume levels...

I think the whole point of my feature suggestion was to provide more than just a simple skip-back listen to our doodling... There are a myriad of things you can do with MIDI that are impossible in audio...

For the home user the built in audio recorders are perfect...simple, effective easy to use.

Of course, the pros will want more than simple and they can find that in a software sequencer....but the majority of arranger buyers aren't pros.

Thee home user/hobbyist is usually happy enough to make a WAV recording that they can burn to CD or turn into an MP3 so they can e-mail it to their friends.

Yamaha's audio to USB is so cooool!

Ian

Ok, I'm a home user and PROUD of it. Frankly, I think (despite claims otherwise) just about EVERYONE here at Synthzone a home user as well.

Afterall, don't we all, in addition to taking our keyboard on the job aka: gigs , play our keyboards 'at home' too? It's really only the BIG TIME Pro musician who can really afford having their music business fully subsidize a dedicated building outside the home, solely for the purpose of music, and I'd doubt these guys spend time posting "daily" on Synthzone as so many of the purported pros here do. Am I wrong?

As a p/t performing Pro who happens to be a home user as well, I definitely appreciate the ability to conveniently record "on the fly" my live performances, and 80 minutes on the fly record time allows me to easily capture an entire set (both vocals & keyboard) with which I think is more than acceptable sound, evidenced by my song demos posted on my website.

I much prefer hearing live spontaneous performances (with the occasional glitches) vs the engineered & EQ'ed to death up studio recordings. Perhaps that's why I prefer name artist LIVE concert performances to their studio recorded counterparts.

The other advantage to having a convenient audio rec feature is the ability to later self-critique your performance and learn from it. This includes not only the music, but the audience dialogue as well, what works and doesn't work etc. It's a great built into the kb tool. The recording then can then be archived or simply deleted.

- Scott

Diki how is that H4 ?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Diki
I do the same thing, John, but I use either my DAW or a ZoomH4 to capture it to audio afterwards...
[/QUOTE


Diki how is that H4 for recording a few stereo tracks lets say style, vocals, lead etc ...?

Well, firstly, I got to say I agree with Scott (amazing, eh?!) that all of us probably play at home as well as on gigs. I must confess I find the whole 'home' arranger vs. 'pro' arranger debate kinda silly, PLENTY of pros using 'home' arrangers, PLENTY of home players playing 'pro' arrangers, to the point where I just don't see any difference at all in their intended use or target customer.

Just about ANY feature on an arranger is as useful to a pro as a home player... Whether music is played in the living room or the bar-room, it is still music... And a 'home' user can appreciate a fine action as much as a pro can appreciate easy portability.

I agree that a built-in recorder has it's uses, but the convenience of it all 'in the box' is somewhat outweighed, IMO, by the thought that even 'home' users have friends that play, and have relatives that want to sing along, and the built-in nature of arranger recording facilities denies some of the more likely recording scenarios. Unless you ARE playing by yourself (and where's the FUN in that? NB I'm joking, OK?) there is always the possibility of others to add into the mix. A ZoomH4 (or something similar) is at least as easy to operate as a built in, but with the advantage that you can record off the mixer if others are playing with you, or can simply use the built in mikes to capture an 'acoustic' moment.

Donny, the H4 DOES have some overdubbing and mixing capabilities, probably at least as good as an arranger built-in, but in truth, if you want to do something like this, a laptop or home computer is by FAR the better tool for this, and, to be perfectly honest, no harder to learn than any modern arranger's OS. If the 'home' user (whoever THEY are) can master the OS of an S900 or an E60, a simple audio recording and overdubbing program is a piece of cake...

BTW, once you have filled up the T2's HD, just how long does it take to transfer all that data to a computer to burn a CD? Does it use USB2 or USB1 speeds? Just curious. Hopefully, it's a LOT faster than that glacial sampler load up times...

Anyway, to try and get back on topic (WHAT??!! How DARE anyone hijack one of MY threads! ) anybody else up with the idea of a constant MIDI 'capture' in the background...?

Diki's finally seen the light

Scott looks more like Dikis guitar player