Wow! What a deal.. MusiciansFriend dropped the price of the Yamaha AW16G 16 track recorder down to $949.00 That's a great price. A buddy of mine compares it to the Fostex VF-160, but I think the Yamaha has the edge on several things. Anyone here use the AW16G? I personally like the quick loop sampler on it. Something like that could really come in handly on a digital multi-track recorder.

Squeak

Hi Squeak: I purchased (a week ago) a Yamaha AW16G (from Guitar Center) for about the same price 'out the door', but subsequently found out the AW16G only supports 16 bit recording, so exchanged it (an even exchange) for the Korg D1200mkII (24 bit recorder) instead. Though the D1200mkII only supports 12 tracks vs 16 on the AW16G, the other big IMPORTANT plus about the Korg D1200mkII (as well as the D1600mkII) is that they supports USB connectivity (the AW16G doesn't), which makes it real easy to transfer files back and forth freely between the Digital Mutitrack Recorder and PC, for further processing in SoundForge and/or Cakewalk Sonar. - Scott

Squeak,

That is a great price indeed !
As Scott I did a 'swap' but the other way around .... and why ? :

a. The AW has 24 bit AD/DA converters and internal processing is done with 32 bits ! The recorder resolution is 16 bit uncompressed what is standard on audio-CD's, so why should I record at 24 bit ?
The D1200 standard recording resolution is 16 bit but the user is able to switch to 24 bit.... BUT the number of channels drops to 8 !? (Am I right Scott ?)

b. At first I thought the USB connection would be great to use for disk-access... but only a limited partition can be used for data exchange. The AW16G has no USB-port but data can easy be transported through digital optical out or CD-RW media.

c. The higher number of tracks of the AW

d. The AW has MUCH better user interface. (buttons, menu-structure, display, sliders, housing, jogging-wheel etc.) of the AW. The Korg has a very small, difficult to read display and it is soo easy to get lost in the menu's. (e.g. Tabs)

e. The Korg is pretty noisy, but the AW is producing as good as NO noise !

f. The AW has a built-in power supply, while the Korg uses a separate adapter

g. Much better quality headphone amp in the AW. The Korg's amp clips (distortion) very soon.

I paid about 1200 Euro's ($ 1600) for this AW
and if I were you I would purchase one immediately..... for this price !

Roel

[This message has been edited by Roel (edited 12-30-2003).]

Hi Roel: The D1200mkII allows you to record in either 16 or 24 bit mode. In 24 bit mode you can record up to 4 tracks simultaneously with a maximum of 8 tracks simultaneous playback. I can hear significantly better musical 'timing resolution' when recording 24 bit vs 16 bit, so think it worth giving up the added track capacity recording in 16 bit, to gain the improved audio timing/sound quality. I figure if I really need more tracks, I can easily (via USB) move the tracks to Sonar.

Admittedly, when mastering to CD (dropping down to 16 bit) won't retain the original 24 bit resolution, but (for some reason) both studio engineers (and even I) can still detect the smoother & better fidelity sound when listening to a CD which was captured originally in 24 bit. Big time recording studios always prefer mastering at the highest bit resolution possible even though they know it will end up in 16 bit audio CD, because the more audio information you can capture in the original recording the better. In fact, with the new Sony SACD audio format now out, every bit of 24 bit quality resolution can now be retained and played back on an SACD (super audio compact disc) format CD player. I'm now just waiting for SACD format recorders to become commercially available to the general public.

Whether you go with the Yamaha AW16G, Korg D1600mkII, or the smaller Korg D1200mkII (like I did), you can't go wrong for the price. Each one is just geared for slightly different personal user requirements. - Scott

Well, you do realize that 24 bit A/D is still better for recording. Especially if you're recording acoustic instruments or vocals. The final 16 bit conversion that happens when the track is being burned to an audio CD happens in a digital domain, so it's VERY different from 16 bit A/D conversion that happens on the imputs of the Yamaha. However, dispite the bit rate bullshit the Yamaha still sounds better then the Korg.

-ED-

Scott,

I'm sorry but I strongly have to disagree with your point about the better musical timing you think you experienced at 24 bits.
The 24 bits resolution has NO better timing than 16 bits ! Only the amplitude-is more accurate. Only the sampling frequency could bring a better timing..... but NEVER detectable by human ears

I used to have a Roland VS880 and a VS1880 and they both have parameters to set the sampling freq. to 32- 44.1 and 48 kHz. I'm honest now and must say it was VERY hard for me and others friends to hear quality differences in recording frequencies. (As good as none)

Ed,
The AW16G has 24 bits AD/DA conversions says my manual! In fact I don't care either.... as long as the sound is better.

Roel, perhaps it's not the timing, but the greater smoothess (naturalness) of the sound that I notice when hearing a 24 bit recording. Listening to a 24 bit recording vs 16 bit, sounds (to me) like all the gaps in time have been filled in. I'm sure there are MANY parameters which affect the sound of a recording, but when I performed a short simple spoken word 24 vs 16 bit comparison test on my D1200mkII, one at 16 bit/44.1 khz, and the other at 24 bit/44.1 khz, the difference between the two was immediately noticeable.

Whether the Yamaha AW16G at 16 bit/44.1 khz sounds better than the Korg D1200mkII or D1600mkII at 24 bit/44.1 khz, I don't know, because I NEVER performed a side by side comparison test, but I suspect the reason (if it did) has nothing to do with the bit rate. I agree that the Yamaha AW16G is a great DAW especially for the current bargain price, but I'm certain that a 24 bit recorder, such as Terry's Tascam SX 1LE will capture more and sound better than any 16 bit recorder can.

In addition to its 24 bit recording capability, I got the D1200mkII for the portability & convenience it offers. For more intense production projects, I'll stick with Cakewalk Sonar which supports 24 bits/96 khz and allows unlimited tracks. - Scott

Well, then it's just a matter of preference.
I personally don't care about bit rates and A/D D/A business that much.
If it sounds good - Rock on!
If I can make it better -Great!

I personally use Pro Tools hardware with both of my MACs.Digi 001 with my G4 and an 888 with my 7100.
I can tell that 24 bit converters on the Digi 001 are definitely warmer sounding then the 16 bit converters on my 888, but in overall I think they are both great.
So, if I recored something at 16 bit and it sounds great, but not as warm as 24 bit, I don't lose any sleep over it.
The difference is minor. Too minor to worry about.

But I do know people who claim to notice a BIG difference in the sound. May be their hearing is sharper then mine. After all, we're all different.

-ED-