View Full Version : Korg D16XD
12-04-2003, 10:51 AM
I've got a friend that is looking at a D16XD, just wondering what you guys think of it. I really like the fact that it goes to 96k uncompressed, and the analog compressors are a nice touch. Any beefs with it? Is there something else you'd spend 2000 smackers on? Keep in mind, my friend does NOT want a PC based DAW. He's used to working on a Tascam 4-track, and it will be hard enough for him to get used to the digital all-in-one.
12-05-2003, 11:19 AM
Smiley, I liked the korg recorder accept the fact that it doesnt have motorized faders and they put the Guitar Hi Z jack in the front. It also doesn't have channel level display. I ended up buying the Yamaha Aw4416 for the same price at American Musical Supply. Also the amp modulation is better in the Yamaha.
12-05-2003, 07:04 PM
Did you actually own one? Are those the only things you didn't like?
Nick : My studio uses two cascaded Yamaha AW2816's in one room. True, a bit rate of 48 is as high as they go, but there is more to a successful recording than bit rate. I find the Yamahas to be amazingly durable (only one problem is years...Even though the unit was out of warranty, with Sweetwater's backing, the AW2816 was repaired, gratis...). These units are used a LOT of hours per week, and they DO contain motorized faders.
The AW4416 (big brother) would be an option for you, but it contains expensive features not useful for us...Last time I looked, the AW2816 was less expensive than the Korg...For us, Yamaha's technical support has been spot-on...We have only needed that support for answering cascading questions, not for problems...
With two AW2816's running at the same time, the noise floor is quiet enough that recording could be done in the same room, if necessary...That is not possible with some other DAW products. I do not know how noisy the Korg units are...
I am certain the Korg is a fine product. To us, motorized faders are a very large deal...To be able to automate mixes on a stand-alone DAW in this price category, is an amazingly useful capability.
Good luck in your choice. I have simply given you our $.02, from lots of experience with the Yamahas............
12-06-2003, 02:10 PM
Thanks for the reply. How are the editing features on the Yamaha? I also liked the touchscreen feature of the Korg, but like I said, this is for my friend, and I'm affraid he's dead-set on the korg. I appreciate your response a lot. I was hoping you'd respond, since I've seen your other responses and i knew that you actually use standalones.
Nick: The Yamahas do all the basics of editing, internally. These includes all the cut and paste stuff, time compression, inserting, deleting, etc. When we need to do complex wave form editing, the Yamahas can create wav.files. These are then inserted into Digital Performer software, the editing is accomplished, and the wav.form is then re-loaded into the Yamaha...
I find the user interface of the Yamahas very intelligent and easy to use. Their lack of physical noise is not something to be taken for granted in the DAW world...I wish your friend would have time to spend with both units before he made his purchase. He might avoid a very costly error in judgement...
We looked LONG and hard before choosing the AW2816 architecture...I must repeat that motorized faders/automated mixing is not something to be ignored. If the Yamaha midi software that runs this feature were in any way sub-standard, then the whole thing would be worthless. In reality, the automation is the same as on a number of Yamaha's very respected digital mixers...
If you or he have any direct questions concerning the Yamaha AW2816, please feel free to ask. Again, I wish him the best with his purchase. In the end it is the music recorded, and the engineering skills of your friend that will rule...
Best and thanks for the kind comments.
12-07-2003, 02:11 PM
I would like to say that the XD looks really great. If your friend is jumping from a Tascam 4 track to the XD, then I would have to assume that he/she isn't concerned/knowledgeable with many of the differences between the higher end DAW's.
In terms of sound quality, there is very little to differ between them in the hands of an experienced user. Features, layout, structure, etc. are points to consider when purchasing, but only when you know what features, layout, structire etc. you are looking FOR.
I am using the D1600 myself (The AKAI DPS16 prior), which I find to be OK. The layout is intuitive which helps but like all of the DAWS it has many 'menu driven' features which take time to dig through. Personally I couldn't own a DAW without wave form editing and so I chose the Korg over the AW2816. In retrospect I can't say one is better than the other but I am thankful for the touch-screen. At first I didn't like it but now I find myself trying to use it on all my gear. :)
My point is to say that your friend will learn exactly what he likes and doesnt like, regardless of the DAW he buys. They will all serve him well and unfortunately none of them can please all of us. The XD looks really great.
Good luck, Cheers.
12-08-2003, 01:40 PM
Thanks so much for the nice responses!! I just found out that he did go ahead with the D16XD. So, I'll check it out and relay back to you guys.
Thanks so much again!!
Rodney: A question, if I may. Something in your post concerning the Korg products truly interests me. While the Yamaha AW2816 uses visual waveforms for location, etc., no truly sophisticated waveform editing is possible. We use Digital Performer for that, downloading and uploading from the Yamahas, as necessary.
Comments in your post lead me to believe the Korg D1600, and probably the DX16 both have sophisticated waveform editing inherent in the machines, themselves. Could you elaborate a bit? I had no idea any $2000 machine had this multi-track/waveform editing capability.
Thanks and best wishes.
12-09-2003, 11:13 AM
Byll, thanks for the question.
Perhaps I am mistaken in my use of terminology, could you please describe 'sophisticated' wave-form editing vs. wave-form editing? I certainly do not want to mislead anyone, and I would be able to answer your question much clearer.
My personal experience with wave-form editing has all been hands-on with standalone DAW's. My current temporary machine (D6100) uses basically the same editing structure as my AKAI DPS24 and DPS16 did. I have little experience using 'software' or computer based programs so I would like to learn here what you are referring to. The XD32 shares the same editing structure as both XD16 and D1600 according to Korg.
Thanks for your time.
12-09-2003, 11:38 AM
Editing waveforms in a software program is basically the same, just done with a mouse, so you can get finished quicker. This is probably helped by the touchscreen on the Korg. The biggest advantage to editing on a program is that you have the whole computer screen to work on. With standalone DAWs you might be able to see 2 waveforms at once, but with software, you can view like 7-8. That will allow you to work on a whole drumkit, or several vocals all at the same time. Roland adressed this problem with the 2400 and 2480 machines, allowing you too hook up a monitor and mouse. Also, the DPS24 can be hooked to a computer for the same feel. BTW, did you like your DPS 24? How did it sound? Automation good? It seems to be one of the most 'professional' standalones out there.
12-09-2003, 12:11 PM
Nick, thanks for the reply.
I'm certain that software based programs allow more editing overall. Crossfading, sample editing etc. but i'm not sure how 'deep' it all goes.
I really loved the DPS16, beautifully intuitive and absolutley terrific sound (effects and pre's aside)
Not 1 single glitch ever.
DPS24 ? I ended up with a clunker.
I had alot trouble with it from the start. Wouldn't read DPS16 files and I had constant HD and recording errors causing me to constantly format or shut-down. AKAI was helpful and it was covered under warranty but I returned it to the place I bought it and never re-purchased. Automation was really awesome and though my head was mostly busy with problems with the machine, I could see using it all of the time. Of course it was my first forray into the automation process so I can't compare it with anything else.
I would really like to find another standalone with 100mm faders. That is the one element I was looking forward to re-mixing on with the DPS24. I might give it another shot as the price has come down over the last year and I had great results in terms of reliablilty with the DPS16.
Bought the D1600 because I literally could not pass up the deal.
Rodney: When we dump wav.files from the AW2816's to Digital Performer/Mac G4, or to our Sonic Solutions system, we can do insertions from different takes, with cross fades on any channel at any place we choose. Cross fading different tracks at different points in the same musical phrase makes for completely seamless editing for us. I cannot do that on the Yamahas. That is simply one example of what I referred to as 'sophisticated'...
The Yamahas are capable of all the basics: working with tracks/regions/parts, erase, copy, exchanging tracks and parts thereof, time slipping, time compression and expansion, pitch changing, appending, exporting, dividing, trimming, inserting, moving, etc. All this can be controlled by a visual waveform - but only one waveform at a time...
Does the Korg have onboard capabilities that go beyond these basics? If it does, it truly has one up on the Yamaha AW series...
Best to you in your endeavors.
12-09-2003, 10:19 PM
I read that the Korg XD's can actually do crossfades as well, but I can't hold a fire to that cause I haven't had a chance to check out my friend's unit. I do know that they now have USB ports so you can import/export WAVs without burning to CD or taking out the HD.....thought that was cool...
Good luck to you!
12-10-2003, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by Byll
Does the Korg have onboard capabilities that go beyond these basics? If it does, it truly has one up on the Yamaha AW series...
Best to you in your endeavors.
Byll, thanks for the response. My D1600 cannot edit beyond the basic functions you mentioned with the exception of a few proprietary edits germaine to the Korgs.
Sorry but I had mistaken your 2816's for the AW16G's.
I would like to learn more about digital performer and how I might be able to implement it into my own system which I am slowly uprgading. Truth is I don't know that I would have any reason for more editing? I have always been able to accomplish every detail with what I have.
I just purchased the Tannoy Reveals, arrived today actually!(Whoo hoo!) and I will be selling my D1600 as it was a temporary buy. I will most likely purchase the AKAI DPS24 again or the new Korg XD32 as I really need the extended tracks.
I need more research (and more cash!)
12-10-2003, 12:31 PM
My teacher uses reveals. They sound excellent, and I think you'll be pleased with them. I had pretty much decided to go with a software based DAW to upgrade my studio, but after hearing from you guys, I might just change my mind. I think the DPS24 looks awesome. It even has a talkback mic and outputs for 3 fifferent sets of monitors. Then again, I just heard my friends first recording with his D16XD and it sounded amazing. Rodney, if you decide to go with the DPS24, please tell me..... I'm really interested (heck, tell us even if you get the other one!).
Rodney: One of the two sets of monitors in my studio is Tannoy Reveals. I really like them a lot...For a none point-source speaker, they have truly fine imaging - a very big deal to me...Hope you are satisfied with your purchase.
Just a thought. If you like your D1600, why not cascade two of them if this is possible? The freedom this gives is truly synergistic... More than simply doubling your tracks to 32, you get double the DSP capability, and anything else that happens to be inherent to each machine. Sure would save a pile of money that could be spent on excellent mics, et. al.
I am kind of a conservative person, fiscally, in the studio. I have not found that better/faster/sexier gear makes for a better recording for my clients. I tend to save my bucks and use my gear for a lot of years before changing...During that time, I REALLY learn to use all of the gear's capabilities...Getting the MOST out of equipment has always been a main goal.
Nick: Using both computer-based and stand-alone DAWS, I find the stand-alones more personally satisfying to use. Difficult to back that up with anything meaningful...Simply an observation...
12-10-2003, 10:39 PM
Hey Byll, thanks for the reply.
I am extremely satisfied with my Tannoy purchase. Not the 'new gear wow' kind of satisfied but genuinely enlightened. I consider them my first pro monitors and coupled with my Yamaha MSP5's I should be able to get fresh results.
Cascading 2 D1600's is certainly possible and I know of people who are getting good results in terms of syncing up. However, I am not real big fan of this machine. It has slow to respond transport mechanisms due to hard disc latency, regardless of the task. The screen display is really small compared to the AKAI which I am used to. The wave-form display is really 'bitmappy' ,the effects are better than the AKAI but they still generally persuade me to use outboard reverb (Only 1 AUX though).
60mm faders etc.
Although it is a fully functional 16 track hard disc recorder, it still feels kind of like a 'hobbyist' machine and truthfully I am not inspired to do my best work with it.
Right now I am my own main artist producing spiritual music so my gear doesn't need to impress anyone but me. My ears seem to have gotten much more critical this past year and even more this past 2 months. Ever happen to you?
Anyway, thanks for letting me ramble.
Rodney: At my age, I have been through any number of times my ears changed their 'critical mass'........
In e-mail, send me your mailing address, and I will send to you a copy of some of the tracks from our latest project - a Contemporary Christian offering.
Performers are a guy and a girl. Instruments are guitar/mandolin/bass. Lots of overdubbing on instruments and guitars. Nice stuff. All was recorded on the AW2816 twins, at 44.1/16....This project used all internal effects...Mics by Shure and Audio Technica, mostly.
Glad you like your Tannoys so much. Both sets of monitors in the AW2816 room are Tannoys - the second set being System 600's. I prefer 6.5 inch drivers to 8 inch or larger, in nearfields - always...
05-08-2004, 06:21 AM
I have some questions concerning the fan noise produced by the Korg D16XD, and
by other DAWs alike. I was hoping perhaps some of you could shed some light...
Not so long ago I was able to test the Korg in my home and as soon as I turned
it on I was struck by the amount of mechanical noise it makes.
I started recording and the noise ended up on all the tracks done with a mic.
A pretty serious accumulation of noise therefore and although I found working
with the Korg satisfactory, it's exactly this problem that keeps me from buying it.
I once tested the Yamaha AW4416 and turned it down for the same reason.
Can anyone of you tell me whether its sibling, the AW2816, is a genuinely quieter
machine? Needless to say I work by myself in a single room.
Hello, Tiedo: I am a bit reticient to answer your query on so subjective an issue. I use twin, cascaded 2816's in my studio. The room in which they are located also serves as the control area. There is no glass separating the clients from the engineer(s). We like to work this way. It provides an intimacy and friendliness I have not found in the separate studio/control room environment.
In front of the 2816's, and between them and the clients, is a sofa. Yes, a sofa...It is part of the sonic signature of the room. It also acts as a noise barrier between the recording gear and the studio area...The room is fully treated, is two stories underground, and has a very low noise floor. You can truly hear your heart beat in the room...With either one or both of the 2816's running, the slight fan noise of the 2816's is not audible in the studio area of the room. I have never heard a 4416, and have no means of comparing the two...
I picked the 2816 partly because of its low self-noise. Korg, Roland, Akai, and Tascam units were not in the running...All excellent units, but too noisy for my needs. I also found the Yamaha's ergonomics and operating system to my liking.
And yet, you say the 4416 was too noisy in your trials. The 2816 being its twin in most operational facets, this kind of negates my credence for your needs. Wish I could be of more help. For me, the 2816 was the answer to an important question - one too often ignored by prospective DAW users...
One answer to your challenge might be to baffle the DAW, as occurs naturally with the use of my sofa...That sofa is not placed there, by accident...
Best to you and good luck in your search.
PS Tiedo: A quick edit. I just noticed where you are located. It is a LONG way from the US. It could be we are not comparing apples with apples. I have no idea whether the Yamahas of Holland have the same operating and noise characteristics as those sold in the States. It would be interesting to compare...
05-09-2004, 09:38 AM
Thanks a lot for replying and I'm glad with all the detailed information you've
provided me with.
As for the whole concept of fan noise, yes I agree it is somewhat a matter of taste.
But I have been in a position to compare a bit. The AW4416 and the Korg D16XD
are equally noisy in my experience. The Roland VS2480 far less so.
When I had tested the Yamaha and, being disappointed, brought it back to the shop, my complaint was taken seriously to the extent that the shop owner stopped selling the AW4416 because he shared my opinion on it being unacceptably noisy.
A review in the UK-based magazine Sound-On-Sound claims that both the Korg 16- and 32-track machines "could have been quieter, especially as most machines of
this type are used in a single-room studio".
(another review states the AW2816 to be quieter than its predecessor. That's why
I'm curious about the recorder you use yourself. I haven't been able to acquaint myself yet)
I'm wondering what kind of tricks there might be to circumvent the fan problem,
when recording in one room. I'm afraid your sofa-solution does not capacitate in
my case. The thing would simply be in my way all of the time as I'm working alone.
Using solely directional mics helps, that I know.
But remains the fact of having to operate midst a continous and slightly disturbing hum. Not a good thing once you wish to focus on meticulous mixing...
Because the fan problem keeps coming up in nearly all the DAWs, I have considered purchasing something other than that. But I do like all the specific advantages of digital stand-alones. The AW4416 and the Korg are excellent in terms of performance and ergonomics (can't say the same for the Roland VS2480).
Tascam has just released a 24-track that has no cooling fan and seems to be remarkably silent. I will definitely check it out but from what I've gathered this recorder isn't really up to professional standards
So I hope the other companies will soon follow Tascam's example, thus create a
wider range of choice so that my various demands will finally be met.
PS Wouldn't you think it's strange if there really is a difference between recorders offered here in Holland and those in the U.S.? Because it means that all the companies have spent an awful lot of extra money to provide the world with variations on one theme, so to speak.
It seems very unpragmatic and un-businesslike to me. But maybe you're right...
Tiedo: I have found the noise level to be dependent on some very odd things. Even the size and speed of the HD can have an effect on the design parameters of the fan speed, and therefore the noise level. For our uses at Underground Sound, the 2816 works well.
Solution for you may be to carefully baffle the unit...
Good luck in your endeavors.
05-10-2004, 05:50 AM
Byll, thanks once again. Baffling the unit is something I'm going to look into.
At least I will discuss it with the music shop that lent me the Korg16XD for
testing purposes. See what they come up with.
Good luck to you, too.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.