0% Interest for 48 Months! Learn more »
(800) 222-4700
  • Español: (800) 222-4701
Cart
Live Sound - 2 days left

Sweetwater Forums [Archived]

After 15 years of great discussions, the Sweetwater Forums are now closed and preserved as a "read-only" resource. For discussions about current gear, check us out on Facebook, YouTube, inSync, and our Knowledge Base.

Korg D16XD

smileywiley

Hi folks!
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.
Thanks guys!
Nick
December 4, 2003 @04:51pm
fisherob

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.
December 5, 2003 @05:19pm
smileywiley

Did you actually own one? Are those the only things you didn't like?
thanks!
Nick
December 6, 2003 @01:04am
Byll

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............
Best.
Byll
December 6, 2003 @07:58pm
smileywiley

Hi Byll,
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.
Thanks again!
Nick
December 6, 2003 @08:10pm
Byll

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.
Byll
December 6, 2003 @08:33pm
Rodney Spaulding

Hi Nick,
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.
Rodney
December 7, 2003 @08:11pm
smileywiley

Hey fellas,
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!!
Nick
December 8, 2003 @07:40pm
Byll

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.
Byll
December 9, 2003 @04:03pm
Rodney Spaulding

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.
Cheers!
December 9, 2003 @05:13pm
smileywiley

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.
December 9, 2003 @05:38pm
Rodney Spaulding

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.
Cheers.
December 9, 2003 @06:11pm
Byll

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.
Byll
December 10, 2003 @01:55am
smileywiley

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!
Nick
December 10, 2003 @04:19am
Rodney Spaulding

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

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!)
Cheers!
Rodney
December 10, 2003 @06:09pm