Two microphone preamplifiers compared at Abbey Road Studio 2 - tube and transistor
The Making of a CD - FREE DOWNLOAD
What is production? Part 3: Recording
What level of background noise is acceptable in a recording?
Audio demonstrations of distortion produced by compressor plug-ins
Today you can buy microphones that were used to record Nirvana's 'In Utero'
A great-sounding live vocal mic that you might never have heard of [with video]
A simple 8-mic drum mix, with video
New vs. old guitar strings: Part 1 - The case for new guitar strings
Your mix sounds good in your car. But does it sound good in ANY car?
Subscribe to access our latest, up-to-the-minute articles with hints, tips and adventures in audio in the weekly Audio Masterclass Newsletter.
Right now, the world of hard disk recorders and editors is split into two camps: those that use dedicated controllers and those that have a standard personal computer interface. I suspect that many of us have ingrained prejudices that cause us to favour one or the other, but sometimes prejudices have to be set aside so that the true worth of a product can be assessed. I used to have a leaning toward dedicated hardware systems like the DAR SoundStation II and SSL ScreenSound (which is almost dedicated with its custom operating system and pen and tablet input). They are both very well designed for the particular task in hand but SoundStation II, I would say, is rather more suited to music editing and dialogue manipulation while ScreenSound offers advantages for searching a sound effects library and spotting to picture. The benefit of a hardware orientated system combined with a specialised display and sound file handling routine is that the user interface can be matched to the nature of the work being done. if a button needs to be just there, it can be. If a file needs to be accessed in a particular way, it can be. ScreenSounds sound file retrieval system, in particular, is a model of efficiency. The drawback to hardware controllers and one-off operating systems is cost. It takes a good deal of research and development effort to design the system in the first place, and that R&D has somehow to be paid for.
The alternative route to hard disk recording and editing is to use a standard computer interface. The Apple Macintosh has proved particularly suitable for this and simply bolting it on to the disk recording hardware saves an awful lot of design and manufacturing time and expense, which naturally results in a system of lower cost. But certain questions have to be asked, such as: Is a mouse and computer keyboard the best way to navigate the complexities of music and dialogue editing? Can a computers standard file handling procedure offer the most efficient access to your sound library? Will my staff be keen to be transformed into computer operators? I cant offer any opinions on the last one, but I have attempted to throw some light on the other two points in a separate panel.
One particular advantage of DAWN IIs Mac interface is that it allows you to choose from many screen display options. According to the manual, DAWN II will even run with a 9 screen MacPlus - one of the forerunners of the Mac Classic, which apparently isnt quite so adaptable. Obviously, no-one is going to run a system costing over ten thousand pounds with a computer that can be bought for about £200 from an ad in the local free sheet (and I would have to see it to believe it anyway). But you do also have the choice of any of the LC, Mac II and Quadra versions and any mono or colour screen that will suit. Sensible screen choices would range from 14 diagonal right up to 20. If you are not familiar with Mac screens then I should point out that the different sized screens dont show the same picture at different magnifications, they all show approximately the same size image but the larger screens show more of it. (Of course, the software that you use may have zoom in and zoom out functions in addition). Since the Mac is perfectly comfortable with multiple open windows, the larger the monitor, the more information you can see at the same time. DAWN II was demonstrated to me with a 20 screen, and I have to say that it seemed about the right size. The colour Mac display, whether on an Apple-badged monitor or not, is very elegant and classy looking. I certainly find it more impressive than computer monitors that project harsh saturated colours onto my retina. I also find a decent monitor easier to look at than SoundStation IIs glowing touch screen, although I can quite understand why some people appreciate the latter.
DAWN II consists of the cleverly named Digital Audio Workstation Nucleus, which is a box bristling with connectors that you need handle only once then leave in a dark cupboard to get on with its work (you can leave the computers main unit in the cupboard too, with only occasional access needed to insert a floppy disk of edit decisions). The standard nucleus comes with eight AES/EBU inputs and outputs and eight XLR balanced analogue inputs and outputs, and the whole system is expandable to forty-eight ins and outs. The system includes a MIDI interface (they dont shout about it in case someone thinks that DAWN is only useful as a component in a MIDI system) and a SMPTE/EBU timecode generator and reader. If you want to interface with a video editor, the familiar 9-pin connector is ready and waiting. The recording medium may be a Mac compatible hard disk or removable optical disk and backup is to a Mac compatible tape storage medium. As has proved to be the case with other systems, some disks are bound to be more compatible than others and I suspect that anyone purchasing a DAWN system would do well to question their supplier carefully and follow the advice given, rather than buy a disk drive that hasnt been tested with DAWN II at a low price from an ad in Computer Shopper. To complete the system, you might want to have a printer connected to the computer. A printer in the studio?, you cry. Yes - if you want hard copy of your edits in familiar film cue sheet format.Come on the FREE COURSE TOUR