Boss BR1600CD or Korg 3200??

When I was going round the various shops looking for my new monitors I couldn't help but see that one shop had one of these Boss units on sale for NZ$2500 while another shop had the Korg unit for the same price.

While in many - if not most cases - bigger is usually better(!?!) I struggle to see how I could ever use 32 tracks - even if I used it to record my 5 piece band playing live. I have a gut feeling that I'd be more than comfortable with 16 tracks given that my music is relatively straightforward country blues or blues rock depending on how I feel at the time.

As I've had a Korg D8 for many years, would the transition to the D3200 be relatively easy or is there a big learning curve? What about moving from Korg to Boss - easy step or otherwise??

I suppose you could argue that with 32 tracks you're never likely to run out of space for ideas and multiple takes of every instrument but there's a limit to my imagination and creativity apart from anything else!!

Which machine would you go for and why?

When I was going round the various shops looking for my new monitors I couldn't help but see that one shop had one of these Boss units on sale for NZ$2500 while another shop had the Korg unit for the same price.

While in many - if not most cases - bigger is usually better(!?!) I struggle to see how I could ever use 32 tracks - even if I used it to record my 5 piece band playing live. I have a gut feeling that I'd be more than comfortable with 16 tracks given that my music is relatively straightforward country blues or blues rock depending on how I feel at the time.

As I've had a Korg D8 for many years, would the transition to the D3200 be relatively easy or is there a big learning curve? What about moving from Korg to Boss - easy step or otherwise??

I suppose you could argue that with 32 tracks you're never likely to run out of space for ideas and multiple takes of every instrument but there's a limit to my imagination and creativity apart from anything else!!

Which machine would you go for and why?

Well, I don't know diddly about either machine you're considering.

But I do know that while 16 tracks may sound like a lot - they can fill up mighty quick.

And let's consider inputs too, not just tracks.

Let's look at a fairly simple 5 piece drum kit. Kik, snare, two rack toms and floor tom along with hihat, maybe a ride and a couple of crash cymbals. Pretty typical.

How you gonna record that?

Well, let's say there's a mic on the snare, kik, each tom and two overhead mics. That's seven mics/inputs right there. I'd pan the 3 toms into a stereo group - saves you a track.

But that's still 6 tracks. Add in the bass, a couple or three guitars and we're up to 10. Keys? In stereo? 12. Lead vox - we'll give that one. Backing vox in stereo? Leaves one track for percussion/ everything else.

And that's just what goes to tape. When you mix, what if you want to send a supercompressed submix of the drums back in under the "normal" drums to give a bit more punch - you'll want more ins for that. (this little trick has saved my bacon a couple of times. The big lesson here is that more inputs on your mixer than the number of tracks on your recorder is a very good thing).

And let's go back to the drums - what if you like to mic the top and the bottom head of each drum? Or the hihat? (Just say no - but if you must ...) Or adding in a room mic? A lot more inputs required, maybe more tracks you'll want to record to, depending on how comfortable you are balancing stuff as you record.

And guitars - do you think 2 or three will be enough? Often it will be. But there'll be times you'll have a rhythmic acoustic thing happening with at least one electric rhythm (but often two) and there'll be a slide part and a lead and ... Maybe you want two different mics on an amp. Etc.

And then there's the vocals and the harmonica and the guero and the ...

Ok, you get my point - tracks can add up - fast.

Whether you need more than 16 I can't answer. But do sit down and think about what you need and write down how many inputs you need (if you're going to record your band live it's gonna be all the mics and line inputs you typically use). But also try and foresee any future needs here as well.

I'm sorta leaning to the more is better here. But then again, a good drummer, in a good room with good mics in the right place can get away with 3 mics and it'll sound amazing. Sometimes less is more. But usually more is more.

Before you go and plunk down any cash, sit down and seriously think through how many inputs/ tracks you need. the more you're thinking of just capturing the band in a live setting, the more the available inputs might come into play (depending on how you want to mic things - two mics in the right place can be a beautiful thing). For studio purposes, if things are going to be mostly overdubbed, the number of tracks is probably more of a concern. But I'm generalizing big-time here.

Repeating but - it helps to have more input strips/channels on your mixer than you have tracks recorded. I'll give another example why. If the eq one pass through isn't doing everything you want, you can send it through another to fill in the gaps. Or you can subgroup stuff - I'll take the "low end" stuff, kik, bass, sometimes guitar and send them to a stereo subgroup. they still have their individual channels where they get eq'd, but I'll compress the subgoup together (and give it additional eq if needed) so it "hangs together" as a unit in the mix. Or I might do the same to all the guitars, or just the toms, or whatever.

Um, more ins is better, all things considered.

Hope this has been helpful rather than just confusing.

Cheers,
Geoff

So, I'm guessing you're suggesting the D3200 might be the way to go then?????:lol:

Confused? Me?? Na...... but bear in mind that I'm coming from the simplicity of a D8 and you're talking subgroups and sub busses and you could be talking submarines or substations for all I understood of that lot!!!!

But I guess I might learn more with a D3200........ and then I can confuse others the way you've done for me!!!!

Seriously, thanks for that. I take your point that more is often better and doesn't always have to be used but it's there if you want it.


Cheers

So, I'm guessing you're suggesting the D3200 might be the way to go then?????:lol:

Seriously, thanks for that. I take your point that more is often better and doesn't always have to be used but it's there if you want it.


Cheers

Depends entirely on your needs.

I do find 16 tracks a bit limiting. But, most of my favourite records were done on 16 tracks or less.

But a 32 or 64 input mixing board isn't necessarily any more complex than a 16 in. Once you've figured out all the properties of one input channel strip, whether theres 15 more of them or 63 more of them doesn't really matter. Until mix time when you'll need a few more hands.

Cheers,
Geoff

But a 32 or 64 input mixing board isn't necessarily any more complex than a 16 in. Once you've figured out all the properties of one input channel strip, whether theres 15 more of them or 63 more of them doesn't really matter.

Cheers,
Geoff

Exactly.

You are thinking 16 in at one time. Yeah, that's a lot for most folks. But if you're doing overdubs, doubling, using channels for effects, etc, it fills up most of 32.

Don't forget too that those channels specs are likely mono. Your track count will be halved if you are dealing with stereo pairs.

I have the Boss and I absolutely love it. Nice clean sound easy to use and the mastering suite is incredible..a ton of great effects. You have 8 xlr/1/4" inputs so you can record 8 tracks at once and 192 virtual tracks...a great thing to have if you want to have multiple takes on the vox or guitar leads. Not familiar with the Korg so I can't speak on anything it has or doesn't have to offer.