Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yes, BR is cheaper.  Coffey only sells Metacorder because BR is bought direct from VosGames online.  Trew and LSC sell Metacorder as well.

There advantages to both.  Both have demo versions....see what you think.

I have a huge number of hours driving Metacorder, and very few on BR.  Re: Metacorder, it has hung in on big track counts (for me, up to 24, 24/48) for 3+ hours on a roll, with a slow computer (G4 1.2G) and FW 400 drives.  The ability to enter metadata info on the fly (and in the previous, already recorded take) as well as some auto-generated notes (like a TC grab during a take) are very helpful during quick changing shoots.  MC has an option that allows mirroring, and can record to 3 media at once.  It also has an option that allows recording two sets of files, a 2 track dailies mix and isos, and route them differently.  Like BR it can generate a PDF report with your notes and track assignments based on the inputs you've named.  There are other features, but the important one for me is that I have the confidence that when I tell Metacorder to go into record, often in concert situations where there is no "not ready" or second takes or possibility of delay that it will go into record and stay there until I tell it to stop, like a hardware recorder (but seriously cheaper per track esp for high track counts).

There are many Boom Recorder users here (including you, I thought?) who can tell you all about it. 

Philip Perkins

Link to post
Share on other sites

BR allows you to change scene numbers and add notes during and after record also.  It also allows you to record multiple files to the same or different destination media, with whatever tracks you assign to those files.  It does not have a TC grab option, which I could see might be handy to label a specific even within a recording, but I've never missed it because I mostly do narrative stuff.  When I was running a slow laptop with only 1GB RAM, the buffer would sometimes fill before recording if I was recording 6 or more tracks.  But since moving to my newer MacBook with more RAM, no problems.  No freezes, no aborted takes, flawless.

While it might lack some cool features, I use my BR with confidence.  It is very inexpensive and easy to use.

Robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use BR as a main recorder and it has yet to let me down. I've never gotten the spinning beach ball of death. Only issues i have had are user(*cough) errors. I dont use metacorder, but i think it has some kind of monitor/solo system as well as TC in on the computer aux in as opposed to BR where you lose an audio channel(if you want continuous TC)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, BR is cheaper.  Coffey only sells Metacorder because BR is bought direct from VosGames online.  Trew and LSC sell Metacorder as well.

Metacorder is also available at Gotham Sound.

JG

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I've noticed with both Metacorder and BR is that both seem to work a lot better with current laptops.  Both apps were designed when recording a lot of tracks at once on a laptop was kind of a dicey proposition with existing sound recording/editing/mixing software (ProTools, Audio Desk, DP), and I got burned a number of times in concert situations where the recorder would just stop on its own, probably due to Mac OS housekeeping or other similar automatic/background issues.  Mark Gilbert and Take Vos got around these limitations somehow, and made clean, straightforward audio capture apps w/ much lower graphical overhead and no post-production type features at all, and they worked spectacularly well on the G4 laptops most of us were using.  W/ the Macintels, in my case, just a low-end MacBook, this doesn't seem as important due to a huge increase in the power of the computer, and it may well be that apps like ProTools could be used in the kind of situations I encounter much more successfully than a few years ago.  I still see the relative simplicity of BR and MC as a big plus, but the market is limited to people like us, who don't need to overdub, remix, eq etc or work in music-recording-studio exchangeable sessions (ie PT).  Also, with the 788 and the new Fostex machines it isn't so obvious a choice for recordings in the 8 track range anymore, balancing price vs. hassle, cart space, powering and portability.  For record track counts beyond 8, however MC and BR are still the best bang for buck.  I'm not at all sure that I'd be in the location multitrack live music recording business without one of them.

Philip Perkins

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also use BoomRecorder as my primary recorder and have never had any problems (other than those I created myself).  While I haven't used MC, it sounds like they are pretty close in features.  Two additional points to make. First I understand that MC requires a hardware dongle in order to run.  I've never been a big fan of hardware copy protection.  If it is lost, misplaced, falls out, breaks, etc. you're SOL.  Second, I've heard many say that the dedicated hardware recorders are much more reliable than computer-based systems.  I strongly disagree with that with a caveat - you should treat your BR/MC machine as a dedicated recorder - no internet, no shareware, no porn, etc.  :-)  Then you will have a platform that (IMHO) is as stable as a Deva, SD, Fostex, Cantar, etc.  And for those that are reading this and thinking "I can't afford to have two computers, so I'll just ignore this suggestion" - think about it - you'd buy a $5K to $15K recorder (788 to Deva) and you still have a computer, so why not buy 2 $1500 laptops - one for your recorder and one for your porn.  LOL

Phil

Phil

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also use BoomRecorder as my primary recorder and have never had any problems (other than those I created myself).  While I haven't used MC, it sounds like they are pretty close in features.  Two additional points to make. First I understand that MC requires a hardware dongle in order to run.  I've never been a big fan of hardware copy protection.  If it is lost, misplaced, falls out, breaks, etc. you're SOL.  Second, I've heard many say that the dedicated hardware recorders are much more reliable than computer-based systems.  I strongly disagree with that with a caveat - you should treat your BR/MC machine as a dedicated recorder - no internet, no shareware, no porn, etc.  :-)  Then you will have a platform that (IMHO) is as stable as a Deva, SD, Fostex, Cantar, etc.  And for those that are reading this and thinking "I can't afford to have two computers, so I'll just ignore this suggestion" - think about it - you'd buy a $5K to $15K recorder (788 to Deva) and you still have a computer, so why not buy 2 $1500 laptops - one for your recorder and one for your porn.  LOL

Phil

Phil

I will admit that the hardware dongle for MC is a serious drag, but Mark is immovable in the subject, and no issues yet.  I did as he suggested and insured that dongle for the full price of the software.  I agree that it is better to have a dedicated laptop for recording, but since my audio laptop was stolen in Dec. I haven't had the $$ to have two laptops, so the machine I use on my desk has to do double duty.  The fact that this has worked fine might also have to do with it being a more powerful machine than the one it replaced. 

Philip Perkins

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I haven't used MC so I can only talk about BR.  I have used BR on a number of concert/ doc situations where I was recording 10 - 14 inputs often with mirrored files (so 20 -28 files) for takes up to two hours with never a hiccup, to a buss powered USB2 drive no less.  I did a test to see how many tracks I could record simultaneously to the drive before using it live.  I was able to record 72 tracks 48/24 with out having a buffer overrun.  I only ran that for 10 min. but I knew I was never going to get anywhere close to that in real life.  Talking to the developer about drives FW and USB2 were preferred over eSATA.  The USB2 drive also has an eSATA port and that is what I had planned to used but apparently eSATA isn't a particularly smart protocol and so wasn't a first choice because it doesn't talk back to the app.

On the last Dalai Lama gig I had 14 lines in going to 14 discrete files plus three different stereo crash down "mixes" (for different translations), and mirrored those to a second drive.  So 40 files being written.  The teachings were 2-3 hours long each so VERY long takes.  No issues at all.  It would be nice to drop TC marked notes but you can take notes while recording and type in the TC, not frame accurate but close enough for what I have been doing.  And you could if you wanted split the recording and mark it that way.  BR has user settable pre and post roll so if you split a file on the fly you have overlap if you need to phase them in later.  You get very nice sound reports after with hyperlinks to the files.

MBP first gen with 2gigs of ram

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't used MC so I can only talk about BR.  I have used BR on a number of concert/ doc situations where I was recording 10 - 14 inputs often with mirrored files (so 20 -28 files) for takes up to two hours with never a hiccup, to a buss powered USB2 drive no less.  I did a test to see how many tracks I could record simultaneously to the drive before using it live.  I was able to record 72 tracks 48/24 with out having a buffer overrun.  I only ran that for 10 min. but I knew I was never going to get anywhere close to that in real life.  Talking to the developer about drives FW and USB2 were preferred over eSATA.  The USB2 drive also has an eSATA port and that is what I had planned to used but apparently eSATA isn't a particularly smart protocol and so wasn't a first choice because it doesn't talk back to the app.

On the last Dalai Lama gig I had 14 lines in going to 14 discrete files plus three different stereo crash down "mixes" (for different translations), and mirrored those to a second drive.  So 40 files being written.  The teachings were 2-3 hours long each so VERY long takes.  No issues at all.  It would be nice to drop TC marked notes but you can take notes while recording and type in the TC, not frame accurate but close enough for what I have been doing.  And you could if you wanted split the recording and mark it that way.  BR has user settable pre and post roll so if you split a file on the fly you have overlap if you need to phase them in later.  You get very nice sound reports after with hyperlinks to the files.

MBP first gen with 2gigs of ram

In your 72 channel test were you sending the system 72 different channels of audio or the same thing split out a number of times?  Did you have 72 channels of inputs/interfaces on the FW bus?  2 buses?  I ask because I got different results in terms of max track count when testing these two different ways. 

BR is so reasonable in price that I see it as a must-have for anyone doing any sort of location etc recording, even if your pref is for hardware recorders.

Philip Perkins

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a number of products. I use the Metric Halo gear models 2882 and uln8. I have use RME fireface. Others use Motu or Apogee. If your using a mixer on the front end, whatever A/D interface you choose should work since you aren't using the interfaces preamps. A/D converters do have characteristics which can alter the sound. Just like anything else, you can pay decent $ and get decent results and then the law of diminishing return kicks in. I know the 2882 and fireface 400 can be bus powered off a computer and I think the Motu Traveller is as well

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will admit that the hardware dongle for MC is a serious drag, but Mark is immovable in the subject, and no issues yet. 

I recently had an issue with moving Metacorder from an old laptop to a new one, but Gallery was extremely fast in providing me with an update and an unlock key to get it going. Kudos to Mark for coming through so quickly.

--Marc W.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently had an issue with moving Metacorder from an old laptop to a new one, but Gallery was extremely fast in providing me with an update and an unlock key to get it going. Kudos to Mark for coming through so quickly.

--Marc W.

I had to do this too after my last laptop was stolen, and had the same experience.

Philip Perkins

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice to drop TC marked notes but you can take notes while recording and type in the TC, not frame accurate but close enough for what I have been doing.  

When you're in a text editor with Boom Recorder running, you should look in the application menu (the menu named as the application and shown in bold) and select the 'services' menu, in there is the 'SMPTE Timecode' item; this will paste the current timecode into your text editor at the cursor position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the RME Fireface 800 with a white MacBook and Boom Recorder.  Happy with this configuration for a couple of years now.

Robert

The Fireface Boom recorder combo works great for me too. Rumor has it RME is soon to have a dedicated control surface for the FF line which will really make it powerful. The Mixer is very flexible inside and could be used in realtime without hitting the CPU. I'm using an older Macbook G4 1.67 gHz. I've done 18 tracks at 96K for 2 hour bursts, no hiccups, and nothing but compliments on how great my audio sounds. For me, the big reasons for BR over MC was price, the only feature that MC really had over BR was TC out, and not just in. But for some reason I don't trust computer generated TC and use a generator.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fireface Boom recorder combo works great for me too. Rumor has it RME is soon to have a dedicated control surface for the FF line which will really make it powerful. The Mixer is very flexible inside and could be used in realtime without hitting the CPU. I'm using an older Macbook G4 1.67 gHz. I've done 18 tracks at 96K for 2 hour bursts, no hiccups, and nothing but compliments on how great my audio sounds. For me, the big reasons for BR over MC was price, the only feature that MC really had over BR was TC out, and not just in. But for some reason I don't trust computer generated TC and use a generator.

MC doesn't generate TC itself, it merely looks at TC chosen from an input (or the Mac's clock).  The TC input is merely used to timestamp the files and has nothing to do with the accuracy of the clock used to govern the sample rate. 

Philip Perkins

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

In your 72 channel test were you sending the system 72 different channels of audio or the same thing split out a number of times?  Did you have 72 channels of inputs/interfaces on the FW bus?  2 buses?  I ask because I got different results in terms of max track count when testing these two different ways. 

BR is so reasonable in price that I see it as a must-have for anyone doing any sort of location etc recording, even if your pref is for hardware recorders.

Philip Perkins

Philip,

I was sending the same thing to 72 different files.  14 is the most number of inputs I've used.  Multiple devices would probably add a bunch of overhead so that should knock down the track count.  The most I've done in a real situation was 14 inputs individually to two different drives plus three "stereo" crash down mixes.  So 28 mono and 3 stereo files.

The discussion may be moot though since BR is no longer available for sale.  The developer is too busy with other projects and has closed the store.  It's not "dead" yet and he hopes to have the time to get back to developing it but at least at the moment you can buy it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

What alternatives are there to Metacorder and Boom Recorder? I've used Logic and Soundtrack Pro but they don't exactly cater to field recording on film sets so far as I understand them. The metadata is really what interests and the interface that organizes between scenes and takes. Are these the only contenders out there? Also if I had a mac with 10.5, how would I go about acquiring Boom Recorder. Any third party places still sell it? Since the developers scrapped it, you cant even buy the old version. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What alternatives are there to Metacorder and Boom Recorder? I've used Logic and Soundtrack Pro but they don't exactly cater to field recording on film sets so far as I understand them.

I don't think there is any viable alternatives to Metacorder and Boom Recorder --- they are the only applications that have been designed specifically for use in production sound recording for picture. Most all of the rest of the computer based software/hardware solutions are geared to sound editing, music composition and production, and have way too much overhead for our use. I am sure you can get a copy of Boom Recorder from someone who has a current (last) version and it will run just fine on your Mac (though the Sound Report printing function, I believe, is broken by Snow Leopard (Mac OS 10.6). Take Vos has promised that there will be a new version of Boom Recorder with added features and Snow Leopard compatibility --- but there is no way of knowing when this will be released.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is any viable alternatives to Metacorder and Boom Recorder --- they are the only applications that have been designed specifically for use in production sound recording for picture. Most all of the rest of the computer based software/hardware solutions are geared to sound editing, music composition and production, and have way too much overhead for our use. I am sure you can get a copy of Boom Recorder from someone who has a current (last) version and it will run just fine on your Mac (though the Sound Report printing function, I believe, is broken by Snow Leopard (Mac OS 10.6). Take Vos has promised that there will be a new version of Boom Recorder with added features and Snow Leopard compatibility --- but there is no way of knowing when this will be released.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Great! Yeah, I'd love a copy. It'd be better to run this vs something like logic. It's a bit cumbersome to deal with in the field.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...