Gold Supporting Member
Platinum Supporting Member
Has anyone tried both? If so, could you compare them?
If you have only tried one how did you like it?
If you have only tried one how did you like it?
I've owned the BR600 for a few months now, and love it. Small, very portable, long life on 6 AA batteries if I want to run that way. I usually just record my synth's audio output to the BR. I run all my instruments / mics / amps to a Yamaha MG16/4 mixer, and the stereo outs from the mixer to the mic inputs of the BR, which saves me from constantly swapping cables and adjusting levels on the BR.Has anyone tried both? If so, could you compare them?
If you have only tried one how did you like it?TIA
I would think so. I often plug my iPod into it (via the line in), record the track onto a stereo channel, and then overdub the part I want to play. Sometimes bass, sometimes guitar, and now mandolin. Sometimes I play a track on the synth and add strings, horns, whatever. I don't take it any further, as it's just a scratch pad for ideas.Do you think the BR600 would be a good tool for playing along with tracks and posting on TGP?
My wife got me the Zoom HD8CD for Christmas. I recorded a set of music tracks for her for an upcoming singing recital she has.
I found it pretty easy to use. I have the Boss Micro-BR (the baby brother of the BR-600--most of the drum loops are the same between the two). I found the Zoom more intuitive. The drums sound a lot more organic on the Zoom to me and I like the patterns better--the BR patterns sound good, but I just didn't like them as much as the Zoom (the Zoom also has a bass simulator on the Rhythm track, and the drums are in stereo). The Zoom has a FAST method of connecting together drum patterns into a song. It uses basic addition, multiplication, and parenthesis ("()") to order the song and takes about 10 minutes to figure out if you remember any pre-algebra from Jr/High School
In one day, I was able to figure out how to make a custom rhythm track using both step-input and real-time input, and record my electric in stereo using my GT-8, which records very well. While it has on-board effects, I chose to use the GT-8 due to already having a good acoustic patch setup.
While I didn't use the insert effects on the inputs while recording (other than a little reverb, I did use them during mastering--and they are great for multiple styles--I particularly like Live (very full and natural) and Rock Show (like a stadium concert). After running the aforementioned song through the Live mastering insert effect, my wife, and her singing teacher, loved how it came out--and I'm a newbie to recording!
As far as comparing it to the BR-600, I know the Zoom does not compress and the sound quality is CONSIDERABLY better than my Micro-BR, which I read somewhere has the same COSM models as the BR-600. In addition, the Zoom feels pretty solid. I really like the level meters (you can see them across the room easily) and how the display is at an angle so you don't have to look straight down on it. I really comes down to what is more important to you: portability or a big harddrive in a retro package? The big selling points for me were: 80 gig harddrive, works as a DAW control surface, and comes with recording software (Cubase LE) and a drum patter/song editor. It may not matter much to you, but I also found the Zoom manual considerably easier to digest for the first-timer than the Micro-BR, ie, I retained a lot more of what I read.
My only regret with the HD8CD is that I didn't get the HD16CD. Once you start recording in stereo (with the stereo channel or 2 mono channels linked together), you only have 4 stereo tracks + Rhythm, so most likely, you will have to bounce tracks, which I probably wouldn't have to do with the HD16CD. However, I can (and will) copy each track to a computer and mix there if I run out of tracks. I will be keeping the HD8CD--it was a present from my wife after all
Just a few comments I should add.... I used to have the BR1200CD and "downgraded" to the 600 and am much happier. Personally I prefer flash drives over hard drives.... they're MUCH faster (loading songs, copying, etc) and it's easier to organize things because I can group them on a card. And to be fair, the MicroBR probably isn't the best thing to compare against as it's more of a toy. And no, the models and drums are not the same as the 600... the 600 is much better. I'm a big fan of the 600 so just wanted to add those things!!!
I was in a store that had both the Micro-BR and BR-600--the exact same names were used for both sets of rhythm patterns and arrangements (just verified this by downloading both manuals). Since Roland/Boss has continually reused technology from product group to product group, and the BR-600 came out long before the Micro-BR, it goes to reason that they are the same. I listened to both patterns and arrangements on both products through the same studio monitors in a music store and IMHO they sounded the same, but YMMV
Regarding the effects, the BR-600 has more effects than the Micro-BR, but my GT-8 sounds better than both of them, however, it isn't really a fair comparison since the GT-8 is a tweak monster
I do agree with you on the flash key vs HD issue, however, the big benefit for me there is that the HD8CD records in 16-bit linear, ie, no compression, while the BR-600 and Micro-BR records in 16-bit compressed since they are both limited to 1 gig flash cards--and on that note, come on Boss; keep up with technology already! I can pick up an 8 gig CF card (BR-600) for less than $150 and a 16 gig SD card (Micro-BR) for under $175! Why they limit it is beyond me, since it is completely unnecessary....well, unless you are trying to force consumers into HD based units (sorry for the tangent).