RADAR.... on the radar?

not_so_new 🎙️ · 1st August 2007

Yeah.. bad pun...

But seriously I have been kicking around the idea of getting a RADAR system... well... actually I have been thinking about a Lavry Gold, a 2 inch machine or a RADAR system. All have their ups and downs.

So I want to learn a little more about the RADAR to compare apples to apples.

1) Is the RADAR V the "new" system? If so how do the older machines stack up in sound? What are the older systems to look for and to avoid?

2) What happened to the converters that iZ were talking about putting out there for sale separate from the drive cage and OS?

3) Opinion only obviously but how does the RADAR stack up against a 2 inch machine? I have never used the two side by side. I have heard people say the RADAR is as good as or maybe even a little better than a 2 inch machine and there sure would be a whole lot less maintenance hassle right?

RKrizman · 1st August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by not_so_new ➡️

I have heard people say the RADAR is as good as or maybe even a little better than a 2 inch machine and there sure would be a whole lot less maintenance hassle right?

From what I've heard most Radar user think Radar actually sounds more like tape than a 2" machine.

-R

not_so_new 🎙️ · 1st August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKrizman ➡️

From what I've heard most Radar user think Radar actually sounds more like tape than a 2" machine.

-R

LOL

So have I and I always wondered how that could be.

Thanks man!

**narcoman** · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKrizman ➡️

From what I've heard most Radar user think Radar actually sounds more like tape than a 2" machine.

-R

well youve heard from people who've never used a tape machine!

Tape has a sound - Radar is an excellent clean sounding system Really rerally good technically, and sounds excellent - what you put in you get out. Tape is NOT like this AT ALL. It has a sound, different depending on what you do with it, sexy at times, dull in the wrong hands. The two are not comparable - at all. They solve different requirements.

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by narcoman ➡️

well youve heard from people who've never used a tape machine!

Tape has a sound - Radar is an excellent clean sounding system Really rerally good technically, and sounds excellent - what you put in you get out. Tape is NOT like this AT ALL. It has a sound, different depending on what you do with it, sexy at times, dull in the wrong hands. The two are not comparable - at all. They solve different requirements.

Well... I always take Fletcher's word with a bit of caution because he is a pimp and even if subcontiously he has an agenda... we all do so that is no knock on him.

BUT

One thing you can say about Fletcher is he has used almost every piece of gear under the sun including "real tape" machines. Here is what he has to say on the subject over at R/E/P..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletcher

An interesting thing happened to me last night... first, a little 'back story'. A friend of mine and his exceptionally talented wife and another friend who is a hell of a drummer came in yesterday. We started at like 7-8 pm but I spent most of the day making sure the analog deck was set up perfectly, that every thing that was even a little dodgy on the desk was taken care of, added to our foldback system, yada, yada, yada.

Now another session had come through a few weeks ago where we rolled tape then bounced to RADAR. I found it interesting that one of the songs sounded way better without the tape being involved so we rolled straight to RADAR.

Last night we rolled simuls... the signal went to both tape and the RADAR at the same time... though I had left the RADAR running as a "roll deck" in case they came up with a really cool idea during soundcheck and wanted to go revisit that idea.

So they played, I got sounds... and we went to listen back. We were listening off tape and everyone was rather pleased with the sounds [he said breaking his arm patting his own back]... but there was an idea they wanted to hear that was on the RADAR that wasn't on the tape... so we played back the RADAR... and [yep, you guessed it] the audio from the RADAR was kicking the audio from the analog deck's ass. The overall space and stereo image were better... the transient response [this is kinda open Jazz-ish kinda stuff where transients are pretty important] were better... the audio in general was... I don't know any other way to say it other than "better".

It wasn't like I was slamming the tape, I did the usual thing I do printing kiks at like -10 [on 499 with a 4>250nWb/m alignment] and the snare at -7... the overheads were barely giggling the meters... I was using the machine the way I have always used machines... as a storage device an not an effect.

Now I'm going to double [hell, triple] check the alignment when I go in later today because I'm actually still having a hard tme believing what I heard last night... and I'll play back the analog as well as the digital [96kHz BTW] with somewhat fresher ears... but I have to say I think I became a complete convert last night. I think my analog deck will be going on the market early next year.

heyman · 2nd August 2007

I have owned a Radar 24 (not the new "V") for about 4 years now

I love it. Rock solid.. I have the Radar 24 w/ Nyquist converters which can do 24 at 48Khz or 12 tracks at 96... Has one recording drive and a Dvd rw for backups and burning.

The next step up is the Radar 24 w/ Super Nyquist which does 24 at 96 and 12 tracks at 192...

The Radar V offers the Adrenaline engine which can get you 24 tracks at 192, larger dual recording drives (one fails, you have a backup) and A dvd burner. Faster processor etc...

If you were to get a Used Radar 24, make sure to get one with at least a 833 mhz processor or better and at least 384 meg of ram. The newer software updates wont run on anything slower.. ( Remember- it runs BeOS operating system, which is very effecient). Dont buy one with a Dvd Ram drive either..

Also, I have heard of many people who dumped from 2 inch to Pro tools( on this forum) and said the quality had suffered..

I have not read one instance of that happening when they transferred audio from 2 inch to a Radar system..

I heard from a reliable source that they were working on standalone converters.

Any questions, pm me and I can give you my number if you like.

Best of luck..

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by heyman ➡️

I have owned a Radar 24 (not the new "V") for about 4 years now

I love it. Rock solid.. I have the Radar 24 w/ Nyquist converters which can do 24 at 48Khz or 12 tracks at 96... Has one recording drive and a Dvd rw for backups and burning.

The next step up is the Radar 24 w/ Super Nyquist which does 24 at 96 and 12 tracks at 192...

The Radar V offers the Adrenaline engine which can get you 24 tracks at 192, larger dual recording drives (one fails, you have a backup) and A dvd burner. Faster processor etc...

If you were to get a Used Radar 24, make sure to get one with at least a 833 mhz processor or better and at least 384 meg of ram. The newer software updates wont run on anything slower.. ( Remember- it runs BeOS operating system, which is very effecient). Dont buy one with a Dvd Ram drive either..

Also, I have heard of many people who dumped from 2 inch to Pro tools( on this forum) and said the quality had suffered..

I have not read one instance of that happening when they transferred audio from 2 inch to a Radar system..

I heard from a reliable source that they were working on standalone converters.

Any questions, pm me and I can give you my number if you like.

Best of luck..

Thanks dude.... very cool!

I am really on the fence about it all. Lavry Gold, JH24 (which I would have to bring into Samp with my AD-16x anyway) or a Radar system. Used they are all around the same money.

The JH24 has lots of draw backs, tape, maintenance, parts supply but it sounds great.

I have never used a Radar or a Lavry Gold but people who's ears I trust tell me that the Radar and the Gold are head and shoulders above any other standard digital units. Does that include my Apogee 16-x's? I don't know..

Sucks because I can't afford to get a JH24, a Gold and a Radar in my room at the same time so I think I will have to take a guess at it.

Anyway, thanks for the post. Points I will keep in mind for sure.

dbluefield · 2nd August 2007

I was on that fence...............

I went with the radar (nyquist 24).

The ease of tracking and punching is awesome.

2" tape sounds great, BUT there's lots of issues....IMHO...get a good front end and really they are very close - I went to a shoot out a few years back -- most of the guys in the room said they could hear the low end bump on tape....to my ears they both sounded great to me.

Now the ease of turning on a machine and be ready to track about 30 reels of tape plus -- priceless

Or should I say not as pricey

Now if I can only settle on a DAW....lol

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbluefield ➡️

I was on that fence...............

I went with the radar (nyquist 24).

The ease of tracking and punching is awesome.

2" tape sounds great, BUT there's lots of issues....IMHO...get a good front end and really they are very close - I went to a shoot out a few years back -- most of the guys in the room said they could hear the low end bump on tape....to my ears they both sounded great to me.

Now the ease of turning on a machine and be ready to track about 30 reels of tape plus -- priceless

Or should I say not as pricey

Now if I can only settle on a DAW....lol

thumbsup

Thanks man.

You know it's not really about the low end "bump" for me, it is the depth of field that I am missing.

I love my AD and DA 16X machines, best digital I have every used so far but I am just missing that... "thing"... I don't know what it is, well I know what it is I just can't describe it.

It's that ability to reach inside a recording and walk around in it. I don't think the problem is "digital" vs. "analog," I have heard great sounding digital recordings that I can walk around inside of and I don't think it is my recording methods because I was able to walk around inside of my old analog recordings without much problem.

I just wonder if I need BETTER digital, hence the Lavry Gold or the Radar.... hummmm...

Thanks again man.... oh and, for all of the things I HATE about Samplitude I would probably say you need to check it out if you haven't already. There are some pretty cool features in there that I probably could not live without now that I have them.

Drumsound · 2nd August 2007

I've got a RADAR 24 Nyquist and a JH24 (and an M79 but that is leaving soon). There is a difference between the RADAR and the tape deck sonically. There is more depth and girth with the JH. The RADAR sounds damn good though. I'd call it a slightly harder less 3D sound. The RADAR is a breeze to use, and if you have the session controller it much like tracking on tape. The editing system is like tape in that it works using a mark and mark out feature much like marking tape with a grease pencil. RADAR is super simple and really gratifying to work on. A buddy of mine just got one a couple months ago and he said it has changed his world not having to spend he session time in "computer world." The RADAR feels more like it's made for music than any DAW I've been near.

I reviewed the RADAR V S-Nyquist for Tape Op. I had it twice the first time finishing some things started at 44.1 on my R24 and doing some ruff mixes at 192k. Then I got it back and was able to track and mix an entire song at 192k. While I had it I was amazed that the sound of the 192k converters A/B to the source was hard if not impossible to tell the difference. I can not say that of the Nyquist, though at 88.2 or 96k it's close, and at 44.2 and 48k its still damn fine audio.

I have a couple thoughts on your possible purchases if you don't mind.

First the JH24, especially the later ones, are really simple to deal with. The tech who set mine up and has done a couple small repairs (one that was my fault not the machines) says they are the Oldsmobile of pro audio. Simple, reliable and easy to fix. I tell you that's a god send after have the Italian sports car or pro audio the 3M M79.

Second, if you have the JH and a RADAR why do you also need the Lavry? That to me seems redundant. With the RADAR you can transfer files a number of ways to a DAW if needed. If I were to add a DAW to my system I'd set it up clocked to the RADAR (which has an excellent clock) and have 24 bitchen channels of AD/DA. With the newer versions of the RADAR software you can now convert audio without having a recording drive mounted.

Fretbored · 2nd August 2007

Some of this has been covered already. I'm just going to type as I remember.

1) Is the RADAR V the "new" system? If so how do the older machines stack up in sound? What are the older systems to look for and to avoid?
Radar V is the latest and has the Adrenaline Plus recording engine which I believe is a 3 or 4 thousand dollar upgrade for an older machine. It came out Dec 1st 2004. I see no reason to spend the extra money on older machines unless you track at 192. If you find an older machine running 3.31 software or later, you can upgrade to 3.38 or free. IZ recommends an 833 mhz processor, no less. All IZs run the BEoS which is very stable, but no mouse for you PT guys.

2) What happened to the converters that iZ were talking about putting out there for sale separate from the drive cage and OS? Must have never made it past the talking stage. Just ask for NJ in tech. He's very easy going and can tell you whatever you need to know. iZ Technology Corporation | News

3) Opinion only obviously but how does the RADAR stack up against a 2 inch machine? I have never used the two side by side. I have heard people say the RADAR is as good as or maybe even a little better than a 2 inch machine and there sure would be a whole lot less maintenance hassle right?
I want to say that Fletcher is right about the stereo image and space. As far as the character, it's different. It's good digital. The reason people hype it up is because it's how digital should be. As soon as I hooked up the IZ RADAR 24 for the first time, I called NJ at IZ and asked how to go from 96 to 48 (it sounded like 96). He then informed me that I was already set to 48. This wasn't even the Nyquist version. Now with the Nyquist V, I can't imagine how RADAR could improve this system any more. Well maybe the editing. You may get frustrated with the editing capabilities at first, but track away and edit elsewhere if you have to. This thing allows you to focus on music rather than what you can slide into place. I usually run Transmit on my mac for file transfers and have not had any trouble yet. If you're worried about the hassle of a tape machine, this is no contest.

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drumsound ➡️

I've got a RADAR 24 Nyquist and a JH24 (and an M79 but that is leaving soon). There is a difference between the RADAR and the tape deck sonically. There is more depth and girth with the JH. The RADAR sounds damn good though. I'd call it a slightly harder less 3D sound. The RADAR is a breeze to use, and if you have the session controller it much like tracking on tape. The editing system is like tape in that it works using a mark and mark out feature much like marking tape with a grease pencil. RADAR is super simple and really gratifying to work on. A buddy of mine just got one a couple months ago and he said it has changed his world not having to spend he session time in "computer world." The RADAR feels more like it's made for music than any DAW I've been near.

I reviewed the RADAR V S-Nyquist for Tape Op. I had it twice the first time finishing some things started at 44.1 on my R24 and doing some ruff mixes at 192k. Then I got it back and was able to track and mix an entire song at 192k. While I had it I was amazed that the sound of the 192k converters A/B to the source was hard if not impossible to tell the difference. I can not say that of the Nyquist, though at 88.2 or 96k it's close, and at 44.2 and 48k its still damn fine audio.

I have a couple thoughts on your possible purchases if you don't mind.

First the JH24, especially the later ones, are really simple to deal with. The tech who set mine up and has done a couple small repairs (one that was my fault not the machines) says they are the Oldsmobile of pro audio. Simple, reliable and easy to fix. I tell you that's a god send after have the Italian sports car or pro audio the 3M M79.

Second, if you have the JH and a RADAR why do you also need the Lavry? That to me seems redundant. With the RADAR you can transfer files a number of ways to a DAW if needed. If I were to add a DAW to my system I'd set it up clocked to the RADAR (which has an excellent clock) and have 24 bitchen channels of AD/DA. With the newer versions of the RADAR software you can now convert audio without having a recording drive mounted.

Thanks man... very cool....

Well, just to be clear, I don't currently have a Gold or a Radar. I have a pair of Apogees AD and DA 16-X's.

They sound great but as I said above, it's that ability to reach inside a recording and walk around in it. I don't think the problem is "digital" vs. "analog," I have heard great sounding digital recordings that I can walk around inside of and I don't think it is my recording methods because I was able to walk around inside of my old analog recordings without much problem.

I just wonder if I need BETTER digital, hence the Lavry Gold or the Radar.... hummmm...

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fretbored ➡️

Some of this has been covered already. I'm just going to type as I remember.

1) Is the RADAR V the "new" system? If so how do the older machines stack up in sound? What are the older systems to look for and to avoid?
Radar V is the latest and has the Adrenaline Plus recording engine which I believe is a 3 or 4 thousand dollar upgrade for an older machine. It came out Dec 1st 2004. I see no reason to spend the extra money on older machines unless you track at 192. If you find an older machine running 3.31 software or later, you can upgrade to 3.38 or free. IZ recommends an 833 mhz processor, no less. All IZs run the BEoS which is very stable, but no mouse for you PT guys.

2) What happened to the converters that iZ were talking about putting out there for sale separate from the drive cage and OS? Must have never made it past the talking stage. Just ask for NJ in tech. He's very easy going and can tell you whatever you need to know. iZ Technology Corporation | News

3) Opinion only obviously but how does the RADAR stack up against a 2 inch machine? I have never used the two side by side. I have heard people say the RADAR is as good as or maybe even a little better than a 2 inch machine and there sure would be a whole lot less maintenance hassle right?
I want to say that Fletcher is right about the stereo image and space. As far as the character, it's different. It's good digital. The reason people hype it up is because it's how digital should be. As soon as I hooked up the IZ RADAR 24 for the first time, I called NJ at IZ and asked how to go from 96 to 48 (it sounded like 96). He then informed me that I was already set to 48. This wasn't even the Nyquist version. Now with the Nyquist V, I can't imagine how RADAR could improve this system any more. Well maybe the editing. You may get frustrated with the editing capabilities at first, but track away and edit elsewhere if you have to. This thing allows you to focus on music rather than what you can slide into place. I usually run Transmit on my mac for file transfers and have not had any trouble yet. If you're worried about the hassle of a tape machine, this is no contest.

Thanks! And YES I am worried about the hassle of a tape machine.

So how does the Radar stack up against, say an Apogee AD DA 16-X system clocked off a Lavry Gold I wonder? That is really my choice here I think. The JH machine is still in the back of my mind... of course it would be transferred to DAW with the Apogee's anyway...

rrrr

rghose · 2nd August 2007

I haven't used the Nyquist converters but I can tell you that the RADAR 24 converters (which I have used extensively) sound amazing! I can only imagine that the Nyquist ones sound even better.

If more people were to use RADAR systems instead of most of the other mediocre converters in use today, I think there would be less debates between "digital vs. analog". Digital can sound very good (warm, depth, wide, etc...). RADAR has proved it.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is their support. Amazing! You always get a person on the phone right away and you always get to talk to a tech. The system is so reliable and easy to use that you don't need support often. But when you do, it's nice to know that it's easy to get.

Cheers!
Reuben

lane thaw · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by narcoman ➡️

well youve heard from people who've never used a tape machine!

Tape has a sound - Radar is an excellent clean sounding system Really rerally good technically, and sounds excellent - what you put in you get out. Tape is NOT like this AT ALL. It has a sound.

+1

I have a Radar with classic converters and they are excellent, but Radar adds nothing in a good way, it sounds just like the source, 2" tape adds a bit, and to my ears, for tracking, you lose a bit on tracking direct to protools. But I would not hesitate to tell anyone to track to 2" tape and dump to protools for editing if very high end converters are used.

The Byre · 2nd August 2007

I have ben using a 48-track Radar system for the past five years and it is the best investment I could have made. Here are some key points to augment what has been said before -

1. In that time, our PT rig has had to go through three major (and expensive) upgrades. I have now given up updating PT. The radar has cost me about $300 for two major upgrades, plus some RAM and a combi-drive.

2. What goes in, comes out. There is no real difference between the signal going in and the signal coming out - at any sample rate.

3. It is conciderably easier to use than a tape recorder. It really is idiot proof!

4. Zoom-in depth is not particularly good, so you have to edit by ear.

5. You can either ethernet broadcast WAV files to a DAW for editing, or do the frisbee thing with a DVD-R.

6. You can use the digital outs as well, so the Radar can be the front end of a DAW.

Other than that, like the man said above, make sure it has the combi or DVD-R drive and enough RAM for the latest software. If you are going for a used system and it does not have those two things, factor their cost into the price.

Fretbored · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by rghose ➡️

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is their support. Amazing! You always get a person on the phone right away and you always get to talk to a tech. The system is so reliable and easy to use that you don't need support often. But when you do, it's nice to know that it's easy to get.

Cheers!
Reuben

You'll either talk to Wade or NJ and always right away. When my first unit came in, it had been internally shaken up a bit in shipping and wasn't working. I told NJ what it was doing and within 15 minutes, rollin'. Ever since then, the only reason I've ever had to call is for my own person training.

Fretbored · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by not_so_new ➡️

Thanks! And YES I am worried about the hassle of a tape machine.

So how does the Radar stack up against, say an Apogee AD DA 16-X system clocked off a Lavry Gold I wonder? That is really my choice here I think. The JH machine is still in the back of my mind... of course it would be transferred to DAW with the Apogee's anyway...

rrrr

Good question. Apogee w/Lavry Gold would be cool. The main reason I went with RADAR in the first place was because of it's stability. It never crashes. I was running a DAW and lost several projects. I think that's what this question should really be about because the sound will be there.

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fretbored ➡️

Good question. Apogee w/Lavry Gold would be cool. The main reason I went with RADAR in the first place was because of it's stability. It never crashes. I was running a DAW and lost several projects. I think that's what this question should really be about because the sound will be there.

Well, I am a computer guy when not doing recording so I am pretty good at keeping my DAW going. I know that people have DAW problems all the time but if there is one thing I can say for DAW recording in my world stability is rarely a problem.... watch when happens later today when I turn my system on now that I have temped the computer godz....

LOL

Seriously, the direction I am worried about with stability is the 2 inch ATR. My DAW is rock solid...... not almost bullet-proof like the Radar but good enough up times for my needs.

kats · 2nd August 2007

Ultimately it comes down to whether or not you need 24 i/o or not. Most guys with a RADAR I would guess are using a desk. That's what I do. Actually, started on PT and switched to RADAR. Best thing I ever did. Now I just have PTLE in a different room for any deep editing that might arise - it's come to a point where I can't even stand looking at the screen and find I use PT less and less everyday.

But having said that, if I didn't have a desk and was mixing in a DAW - I would just get stand alone converters.

OTOH, a used RADAR with the latest software and classic converters can be bought around 5K. So you can put the digital card in the RADAR and go straight into your DAW - and at $200 / channel (used) your laughing!

About the difference between the Nyquist converters and Classic, I don't have personal experience but people say the Nyquist is better at any sample rate. But there are guys around who actually preffer the Classic converters....so who knows? I have the classic converters and my only point of reference is the Apogee Rosettas and I can't really give you a comment since so much has changed in my chain - but I notice a fuller bottom end and a smoother top - is it the RADAR, the board? Both? Hard to say.

not_so_new 🎙️ · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by kats ➡️

Ultimately it comes down to whether or not you need 24 i/o or not. Most guys with a RADAR I would guess are using a desk. That's what I do. Actually, started on PT and switched to RADAR. Best thing I ever did. Now I just have PTLE in a different room for any deep editing that might arise - it's come to a point where I can't even stand looking at the screen and find I use PT less and less everyday.

But having said that, if I didn't have a desk and was mixing in a DAW - I would just get stand alone converters.

OTOH, a used RADAR with the latest software and classic converters can be bought around 5K. So you can put the digital card in the RADAR and go straight into your DAW - and at $200 / channel (used) your laughing!

About the difference between the Nyquist converters and Classic, I don't have personal experience but people say the Nyquist is better at any sample rate. But there are guys around who actually preffer the Classic converters....so who knows? I have the classic converters and my only point of reference is the Apogee Rosettas and I can't really give you a comment since so much has changed in my chain - but I notice a fuller bottom end and a smoother top - is it the RADAR, the board? Both? Hard to say.

thumbsup

Thanks..

I do like the idea of having low latency and a full 24 channels of playback for tracking. That is a limitation of my current system, my Lynx AES card can only do hardware monitoring for up to 4 channels at a time, not very helpful for a full tracking session.

I can get away with 16 channels of I/O, I am building out my Tonelux rack for 16 inputs and I usually don't find my tracking session going over 16 tracks.

Actually that is why I am thinking about the Gold, I only track 16 at a time for basic tracking, drums and such. Like most guys I am doing overdubs on 1 or 2 channels after that so the Gold would be fine in that application AND it would make a kisk a$$ mix down medium..... decisions decisions.

Drumsound · 2nd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by not_so_new ➡️

Thanks man... very cool....

Well, just to be clear, I don't currently have a Gold or a Radar. I have a pair of Apogees AD and DA 16-X's.

They sound great but as I said above, it's that ability to reach inside a recording and walk around in it. I don't think the problem is "digital" vs. "analog," I have heard great sounding digital recordings that I can walk around inside of and I don't think it is my recording methods because I was able to walk around inside of my old analog recordings without much problem.

I just wonder if I need BETTER digital, hence the Lavry Gold or the Radar.... hummmm...

I misunderstood. I thought you were thinking of a RADAR and the Lavry.

RADAR is "better digital" IMHO.

nobtwiddler · 2nd August 2007

I own 5 Radar systems....

Need I say more!

midnightsun · 3rd August 2007

The work flow for putting a RADAR to full use versus working with a DAW are different. A RADAR will do its job without compromise and with rock solid stability. I think that the RADAR converters are great but I think that purchasing a RADAR just for the converters is a mistake. For tracking sessions things don't get any simpler than a RADAR. But.... if you want to start playing with your tracks and mixing right away this may require some chores. Fletcher describes dragging the harddrive over to his DAW while Barry H and others describe sending the files to the DAW via ethernet.

not_so_new.... I would think about your work flow. I am working on a much smaller scale than many of the folks here and often do a short trackin session and then I want to immediately start playing with the tracks. Of course you can still do this with the RADAR but the number of steps for me is greater than simply tracking directly into the DAW.

Something else to consider is how you would want the RADAR to digitally interface with your DAW. Think through every step because it isn't ALWAYS a "no brainer." Is there a PCIe card yet that will handle AES?

RADAR is build like a tank and iZ Corp is peopled with very honorable individuals.

Regarding the quality of the 16ADX/16DAX vs the RADAR converters they are both great but different. My own bias is that once the quality of converter gets to a certain level the choice of talent, mic, and preamp far outweighs the brand of converter when it comes to tone and flavor-- just my own 2 cents.

Good luck .... not_so_new.

indie · 3rd August 2007

Everyone that commented on this thread that has the Radar has been very in depth and right on with my experience. I've owned Radar24 for 5 years and it NEVER let's me down.
I'll just add this: Radar/IZ kicks the hiney.

Sofa King · 3rd August 2007

I have the Radar 24, PT HD3 Accel, and a 3M M79.

[Im in the process of selling the 2"]

the Radar sounds incredible and is the most dependable piece of equipment here, going on 5 years.

I have the classic converters, I am going to try out the Nyquist board to see if there is an appreciable improvement.
I cant imaging the deck sounding much better.

Also, when Im not recording in it, or through it, I use it as my A/D D/A for any bussing needs for the PT rig.

I dont think you could go wrong with purchasing the Radar unit.

all the best,
Sean

Empire Prod · 3rd August 2007

I just received some tracks which I'm going to mix for a fellow G-Slut. The tracks were recorded using the Radar system, and now I want one. It's sound is way closer to analog than PT. No harsh highs or mid mid-highs, and fuller low mids. I'm pretty impressed.

not_so_new 🎙️ · 3rd August 2007

Thanks guys.

Well I think I have discounted the Jh24 machine and mostly because of what midnightsun was saying above.... It really would put a crimp in my workflow I think.

Looks like it is a toss up between the RADAR and the Lavry Gold.

Midnightsun also said "I think that the RADAR converters are great but I think that purchasing a RADAR just for the converters is a mistake. "

Well in actuality I really think I would be purchasing the RADAR for the converters. I am happy with Samplitude (well there are things that still piss me off about it but I get work done with it) and I am happy with my system stability. I do have a problem with hardware monitoring for larger tracking sessions but my main reason for looking into the RADAR is the "sound" of the thing.

So the big $60 million dollar question (or $6700 + question) is will the Lavry Gold sound better than the RADAR? I would think it would but everyone talks about how GREAT the RADAR sounds it just makes me wonder. The Gold IS TOP shelf, hard to get any better than that in AD conversion. Some might prefer Weiss but not because it is "better" more because it is "different." If tracking mostly overdubs 1 or 2 channels at a time, I imagine the Lavry Gold is a better choice for my needs….. but that is allot of money to put on a hunch.

Silvertone · 3rd August 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by nobtwiddler ➡️

I own 5 Radar systems....

Need I say more!

Yes but how many of them are out of the box?

Where are those HELIOS FILES ???

csimprov · 3rd August 2007

I don't see anyone here really distinguishing between Radar's converters and the unit itself. What really makes the Radar sound superior to other DAWs? Is it simply the converters? Or does Radar do better math internally than, let's say Digi HD? My feeling is that it's both. Otherwise, (one would think) iZ would've started to capitalize on their converters by producing standalone Nyquist converters. (Although maybe their thinking is that doing this would take away from their Radar sales.) It goes without saying that the Radar converters are wonderful, but I would like to hear people's opinions on the sonic differences when A/Bing the DAWs themselves: e.g. tracking the same source A) using Radar's converters into Radar and B) using Radar's converters into another DAW. Maybe doing this will be more helpful to Michael.

Thread / Thread Starter	Replies / Views	Last Post
It Came ... W O W KOImaging	replies: 19 views: 3047	etherize 21st September 2002
Radar24 Users UK digi882	replies: 0 views: 4615	digi882 4th January 2007
NAMM 2015: iZ RADAR STUDIO: RADAR and Pro Tools in One Box - Now Shipping! The Press Desk	replies: 843 views: 103637	johnnyz 9th December 2018
New Sound Devices 833 Recorder Deleted 017a497	replies: 93 views: 20879	IronFilm 21st September 2020

Similar Threads

It Came ... W O W

Radar24 Users UK

NAMM 2015: iZ RADAR STUDIO: RADAR and Pro Tools in One Box - Now Shipping!

New Sound Devices 833 Recorder

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:

Gear discussed

Similar Threads

It Came ... W O W

Radar24 Users UK

NAMM 2015: iZ RADAR STUDIO: RADAR and Pro Tools in One Box - Now Shipping!

New Sound Devices 833 Recorder

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:

Gear discussed on this page in this thread

Gear discussed