Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy Which control surface? Mackie control universal or Tascam FW 1082

  • Which control surface? Mackie control universal or Tascam FW 1082

    Posted by Bryan Keith on September 2, 2006 at 8:32 pm

    After a bit of research, I’ve come down to these two. Any users out there want to share their experience with either one of these? Pros and cons of each?

    Thanks,
    Bryan

    John Steventon replied 19 years, 8 months ago 7 Members · 9 Replies
  • 9 Replies
  • Shane Ross

    September 2, 2006 at 10:24 pm

    What mixer will you be using?

    I have the Tascam FW 1082 and love it. Any adjustments I make with it are reflected on the timeline. Plus it has shuttle, jog, playback control of the timeline. AND…you can map Motion behaviours to all of the knobs and sliders.

    Drawbacks…needs it’s own Firewire bus. So if you have firewire drives, you will need a PCI firewire card for additional FW buses. Another issue…the additional firewire card will disable the HD capabilities of your HD capture card…iffin you have one.

    Shane

    Littlefrog Post
    http://www.lfhd.net

  • Bryan Keith

    September 3, 2006 at 12:42 am

    Right now I have a Decklink HD pro card. So you are saying the additional firewire card would disable HD capability? Why would that be? I also have a Mackie 1202 vlz analog mixer for monitoring. I know that I would need to keep that if I used the MCU. Would the Tascam completely eliminate my need for the mixer?

    Is there any latency with the Tascam?

  • Shane Ross

    September 3, 2006 at 12:48 am

    Latency with the Tascam? No.

    I have the Decklink HD card and it doesn’t work with a Firewire card in the computer. But, let me explain a bit further. I have a Sonnet 4+4 SATA Card in Slot 4…the top. And the Decklink in Slot 3. If I put a firewire card…ANY card really into slot 2 is slows down the bus and I can’t do HD. This is known and talked about in the Decklink forum…look my post up and see what they said.

    If I put the Decklink in the Top #4 slot, and the Sonnet card in slot 3 with the Firewire card, my SATA RAID performance takes a hit. I can’t have that. So…when I offline edit and don’t need the HD capabilities…I have the firewire card in. When it is time to online, I take it out. Pain in the patoot, but what I have to do.

    Shane

    Littlefrog Post
    http://www.lfhd.net

  • Bryan Keith

    September 3, 2006 at 1:01 am

    Thanks for that info. The firewire issue seems a problem I might not want to worry about. I guess I’m leaning more towards the Mackie. Besides the fact that I’ll need to keep my analog mixer, is there any other drawbacks to having the Mackie control universal?

  • Jean-philippe Mariani

    September 3, 2006 at 10:59 am

    Should you precise that this only applies to PCI-X machines, and not PCIe G5, like the Quad G5 which is not affected with mixing all kinds of PCIe cards, if they do respect the bandwidth required (1x to 4x for most of them).

  • Chris Poisson

    September 3, 2006 at 1:57 pm

    Brian,

    I have the same mixer you have, and I’m using the Bheringer CS with it, which is USB. Plus it’s way cheaper than the other two and works great with FCP and Soundtrack Pro. FWIW.

  • Chrisbook

    September 5, 2006 at 3:47 am

    There is a downside to the Behringer. Any time there is a track in the timeline without any audio the corresponding motorized slider will slam down to the bottom of it’s track. The result is that the sliders are constantly banging when you are trying to concentrate. I have heard that the Mackie does not do this.

  • Martin Baker

    September 5, 2006 at 9:17 am

    The Mackie is the same – follows exactly what’s happening on the Audio Mixer window. I guess the Behringer faders are probably noisier than the Mackie ones though.

    Martin
    Digital Heaven, London UK

    Unique plug-ins and tools for Apple Pro Apps
    NEW! BigTIme – resizable timecode display for FCP

  • John Steventon

    September 5, 2006 at 11:16 am

    I’ve got the MCU – and it’s a nice mixer to use – when FCP decides it wants to use it. I’m still on 5.02 so many FCP has improve in recent releases, but I find sometimes that FCP doesn’t want to control or be controlled by the faders (it’s more likely that it doesn’t want to be controlled – I’ll move the faders, but they’ll fight against me and not update the keyframe information.)

    As long as you’re only worried about levels, then it’s ok to use. Unless I’m missing something, all the button controls on the right hand side are redundant in FCP apart from the jog control (which works nice, but I wish the scrub part would work on it).

    Compared to needing to use the audio mixer window, or using the pen tool with keyframes, the MCU is a great way of leveliing audio (when it wants to) but if you full control over the audio, you need to work in conjunction the mouse – and click some menus in FCP.

    Hope this helped.

    John

    John
    Success is merely a failiure to imagine more…

    G5 2.7Ghz, 4.5Gb ram, Blackmagic Decklink/multibridge, 5.6Tb Infortrend storage, FCP Studio 5.02, Makie MCU control, Yahama 5.1 surround, JVC DTV multi-format monitor, 2x23inch Apple monitors – and a partirdge on a pear tree.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy