Boss BR 1600 - How to Sync Two BR1600's Together

[@alextrigo403]

Wow!..the infinite capabilities of these machines are surprising, considering that today people are focused on recording with a computer. These recorders have been on the market for many years and still work very well! I take care of my BR 1200 like gold! You are a master at explaining beyond the manuals and their supposedly correct information. Thanks for this information! Greetings from Chile !

[@nikdrown]

My home recording started on BR 8 (only after the famous tascam 4 track) I still have my 1200 and use it for reverbs and delays and effects essentially but also the faders as midi controlling plugins. I love it but the 2 inputs were very limiting. It will always have a place in my heart

[@masteringtoolkit]

They are definitely a bit of gem, even in this day and age of DAW's. Thanks for the comment Alex!

[@GabrielShaid]

Great video!!! I also have a Tascam DP-32 that record 32 channels in 48khz, but don't have MIDI, digital I/O, FXs and a lot more functions than only have with BR-1600... I love my BR.. Thank you so much for your videos!!!

[@masteringtoolkit]

Yes, MIDI is great to have and sadly missing on a lot of modern equipment unfortunately. Combine that with the digital I/O and effects as you say, and I completely agree - it's a killer package!

[@Fezzler61]

Wow. What a wealth of information. I will not lie, I'll be watching this one several times. I know the answer to this is both obvious and perhaps infinite, what are common benefits of having two BR-1600s linked? For, recording a drum kit - each piece plus overhead. Recording a full band live giving each performer/instrument a track plus mic the room. Anything else I'm not thinking of as a home recording hobbyist that worth consideration? I knew this video was coming and anticipated it. You exceeded my expectations!

[@masteringtoolkit]

Thank you Chris! I wasn't sure how much this video would appeal, being a very specific topic. Glad to hear that it will be of use to you. Recording a band in a live situation is the most common use for doing this, with the drums being a great example too. For someone who just records by themselves, this aspect doesn't really hold much appeal I guess. However, even forgetting the ability to record 16 tracks simultaneously, it still affords you double the amount of playback tracks too. This has a two fold advantage of both allowing you to record double the amount of tracks that you can playback at the same time (obviously), and have double the faders to work with. You can mix up to 32 channels of audio on the fly without having to bounce anything! This comes is particularly handy if you like to use something like backing vocals/doubles and harmonies. You can get some really complex, even choir like vocals using this and not have to worry about the track count.

[@masteringtoolkit]

Hey Chris - I got notification of your comment, but it did show up here for some reason? To answer you question: If you are using digital audio between the two BR 1600 recorders, the flow of audio MUST go from the Master to the Slave (the opposite to how Roland says to do it), so all your bounces end up on the Slave, not the Master. If you are using analog connections, it can go either way. Yes, you can expand your track count by adding the BR 1200 to the BR 1600. Digital audio on the BR 1200 is optical not coaxial cable and is only an OUT, so you will need a converter to get the signal from optical to coaxial (and will again flow TO the Slave BR 1600) or use analog connections. I didn't test it out with the BR 1200, so let us know how it goes if you do!

[@Fezzler61]

@@masteringtoolkit Thanks! I had a long post/question but figured it out so I deleted it. Sorry for confusion. Your response above further clarifies. Specifically, the difference between digital and line for audio transfer between units.

[@kishsaintjean6101]

Hi , Thanks a Lot For All those Videos !!👍

[@masteringtoolkit]

My pleasure! I'm glad to hear you find them useful.

[@scottymarr9793]

Great video - very useful, thanks (as are your other vids). However I’m getting slight latency between the two machines when I sync them (the slave is about half a beat behind the master). Any idea how to fix this or is there something wrong with my machine(s)? Thanks.

[@masteringtoolkit]

Hi Scott - thanks very much, I'm glad you found the videos helpful. In my experiments with linking machines, the only time I had a latency issue is when I tried syncing *more* than 2 BR's together. With just a Master and Slave, it worked just fine. I tested it by playing the same demo song on both machines while they were synced. There was a *very* slight delay, which could be heard as light flanging/phasing, but nothing that would stop it being usable, and nothing like the difference you are describing. Maybe you could try using a different Digital cable, if you have one? Also try switching the Master and Slave over and see if that makes any difference? Failing that, take a look at the "Sync Offset" setting in the Utility/Sync menu. I haven't tried it when syncing 2 synced machines, but you may be able to use it to compensate for any delay. Hope that helps - let me know how you go!

[@scottymarr9793]

⁠@@masteringtoolkitThanks. I’ve tried another cable and swapping slave and master with no success. However I’ve established that the issue only occurs when trying to use the inbuilt drum machine on the slave - the audio tracks are ok and so is the drum machine on the master, so that gives me a work around. It’s still a bit odd that both drum machines don’t sync exactly with each other so I may try looking at the Sync Offset as you suggest, but at least I have a way forward for now. Thanks for your help.

[@masteringtoolkit]

@scottymarr9793 I dont think I used the drum machine on the Slave when I had them synced, so i didnt come across this quirk. That gives you two other options to use then: - just use the drum machine on the Master. All audio should be routed through to the Slave anyway, so you can monitor from there or - bounce the drums down to an audio track.

[@hsjmusic]

wish I had the demo songs back on my BR1600

[@thouston0]

Outstanding video!

[@masteringtoolkit]

Cheers Tony 👍

[@Fezzler61]

Tony! Mr. Blues. I learned how to use my BR-600 from your videos and some of my BR-800 too! Thank you! Are you still recording DAWless these days? Do you have or are you considering getting a BR-1600?

[@thouston0]

@@Fezzler61 I have a BR1600, I was one of the first to have one due to my brother working at Roland in L.A. I just never got around to doing a video on it because my band was consistently playing. I still record using the BR-800, as well as the BR-1600. I do transfer the stem tracks to my PC and use Reaper, for adding drums and mastering plug-ins.

[@yarli_elnene80]

Gran vídeo ❤ una pregunta cuando se conecta un instrumento o un microfono y los botones de entrada parpadean en rojo es normal o estarian saturando la senal del audio es decir deben de ensenderce o no es normal y ls otra consulta seria que si en el marcador del master el (0) se inica saturación o el 4 estaria corecto me refiero a los niveles que aparecen del 44 al 0

[@masteringtoolkit]

It is normal (and desirable) for the input peak light to come on. This represents an input signal of -6dB, so you want it to flash "occasionally" while you record your track. If this is the case, then it is not overloading the signal. As for the scale on the faders, the mark in the centre of the darkened area is "unity" and is the point at which the signal is neither cut or boosted. The scale on the faders is non linear, so it's ideal to aim to have the faders at, or close to this location as it allows the finest control of the volume in this area. To make sure you don't clip using the faders, you need to check the level on screen and make sure that it doesn't reach the very top, which would indicate clipping. Aim to have the peak level fall just below.

[@Fezzler61]

Does anyone know if the BR-1600 is more advanced than, let's say, the Roland VS-1880 or VS-1824? I would think it is because it comes with the effects where the VS series needs to have add-in boards (expensive) to get the effects built into the BR-series. I ask because I am curious and thinking about picking up a used VS-1880 or VS-1824 that works if I can get one affordably, just for fun. But, if the VS-series is less advanced than the BR-series, I don't need more stuff. The VS recorders, specifically the VS-2000CD, that can use an external monitor look interesting.

[@darn8352]

I have a rolling vs 880 ex and I'm trying to see if these two devices can sync together

[@masteringtoolkit]

It should work fine as the VS 880 is able to sync with a MIDI MTC signal for syncronisation.

[@darrendaj]

I have the boss 1180 and the cd stopped working. Should I still keep it and record with it??

[@masteringtoolkit]

If everything else is working well, there is no reason you cant keep using it. It has a Digital Out (Optical) which you can use to get your tracks/songs off the machine in lieu of the CD drive. You can also use the Line Outs like I explain in the video, but this will only be an analog transfer. You may also be able to find a replacement CD drive (or another donor BR1180) and you can swap it out too if you want, which is a very simple job.

[@darrendaj]

@masteringtoolkit never thought of that I tried to remove the hard drive and download the data but if course it's proprietary and can't be used

[@mitchsullo]

BR1600 and midi fader next please.

[@masteringtoolkit]

Hey Mitch - Currently working on a video covering the inbuilt drums. I'll add MIDI fader to the list, Cheers!