Software recording – or a digital "portastudio"?

Per Berner · Post by **Per Berner** » 1 Jul 2005 11:49 pm

I need some recording advice.

Last year I got rid of my old 6-track hi-speed cassette recording system, and I need something new. But which way is the best?

A. A self-contained 16–24 track hard drive + CDR unit, like Roland/Boss/Tascam/Korg etc,

or

B. A software-based system of similar abilities and a laptop Mac.

I need to replace my imac anyway, and I like the idea of a big screen for editing; the ability to add plug-ins also points in the software direction.

But I also like the idea of a physical machine to work with as opposed to the virtual variety, and I have a hunch that these stand-alone units would be less likely to crash.

Roland has a 20-track recorder to which a VGA screen can be connected, maybe that would be the perfect compromise?

Those of you who have tried both ways, what are the pros and cons? (apart from cost issues)

--------------------
´75 Emmons p/p D10 8+4, '96 Emmons Legrande II D10 8+5, ´74 Sho-Bud Pro III Custom SD10 4+5, Peavey Nashville 1000

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 2 Jul 2005 5:46 am

CON..PC based

Your PC and Recording world both live in the same domain..

PRO-Workstation

You can walk away from your recording project and leave everything intact...

PRO-PC based
Great quality software and gadgets. You can upgrade daily based on your credit card limit

CON-Workstation.
You got what you got..upgrades are not really a reality

PRO- Workstation
Cheap, portable, excellent results

Con PC Based
not portable

I'm a workstation guy...I like separate worlds

t

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 2 Jul 2005 6:34 am

Per; I vote for the laptop PC approach. As time passes, what was hardware becomes software ... software does not require a change of housing (in most cases) to be updated/improved.

In my system, a voltage follower is used to unload the pickup(s) and provide line driving capability. From there the signal goes to either a "recording interface" and the sound card, or direct to the sound card. The software takes over from there and can be a virtual preamp, virtual effects, recording, sequencing, tuner, and wireless (bluetooth in this case) to the amps/boards.

One of these days I will add a voltage controlled amp circuit to get the VP out of the direct signal chain.

As has been shown in the last decade, software will increase, physical boxes will decrease.

I believe in this enough that I have installed it on the BEAST.

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 2 Jul 2005 6:49 am

I have a Fostex VF160 hard drive recorder. The learning curve on it was almost nil. It works good and it's portable (I've done some live on the job recording). I then mixdown to the PC via S/PDIF digital interface and then "master" on the PC.

I also have Cakewalk Home Studio and even with my PC knowledge I have no idea how to manipulate anything. The learning curve is steep on this. More robust packages such as Sonar or ProTools I suspect is even worse. You will also need an interface unit for the PC, as the standard "stereo" line in or mono mic is not adequate and requires a higher level signal than a regular mic or a musical instrument level.

The PC would be more versitile, once the learning curve is overcome and the needed external interface hardware is purchased. Ultimately the PC based system would be more $$$.

Dan Tyack · Post by **Dan Tyack** » 2 Jul 2005 7:05 am

I've owned both, and the pc (or mac) is definitely the way to go. The portable things are convenient, but if you are going to be doing any sort of editing they are a pain to use. I ended up transfering the files to the PC anyway. Recording to the laptop is great. You can get an outstanding portable interface for a laptop for $5-800, depending on how many mike preamps you want. I recommend the motu and presonus units. I've got a MOTU traveler, and my entire live recording rig fits in a laptop bag.

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 2 Jul 2005 8:35 am

I'm with Dan all the way on this one. I use Sonar on a PC and recommend you dedicate a machine to recording. The Sonar website has a bunch of tips for eliminating unnecessary Windows junk to optimize the performance of your machine, whether it be a laptop or desktop. As Dan says, there are several multichannel audio interfaces on the market and MOTU makes some of the best and most powerful. Most of what I do is one or two tracks at a time, so that is only a critical component for me when I need to record a whole band or drumset onto separate trax -- not often for me.

In any case, I too am among those who swore by dedicated workstations for years and switched to software, never to look back.

vive le Plug-In.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

Michael Whitley · Post by **Michael Whitley** » 2 Jul 2005 11:29 am

It looks like the vote so far is for PC-based, and I haven't tried this yet. (Anyone try a Linux-based system?) I have had a smaller Roland in the past, and I'm currently using a Yamaha AW2816. I've been very pleased with the products of both of these companies - very reliable, good sound, good onboard effects (especially the Roland), and fairly easy to use (I mean, considering what's there). In either case, Per, I hope you enjoy the transition to digital recording as much as I have.

Marty Pollard · Post by **Marty Pollard** » 2 Jul 2005 11:45 am

I dunno guys; I've given up on using my PC because the playback/monitor latency is too great, drives me crazy, and makes it impossible to do good multi-tracking. And it's a pretty powerful computer.

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 2 Jul 2005 11:52 am

Don't most of the portable units let you use your PC and big monitor?

Jerry Gleason · Post by **Jerry Gleason** » 2 Jul 2005 12:59 pm

Latency should never be an issue as long as you're monitoring the input signal before it gets to the computer.

Since you're used to using a mac, it seems like a no-brainer to get a powerbook and a good interface, if your budget allows for it. New macs come with GarageBand, which does multi-tracking audio and is easy to use. You can always upgrade later to something more full-featured, like Digital Performer, Logic Audio, or Pro Tools, if you need to.

I second the recommendation for MOTU interfaces, and I also love MOTU's Digital Performer software, which is only available for Macs. In fact, MOTU's interfaces come with Audiodesk, which is Digital Performer without the MIDI features, but all of the audio features.

As for mac laptops, you could do this on an iBook, but stepping up to a PowerBook gives you the ability to connect a large monitor for an extended desktop. An iBook only mirrors the built-in display on an external monitor. I would recommend a model with the Superdrive that can burn DVD's, since many projects will be too large to store on a CD, but will archive nicely on a data DVD.

I'd also recommend an external firewire hard drive (7200 rpm) for audio if you are working with several tracks.

Per Berner · Post by **Per Berner** » 3 Jul 2005 12:24 am

Thanks for the response, guys! As I suspected, both alternatives have strong points and drawbacks... Maybe I should do both: record on an easy-to-use workstation, and import the files to my Mac for powerful editing...
--------------------
´75 Emmons p/p D10 8+4, '96 Emmons Legrande II D10 8+5, ´74 Sho-Bud Pro III Custom SD10 4+5, Peavey Nashville 1000

Alan Kirk · Post by **Alan Kirk** » 3 Jul 2005 8:51 am

PC-based systems sometimes have problems with fan noise and monitor hum.

I switched from PC to DAW. Happy now.

------------------

Dan Tyack · Post by **Dan Tyack** » 3 Jul 2005 9:13 am

Per said

Maybe I should do both: record on an easy-to-use workstation, and import the files to my Mac for powerful editing..

You can do this, and there are some advantages, but it's a lot more expensive than the laptop only route, because you are going to still need to buy an interface for your laptop. Also, the file transfer can be a pain, unless your portable recorder has an interface so that its' hard drive can be seen directly from your laptop. Otherwise you need to do the transfer using ADAT real time (meaning it will take 2 hours to transfer 2 hours worth of recording). I didn't think this would be a big deal, but in practice it added a day or two (or a week) in the time differencial between doing a live recording and having a rough mix. If you record to the laptop, you can have a rough mix that night.

I've also got to say that many of these workstations aren't particularly easy to use. I couldn't have done anything with mine without a manual. I'd bet that the Garage Band software is a lot more intuitive (especially for a Mac user). Apple does a great job in designing software for power users.

------------------
www.tyack.com

[This message was edited by Dan Tyack on 03 July 2005 at 10:13 AM.]

Don Benoit · Post by **Don Benoit** » 25 Oct 2005 7:34 pm

I'm using Sonar 4 with the Omni I/O interface with the Delta 66 card which can record 4 stereo channels at a time. and also mix 8 more channels for a total of 16 channels. I'm getting up to speed on the workings of Sonar 4. Lots of effects included with the program. Would like to know from other Sonar users what effects they use mostly to record the steel.

------------------
http://www.steelguitar.ca

Scott Appleton · Post by **Scott Appleton** » 26 Oct 2005 6:24 am

Get one of those Mac cube units and a firewire interface .. depends on how many channels you need. That way you can go portable or on the desktop w/o a lot of difficulty. its nice to have a dedicated unit without any other software or virus
problems to corrupt your recording software.
I love the Power Core system for effects
I personaly use a Yamaha 01V digital mixer with
a ADAT XT recorder for mobile recording and then
come home and download it to my Mac G5 with
Emajic Logic and mix down to Peak .. great results.
good luck

------------------
Mullen S12 Almost Mooney
71 Tele, Regal 45
Sho Bud S10 NP
Line 6 Flextone 3 + JBL D130, Acoustic 165 100 W all tube EV 12, Nash 112, digitech 2101 FX

Will Holtz · Post by **Will Holtz** » 26 Oct 2005 1:43 pm

I've used Korg and Fostex stand alone recording units. I've never liked working with them. I greatly prefer a computer based system. The interfaces are so much better, you have more flexibility in adding plug-ins, and I find the learn curve to be easier on the computer based systems.

The only draw back of computer based systems for me is that you have to deal with fan noise. But with a little thought and careful setup this can be avoided.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 26 Oct 2005 9:38 pm

Nothing I could do on a workstation would be impossible on a Mac laptop
and a Motu or Presonus interface.
Or the super Metric Halo interface. http://www.mhlabs.com/metric_halo/

Add Metric Holos Channelstrip plug-in
and a Lexicon or TC reverb plug-in,
and your gonna have a portable workstation sized setup,
but with the full flexability of a software based hardware independent production system.

Add a decent tube preamp and your all set.

Jim Peters · Post by **Jim Peters** » 27 Oct 2005 5:30 am

I use N-track software.($100) I have a Delta 10-10 lite, 8 in, 2 of which are xlr.($200)I bought an inexpensive 8 channel preamp with phantom power($90). I can record 8 audio tracks at once,unlimited total tracks, and I use vst plugins that are freeware, some are great,some not. My PC is homebuilt, an AMD 1.3 Duron with 512 ram,(not state of the art). It works great, no latency, no crashing, around $400 plus the PC. Here's a sample: http://www.swirlband.com/songs.html