Jg42 Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 Hi!!! Goin' to build a small project studio... Need an advice - should I build it around a PC (like buyin' some kind of integrated software (like Cubase VST) and usin' it for audio recording, MIDI sequencing, sampling, virtual instruments and stuff) - or like in the good old days - like buyin' a couple of synths,decent sampler, mixin' board, external FX and so on and Usin' a PC just for plain MIDI?... Which way delivers better sound and which one is more convenient??? I mean - It seems to me that all that integrated VST & DirectX stuff is much more time consumin'... http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/confused.gif So, I'd like to hear what stuff do U use and what about the good and bad sides of it? Thanks in advance... Cheers, Arseny This message has been edited by arsenius@hotmail.com on 03-05-2001 at 11:44 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Ventura Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 The bottom line is that computer-dependant setups (where the computer does most of recording, sequencing, sampling and tone generating) are way too prone to problems arising from a number of reasons, and it takes A LONG TIME to setup in the first place, and it will never be totally stable because everytime you add or remove something within the configuration some conflict will come up. On the other hand, a computer setup will cost you considerably less than an hardware one. On the other hand again, an hardware one can be resold second-hand piece by piece when you get bored with it, whereas software and computer hardware become pretty much dead meat within a year or so from their release, as specifications in the industry continue to rise. Probably a lightweight computer setup is best. My suggestion is not to invest too much on the software and computer side. Max Ventura, Italy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bryce Posted March 6, 2001 Share Posted March 6, 2001 The bottom line is that computer-dependant setups (where the computer does most of recording, sequencing, sampling and tone generating) are way too prone to problems arising from a number of reasons, and it takes A LONG TIME to setup in the first place, and it will never be totally stable because everytime you add or remove something within the configuration some conflict will come up. Here is a responsible opposing viewpoint: http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif I have been using a computer for sequencing for years, starting with my Atari 1040, then on to the Mac SE 30 with Performer 2.41. I currently use a G4 with Digital Performer 2.72. I no longer use my ADATs, except as converters, or to transfer old tapes into the computer. I no longer use a hardware synth to do organ, as Native Instruments B4 (MSRP - $199!) wipes the floor up with any other organ emulation that I've ever heard. I am using my hardware effects processors less and less (although I am still somewhat partial to my PCM 90)- somehow I find the idea of having an emulation of a $35,000 compressor in my computer (Bomb Factory Fairchild 760 plug-in - MSRP $199!)to be...attractive. I have a MoogerFooger Low Pass filter, but I also use the DP MoogerFooger-type plug-in that comes free with DP, because it's was effortless to sync the LFO to the tempo of the tune, and it sounds pretty great as well (go to my MP3 site, and listen to Smoker's Blues - it's what makes the Rhodes sound the way it does). The vast majority of this stuff installed effortlessly, and has never given me any problems at all. I have a problem with buying hardware products that are spec'd out with antique microprocessors that are already obsolete when the product is brand new. I have a BIG problem with non-compatibility of hardware devices with newer products. On the other hand, I am delighted to receive new free updates of DP here and there, and I am extremely happy to know that I will not have to change platforms again - just upgrade my computer every few years. Since I began recording, I have gone from 1/4" 4-track tape to 1/4" 8-track tape to 1/2" 16-track to 1" 16-track to ADAT - each time having to throw my old tapes away, and take a loss on the machine when I sold it. Never again. I cannot understand how the average person is considering buying hardware samplers or hardware based HD recorders when it is pretty much guaranteed that they will be obsolete within a relatively short period of time, when going with the computer pretty much assures you that this will not happen. Computers used to be too slow - not any more. Data storage on computers used to be too slow, and too expensive - not any more. Many programs used to be a bit tougher to install, and there were not a lot of resources to help end-users with problems - not any more. One other point - you already own the computer. The opinions expressed herein are strictly my own - your mileage may vary. dB ==> David Bryce Music • Funky Young Monks <== Professional Affiliations: Royer Labs • Music Player Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jg42 Posted March 8, 2001 Author Share Posted March 8, 2001 Wow... Thanks...!!! This was very helpful, but I seem not to see the whole picture... Ok - here are some more questions: Are there any audio interfaces on the market (we're talking PC now) that allow me to use not only internal audio tracks, but external audio sources as well - like samplers, FX and stuff like that... I mean - is it possible to use PC+hardware combination instead of mixing board+HDR combination? And what about that latency issue? Do I need to buy a 1000MHZ PentiumIII to get rid of it? For example I want to be able to run Cubase VST (Say 15-16 tracks with a couple of VST instruments and 5-6 FX) AND NAtive INstruments REAKTOR - What kind of PC do I need? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/eek.gif I also read about that GIGASAMPLER Software - do I need to buy a separate PC for it - or it can peacefully co-exist with Cubase, Reaktor and other stuff? P.S.David, I was on Your mp3.com music page and sent U a letter from there... I loved Your stuff!! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/cool.gif ------------------ http://www.mp3.com/arseny This message has been edited by arsenius@hotmail.com on 03-08-2001 at 12:03 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Denike Posted March 8, 2001 Share Posted March 8, 2001 Originally posted by arsenius@hotmail.com: Are there any audio interfaces on the market that allow me to use not only internal audio tracks, but external audio sources as well - And what about that latency issue? Do I need to buy a 1000MHZ PentiumIII to get rid of it? For example I want to be able to run Cubase VST (Say 15-16 tracks with a couple of VST instruments and 5-6 FX) AND NAtive INstruments REAKTOR - What kind of PC do I need? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/eek.gif I also read about that GIGASAMPLER Software - do I need to buy a separate PC for it - or it can peacefully co-exist with Cubase, Reaktor and other stuff? [/b] Dear Arsenius; Using outboard gear, like samplers or Adats, isn't so much contingent on the hardware interface - although you will often need some kind of sync/ wordclock/ mtc connection on your destination and source machines . . . the 'software' connections are far more important . . . I'm coming at this from a completely different angle from the other guys because I used computers first, and am now looking into getting a couple of synths for our home studio this summer (by the way, David, Tusker, and others have been great at making sure I don't jump off on every latest bandwagon - not that I'm going to send you guys the money I save!). I love Cubase, mostly because of the powerful sequencing - after I've recorded most of a project, the software allows you to write in extra parts in a variety of ways with the numerous (or numinous?) MIDI editors - usually, I write actual black and white notes in the SCORE edit, and then have the sequencer play back those tracks along with the recorded ones . . . excellent facility there. One feature of Cubase that will get you going is that it is designed as a remote controller for external gear - you can use the play / record / transport controls and mixing desk to automate your samplers and, it appears, ADATs . . . at least, it was contrived to sync your external MDM hardware together . . . If you're using GIGASAMPLER, don't run it on the same computer - I know that Steinberg (the makers of CUBASE) have released their own version of GIGA called 'Halcion' (conjures up images of CIA, doesn't it?) but am unsure of the specs on that - don't even know if it's vaporware . . . anyways, GIGASAMPLER needs its own computer - and, if you're using its onboard effects suite, plenty of RAM, too . . . they also recommenct those 10,000 RPM (very fast) hard drives that only run in SCSI right now . . . all of that adds up ($). As far as speed of computer for recording, the mHz won't dictate latency - that's based on how the drivers interact with the host program (Windows 2000 or NT is better than Windows ME or 98, for PCs - read Craig Anderton's 'most hated ad campaign' thread about Bill Gates bragging that Windows NT is 13 times more stable than windows 98, but never mentioning that on the adverts for Windows 98) Most Audio Card drivers, by the way, allow you to completely eliminate latency during recording by offering 'duplex' routing - many of them also allow you to use FX on the monitor sends . . . and then the program itself (i.e. Cubase) will delay the recorded channels by the exact amount of latency so the new tracks are recorded in sync with the old tracks . . . although MIDI is a different story, again depending on your device drivers and routing (if you're hard core MIDI, don't use USB interfaces - yet) you can have dramatic variations in latency between audio tracks and midi tracks. Running on my wife's 466 mHz no-name Celeron, Cubase with M-Audio Delta can have less than a 7 ms latency - provided I've set the buffer size to correspond to what I'm doing at that time . . . the enemy of track setup is rarely computers, but laziness in how you set it up. The speed of your computer does, however, dictate how many audio tracks you can record and playback simultaneously - again, though, recording software can be set up under OPTIONS and PREFERENCES to match your recording style and the number of tracks you feel you need to record/hear . . . furthermore, a new Pentium IV with that expensive RAM won't do you any good because none of the software companies have written programs for that 'new breed' of processor ,. . . I hope I have helped, if somebody else posts information, listen to them and ignore me . . . as I said, I'm not a keyboard person yet . . . don't know the secret 'synthesizer code of honour', nor have I been inducted into the 'Minimoog' cult . . . yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Denike Posted March 8, 2001 Share Posted March 8, 2001 I'm all ears... This message has been edited by Steven Denike on 03-14-2001 at 02:19 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Ventura Posted March 9, 2001 Share Posted March 9, 2001 Ok, that one got the LONGEST POST GOLD AWARD of all times. Max Ventura, Italy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve44 Posted March 11, 2001 Share Posted March 11, 2001 The way I see it, the only problem with the all-in-one computer thing is that you may want to use the computer for more than just music. This is bad. My Dell is pretty unstable right now because of all the $hit I've installed on it. You have to keep the music stuff separate if you want to have good stability (and if you want to use your time well & not spend all your time on the net or in games). The Macs make this easy by letting you have various different sets of extensions, sort of like having multiple registries on the PC. Anyhow, all-in-one for music is great, but all-in-one for music and the rest of your life is too much and will impede on your productivity. And Mr. Denike, please leave the manual info to emails and PDF files, not buletin posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthfoolsynthfool.com Posted March 12, 2001 Share Posted March 12, 2001 There's a modular synthesis handshake???? Seems to me that I'm not a complete modular synth tech without knowing this. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif One thing regarding studios- please don't overlook or underestimate the cost and usefulness of quality patchbays, wiring, AC, etc. All too often I see people that have budgeted money for gear and then either wholly overlooked the wiring aspect or underestimated the costs or complexity regarding such wiring. You may not immediately realize it, but one fully normalled 96 point patchbay with separate grounds and whatever connectors at the other end (EDAC/ELCO or separate jacks) has over 1000 individual pieces of heatshrink tubing alone. Consider how many measuring, stripping, soldering and labeling operations there are too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bryce Posted March 13, 2001 Share Posted March 13, 2001 please leave the manual info to emails and PDF files, not buletin posts. Agreed. Although I certainly appreciate the effort to suppply the info, I'd prefer if you would just put a link to a site rather than pasting the text. Thanks, dB ==> David Bryce Music • Funky Young Monks <== Professional Affiliations: Royer Labs • Music Player Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.