Limitations of GarageBand?

i've just started digital recording (switched from analog after 5+ years) and have found garageband to be pretty okay. i dont use digital effects or vst's so i don't see a problem with it. it beats audacity that's for sure. yet, i have the option of working in adobe audition as should i make that jump now before i get too comfortable in gband?

i just hear a lot of people bad-mouthing gband - is it because it is being sold at the lower-end of the consumer market therefore is not to be taken seriously?
 
wanted to add: i almost got into working with cubase about a year or so ago when i gripped a zoom h4n but the registration process was such a fiasco it really turned me off of that software before i even had it up and running. bad customer service experience on my end.

the limitations i have found on garageband, however, is that because it's an entry-level DAW it's hard to find answers to more difficult questions when every google search yields things like "how to i record my new guitar on my new laptop?" or "how do i be a band?" and inane things like that.
 
I personally think GarageBand is very limiting because the effect/inserts and what not don't allow you to change things like Pre-delay on reverb and just things that make the ultimate customization on the software very small and to a minimum so that noobies can adjust effects and what not without getting too confused.

Example: The reverb for GarageBand is just one nob. Whereas in Cubase/Protools/ect your able to adjust the reverb time, predelay, mix, room size, ect.

It's more for people that are just starting out and don't really wanna get in confused by all the little customization that come with inserts/mastering and the mixing process in general.
 
^ that's the main picture that i'm getting. i really don't care. my experience w/ analog has led me to severely distrust digital audio chicanery and, for my own purposes, i get better reverb out of the pedals that i use and own that i can out of even say lexicon reverb. not because it's any better or worse but because i've worked with my pedal and spend lots of time dialing in tones/sounds that i enjoy and work to my benefit.

i know waaay too many dudes that spend 1 hour recording an actual instrument and then 1 year monkeying around with the sound in a DAW. i can't stress enough how important it is to know the sound you want and dial it in as much as you can BEFORE you hit the record button, especially when working digitally.

that said - i thought gband had a master track reverb slider as well as an effect module that can be tinkered with (pre-delay, decay, warmth). pretty sure it does and is NOT just a one-button off/on thing. that would be ridiculous.

if this is truly the argument with DAW snobs - and it kind of sounds like it is - it would be like discrediting construction paper and crayons just because children use them and create a lot of bad work. big deal.
 
Garageband is fun for dicking around with when I'm in a position where I'm forced to use a Mac.

I guess it works for simpler things, but it's too simple even for me, and I'm somewhat of a beginner.
 
Dude if you're going to promote your own album, at least be smart enough to post enough posts to get a link happening...
 
Same limitations as any other free program: the nut behind the keyboard.

:D

Check out Reaper. Yes it runs on Mac, too (in fact I went from PC Reaper user to Mac Reaper user....)
 
The Gorillaz created The Fall on an iPad.

If you are going to use your own FX and Amp and what ever else, I'd be more concerned with using a good microphone than whether GB can do what you want it to do.

You use GB to record your track, you can export it into whatever DAW you want after that if you can't do what you want to do in GB.

As for the 44.1k issue someone brought up, 44.1k/16 bit is standard for music. You can record higher than that, but eventually, if you want to hand out CDs to your friends, all your music will be 44.1/16.

Don't worry about what the software can and can't do. Worry about what you can and can't do.
 
Don't worry about what the software can and can't do. Worry about what you can and can't do.

I have to agree. I'm sure I could drop some serious dough and get far more complicated and "cooler" software than GB, but to be honest I can do just about everything I want to do recording-wise in GB.

I am using a Duet2 into a macbook with GB and it works nicely. I can make clean sounding demos and backing tracks.

I also use a third party midi bridge program to allow me to control some garagband transport control features via a midi footswitch which has been a great addition.

My effects are mostly from my pedal board though I have bought a handful of third party au plugs and a couple of drum sequencer aps.

The simplicity is sometimes a benefit too: too many options can be a distraction from just playing and seeing what you can produce given a certain set of limitations and features.

Yes you aren't gonna earn any "street cred" if you tell people you use GB, but then I have $600 Eventide pedals sharing space on my pedalboard with a $50 Zoom multi-effect, so in the end find and use what works for you...
 
Fixed sample rate of 44.1kHz

i've recently discovered this limitation. had to bump my digital recorder down to match it knowing i'll import everything into GB sooner or later.

interesting that this thread got bumped recently. i'm still working with garageband but am thinking of making a move to ableton. my digital work is nothing more than track layering, crossfades and volume adjustment. maybe a little compression here and there and a touch of echo. garageband and audacity are fine for that but i've heard ableton is more intuitive when working with loops and layers plus everyone dumps on garageband so much
 
GarageBand does exactly what I need it to do - record music. I can add some simple reverb, EQ, whatever. That's all I need to do. I've used higher end DAWs at other studios (mostly Logic, which is pretty awesome) but I use GarageBand at home. It's simple and easy to use and I don't have to spend so much time playing around with stuff that I don't need. Besides, no one that's ever heard my music has ever been able to tell the difference between what was recorded on GarageBand and what was recorded on another DAW at someone else's place. The thing that matters most is preference and what you need it for (and what kind of mics and other gear you have). Why should I spend a ton of money for software that I don't need? Just my opinion I guess.
 
GarageBand is as good as the user. It is (on a technical level) simple compared to Sonar, Logic, Pro Tools etc... But that doesn't mean it's not a capable little program. I suggest that if you like it (the sound as well as the interface) that you use it until you out-grow it. I still use Acid Pro to make a lot of my music. I know how to use it, I've got it set up exactly how I need so that I don't have to "think", I can just create. It doesn't have some of the latest bells and whistles of some of the newer programs, but when your riding in you car listening to your song, no one gives a shit what program you used as long as the song is good and sounds good. Despite it's low price, and despite the haters, you can get some good sounds out of GarageBand (some of those built in synths are really fun). Just have fun with it, and if you find it no longer meets your needs, look elsewhere - like Acid (I wish Sony never bought Sonic Foundry - big money bastards...)
 
i've recently discovered this limitation. had to bump my digital recorder down to match it knowing i'll import everything into GB sooner or later.

interesting that this thread got bumped recently. i'm still working with garageband but am thinking of making a move to ableton. my digital work is nothing more than track layering, crossfades and volume adjustment. maybe a little compression here and there and a touch of echo. garageband and audacity are fine for that but i've heard ableton is more intuitive when working with loops and layers plus everyone dumps on garageband so much

Ableton isn't intuitive to all users. It has more features, sure, but you then have to learn to those features. If you just want to make music instead of learning software, GarageBand is more than enough.

Don't get caught up in all the DAW wars. People have been recording single track demos forever. Even with 4 tracks and 8 tracks, it's so much easier to hook up a single microphone and press record. Using creative amp placement and with a large enough room, you can use a single mic to record a band. Who cares if your friend laughs at you for using GarageBand? You do, that's all. But when your friend hears your creations (assuming you work hard to perfect your craft), he won't be laughing.
 
Haha, it's funny because everyone does laugh at me for using GarageBand, but I don't care. The thing that matters most is creativity. And then, of course, your mics and preamps etc. I prefer GarageBand over other DAWs because it does exactly what I need it do do. I don't need all of the fancy stuff in higher-end software. I've used Logic and Cubase and things like that and I would still prefer GarageBand.
 
Back
Top