Why record with a computer when there are all-in-one portastudios?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mbrusko
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good point, Bobbsy. I can't disagree with that. It's a preference. Though, I have to say, for instance when my brother in law got the Mac, he tells me he found by comparison, Windows just felt 'clunky'. He was hoping to keep the old PC for the kids to play on. They weren't having any of it. Soon as his back was turned, the little buggers jumped straight on the Mac! They just found it more appealing and I think kids have an instinct for these things.

As for the sig... Yeah, well... I suppose it keeps some people satisfied. :D
 
Last edited:
There was so much messiness in this thread that I really don't know where to start, but I do want to say a few things... In no particular order here...

-Some of these standalones are definitely not simple or straightforward... My old boss one had a terrible workflow to it.... Cubase SX3 is so much easier and way more straight forward...

-Windows does not need to be more complex or clunky than a mac... I get rid of all extra features in windows... My start menu has Reason, SX3, Nero, Photoshop, Disc cleanup, my interface software, and NOTHING more... The icons on the desktop are the same... My folders and harddrives are so organized a stranger could find what they wanted... My Ubuntu software is more cumbersome than my XP or 7 is....

-Using sx3 is super simple...

-As mentioned above the plugin options and overall flexibility are fantastic, but it goes farther than this... Using FL studio, cubase, reason, and other softwares Rewired together create an integrated system that would be hard to parallell in a hardware world... Each has a different workflow and method of creating... Would you like to create from loops, or from a piano roll, a sequencer, from midi, audio recording, etc, etc... And with a computer (mac or pc) you have more options in this reguard... Even today vinyl djs will use software integrations just for this purpose adding software like reason, maschine, FL, and more... They may use hardware sequencers for some things, but there are so many options available.. SO definitely flexibility goes to the computer...

-You don't have to have a seperate recording computer, but it is a plus if you can do that... It will be more reliable long term... Again, mentioned above, the computer doesn't have to be hard to set up or have issues.. My main recording computer is from 2003 or so and has been amazingly reliable.... I set it up once and have never had an issue with anything... Do your research... Know what works and what doesn't... You don't have to be an expert... Once you find a setup that works, leave it that way... I'm still using the drivers from way back then.... I ran it with two gigs of ram untill two weeks ago... I admit that I don't usually have more than ten or so tracks in a project, however, it can be done!
 
Bobbsy said:
Of course there's a half way house--or at least there used to be. A standalone multitrack recorder like the old Alesis HD24 hooked to a mixer was a very good...and very reliable...way to record stuff. It also provided for direct transfer to a computer for the mixing and editing stage which can be where a computer DAW can really shine.

Alas, that sort of solution has gone out of fashion but, to my mind, was an excellent compromise.
Click to expand...

That's exactly where I am with it, at the moment - that excellent compromise/ halfway house. I simply can't risk computer (Windows) failure while recording - but I can't quite imagine mixing to the same high standard and with the same ease as I can using FL Studio on Windows. But, as long as my precious WAV recordings are safely recorded to SD and backed up on my external HD, then Windows can crash as much as it likes during the editing process; I'll get the job done, one way or another. It just must NOT happen while I am trying to record.
 
Hello all...

Coming from a slightly different angle, I do both.

For my band's current project I used a Zoom R16 in our practice space to capture six tracks of drums, the bass, and a guitar scratch track all in one go, and additional passes for the majority of final guitars and all the vocals. Then I took it home and dumped all the audio to my computer where I used the R16 as a control surface and audio interface for my DAW, basically using it mostly as a mic pre for a few guitar overdubs that had to be redone.

I have found this to be the way I am most comfortable and get the best results. Although I have mixed a few lower track count things in the R16 itself, I like the flexibility and power of the DAW for a full band, such as increased choice of plugins and the number of channels limited only by the computer's computing ability, etc.

-Jet
 
A computer gives you a full monitor view for when you record yourself. Versus trying to view a 3" LCD at 6' or more.
 
Shadow_7 said:
A computer gives you a full monitor view for when you record yourself. Versus trying to view a 3" LCD at 6' or more.
Click to expand...

And what, exactly, would you be looking at, on this "full monitor view", while you're recording yourself? Personally, I'm looking down at my script.
 
Regarding your question, I have used both. I favored the Akai DSP 24 for years as a stand alone unit because of its power and ease of use. It had everything I needed including 100mm faders. I started using ProTools, recording on a stand alone Yamaha unit and uploading the files for editing. I found the stand alone, although very portable, insufficient to give me the connection to ProTools I needed. I had to upload the files to CueBase and then convert them and import them into ProTools. That soured me on stand alone units altogether since I knew I could never be sure if they would give me the uplink I needed. I now have a super computer running an i7 Sandy Bridge with tons of ram and storage for animation. My laptop is my recording computer. It's an ASUS i7 Sandy Bridge. I run through an M-Audio converter and do all my video and audio on it with Adobe Audition. I'm happy with the setup, I can even take it with me and do video editing while having a coffee. Here's the bottom line. Use what you have until it is no longer sufficient. You would be surprised at what great files end up being done on budget equipment. Working as you are you learn everything you need to know if you want to step up. Computers can be upgreaded and often have a lot more flexibility. That' the benefit of them. Otherwise, the music is what's really important. Good luck,
Rod Norman

mbrusko said:
As a total newbie to home recording (been at it about three years) I gotta admit I'm baffled at how many more people do this with computers than with standalone portastudios like the 2488neo that I'm learning on.

It can't be a money thing. A Mac alone costs two or three times what my neo cost.

It can't be flexibility, either. In addition to a library of fully editable onboard fx, the neo (and, I assume, similar machines) can accommodate as many outboard rack units as you want to daisy chain together.

Sound quality doesn't seem to be an issue, either way.

So, what's the attraction, DAW users?

FYI I'm not asking for an argument. I truly am curious. I have the money to spend on more toys, and I have the passion to stay at this and hopefully someday get as good at it as the many HR.com folks who've lent me their opinions on posted MP3s.

But before I get too much further in, I want to be sure I'm not missing some glaringly obvious reason why I should abandon the neo.

Oh ... and if this subject has been beaten to death in a past string, just let me know and I'll go there.
Click to expand...
 
The computer/DAW unlocks the full capacity of midi and automation, esp. if you have an all hardware synth-based studio as I do. Now, I am pretty new to this great universe of recording too, as a post-military career more-than-hobby. I missed a few decades of incredible instruments and so what I have is very 'new to me' and call me old school, but I prefer hardware. However, when the computer and DAW can record say two tracks with one audio and other midi, then I can go back into that track via midi and add modulation, tweak this and that OR even keep the midi track and drop a whole different programmed sound from my hardware synth into that track, even stretch, without killing pitch--pretty cool stuff and the more you learn the more you realize how much more there is to learn!
I do have a Zoom R24 that I have used creatively with it's sampling/pad capacity, although there's no midi, it's still an extension of the creative process but could never imagine trying to do a tenth of what have learned thus far via a small screen. Being a synth guy, am quite familiar with some smaller screens but that's also why I prefer heavily knob-adorned quality synths rather than menu-diving. The R24 now mainly has found its use in using onboard mics and bring-in wav samples of field recordings to experiment with.
The computer DAW is primarily for me a sequencer/recorder, as to be honest have a kick arse hardware synth set-up and am not so much into virtual instruments except Izotope IRIS, a vst or stand alone sampler/synth that for $200. usd this thing can do WAY more than the CMI Fairlight of the 1980's that cost within twenty grand then.
The computer is a tool and very much a platform for instruments as what strings are to the guitar. Probably have spent a few years doing searches on this very forum and some specific to some of my synths to glean so much and now have a separate dedicated computer build for DAW and it actually allows so much freedom for unhampered creativity and like anything, takes repetition and practice to get settings, routings, et al, but what's most important is that you remember it's not like the computer is going to take the place of practice and talent. For instance, I certainly am not a drummer but certainly have rhythm and to set-up whatever beats or if am using synths to program drums, I have to learn to listen/hear/play like a drummer and that goes for any other vst or say a pretty accurate sounding viola shimmering pads sound, to program that modulation of the bows striking strings....and I can go into that track with audio and a 'midi sister track' after the fact in computer and place that emphasis.

Now, if our Sun and Earth changed to where electricity was not possible to transmit any longer, we would have acoustic pianos, guitars, and a shotgun to keep looters from wanting to use them for firewood...right? On that note, I may use a computer for recording and hardware synths, there still is nothing like the feeling of setting and playing an acoustic piano with not a wire to be found near me:-)
 
Why record with a computer when there are all-in-one portastudios?

As my new one month old, pc freezes up again this morning, and I reboot for the 12th time, and XBOX live doesnt like REAL Player anymore, and WIndows Media Player fights internally for being the primary audio engine but LINE6 cant seem to work with any of them now all of a sudden, or maybe it was the WINDOWS 8 update that screwed everything up (again) by moving files around and not fully ensuring all the other software programs that will freeze up later after a sloppy WINDOWS !!!! UPDATE!!!! required is flashed over and over, or the firewall or free Norton AntiVirus temp software that keeps asking me for money on every page I go to......or maybe its a USB failure that wont allow the Music to play now when it did just last night, and this morning can't play one song with out the CPU freezing.....causing me to spend about 2-3 hrs rebooting and reloading software drivers...again..trying to get this old thing working.....just to play a song or two...

I dont know the answer to this question either.

The easier concept, does seem more pleasurable at times, to stick a CD into a CD player and press play.
 
Will the real Dr. Varney please step forward...?
 
Last edited:
I use a Roland Boss BR 1600. I tried using a computer and it just wasn't for me. I wonder how many here actually record more than one track at a time, I don't. In essence the 1600 is overkill but I got it for a song. No pun intended. I use the computer for my final leveling edit when compiling a CD from Wav files I've exported to the computer using Mixcraft 6. And yes, exporting wav files to my PC is a slow process, but, no big deal. Quality? Four of my songs have been picked up by a publisher. I've been invited to submit up to 12 more to another publisher and I have four songs that will be in a low budget movie produced in LA. All products of the BR 1600. I just feel more comfortable with the stand alone. Besides, I like to turn knobs. BTW: In five years I've replaced the HD in the Roland.
 
CoolCat said:
As my new one month old, pc freezes up again this morning, and I reboot for the 12th time, and ...
Click to expand...

Please don't take this the wrong way. I just want to address the logic of the argument that computers are more complex to set up than standalone recorders. Yes, they are! But that shouldn't be an argument against using computers. I see it as an argument for learning more about computers. In the old days before computers we used expensive multi-track recorders with 2-inch tape. If the recorder's brakes failed so tape spilled all over the floor every time you hit Stop, you'd either learn how to repair the machine or hire someone to fix it for you. Today there are companies that will set up computers to behave properly with audio and video software, for people who don't want to be bothered learning how to do that.

--Ethan
 
Roland 2480 Workstation

In 2003 when I decided to upgrade from my two ADAT-XT's I faced the choice of going with a computer set-up for a stand alone workstation. At that time I opted for the Roland 2480 as computers tended to have noisy fans and crashed more often that sonething designed from the ground up for recording. I bought all the optional FX cards and software that was available as well as some handy outboard interfaces like a DVD buner, etc. It has served me well all these years.

However, my recording system is now stuck in 10 year old technology. Compared to the analog tape recording that I was reared on, the 2480 is a dream. But compared to what one can do now in a computer with it's intense editing capabilites, unlimited track counts, and ability to add new plug-ins as they're developed, if I had a fire and lost everything, I'd go with a computer-based system today. The computer allows one to start small and to add on to it and upgrade as one can afford it.

With my 2480 my niche is emerging artists and budget projects. I often record projects where I do the tracking in my sizable room at economical rates and export the tracks so my clients can mix & master in a world-class room if they so desire.

PS - The 2480 only has 8 mic inputs. When a whole band comes into play and record "live", I can easily record 16 tracks at a time by hooking up my Mackie CR-1604 for extra inputs and take the direct outs into my 2480 line-in's.
 
Ethan Winer said:
Please don't take this the wrong way. I just want to address the logic of the argument that computers are more complex to set up than standalone recorders. Yes, they are! But that shouldn't be an argument against using computers. I see it as an argument for learning more about computers. In the old days before computers we used expensive multi-track recorders with 2-inch tape. If the recorder's brakes failed so tape spilled all over the floor every time you hit Stop, you'd either learn how to repair the machine or hire someone to fix it for you. Today there are companies that will set up computers to behave properly with audio and video software, for people who don't want to be bothered learning how to do that.

--Ethan
Click to expand...

Agree entirely...but would like to add that there's something pretty fundamentally wrong with a practically new computer that is crashing so frequently. I was an "early adopter" and have had computers since the days of DOS and been using a computer for sound since Cool Edit 96--I don't know how many computers I've used but, apart from one instance with a nasty virus early on, have never had problems as severe as that recent poster detailed.

My latest upgrade for my DAW laptop was about six months ago and, frankly, the computer worked fine for audio straight out of the box. Even so, I did all the usual tweaks (and deleted some unnecessary stuff) to optimise it but I certainly never had any issues of the severity some seem to.

(As an aside, I wonder how many computer issues happen on shared machines, particularly those also used by teenagers who download anything and everything without thinking?)
 
Well, I have a sense of humour and recognise my faults, etc. It's when people get shitty and things turn into a pile up that I see red. For all my peculiarities, I think that's pretty 'normal'. :)
 
Doctor Varney said:
Well, I have a sense of humour and recognise my faults, etc. It's when people get shitty and things turn into a pile up that I see red. For all my peculiarities, I think that's pretty 'normal'. :)
Click to expand...

No need to go 'red' man. You are a big part of this community.

Some find humor as a way to vent. No offense; but some things just become funny after a while...

'Shitty' may just be a perspective. Take 'shit' for what it is worth.

Did I just go Grim here? lol!
 
Bobbsy said:
Is the formal version of "shitty" "faecesy"?
Click to expand...

**THAT is funny!!!**

Thought to share that my early experiences learning to use DAW were rather "Grim", and admittedly was very much inexperienced with using pc for recording but not new to computers at all. I Firstly purchased an audio interface that came with a version of pro tools, had nothing but problems and did not help that Avid's support basically was "we cannot give you support unless you have an officially supported computer platform", EEEK! Now, even when I did have a pc tower built specifically for DAW those problems persisted but thanks to this forum, finding other people that just did not like the way pro tools demanded one way to do things, I obtained Reaper and loved it, paid the non-commercial license, purchased an instructional dvd for Reaper and not a hick-up from my pc and nice thing about Reaper is it allows you to make Reaper work in a way that's intuitive to the user!
There's still speed bumps every now and then and now that am looking to upgrade to better audio interface, this forum yet again has helped with deeper knowledge of actual user problems with particular interfaces, of which has saved me from making perhaps a dire purchase. Computers have brought professionals and newbies together in communities that otherwise would only learn these things in past if doing an internship, not unlike apprenticeships of days past. There's still mistakes but that's how we learn and of course there's always those 'happy mistakes' when it comes to music and creativity:-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top