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

[Doctor Varney]

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!

Not really, LOL. And, thanks - though maybe not everyone may see it that way.

I don't want to labour the point as I said what I wanted to say at the time. Especially since I'm making a fresh start and putting my angry PC assumptions aside for the benefit of the doubt. As for 'giving advice' I suppose I can at least tell people to avoid things I've done in the past. I've learned you can't just throw a PC together and hope it works. I think it's important to sit down and plan it carefully and know what you're doing first. Which is all I was trying to say back there.

I'm in a much better mood last few days. You know how moods go... people get moody, shit happens.

 

[Doctor Varney]

Is the formal version of "shitty" "faecesy"?

Close... Technically, the word is "facetious". I suppose you could bastardize it to: "faecetious" to give it some added 'texture'.

 

[Doctor Varney]

So, the installer app for my DAW is crashing before it can even install itself. It's a common enough problem and not just peculiar to my computer, yet the precise fix is moot, even among the developers. Meanwhile, the little 'portastudio' is up and running at the flick of a switch - and ready to rock. So I guess that's an excellent case for hardware recorders. Every home (studio) should have one, in my opinion. I've learned my lesson well: I'll NEVER trust a computer again to record without some kind of back-up plan. NEVER.

 

[CoolCat]

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

I liked the 2" tape machine story..

Sure they all have the pro's and con's.

I was kind of venting and trying to be humorous. But I have a list of crashes on the pc, and not all related to my low level of software and dll, and file skills.

I've had several standalones and moved into pc's.... but if something better comes along, I would have no remorse dropping this and trying a new technology.

The pc unlimited tracking and ease of editing and cost for a huge selection of virtual rack gear and etc..etc.. is why I sold the standalones.

You kind of hit the nail on the head though about learning the tool, the pc. Optimizing and backing up data, and organizing the files, updating drivers, etc..etc.. is the lesson I havent found too easy to do, therefore not as much fun as plucking on the guitar or creating a bass line.

The best standalone I had was a 2488 Tascam(similar to the neo) they made it extremely easy to record and it sounds good. But the editing screen thing was a weak point. It also had a hardrive so upkeep and maintenance was required on it too. (with a bunch of CDR's, cumbersome)

So yeah, I kind of hope there will be a DAW online, on some site that I can record too and the site will take care of all the stuff, kind of like SOUNDCLICK or SOUNDCLOUD, but having the DAW available too. Something like that might be cool..let someone else deal with all the hardware and drivers.

 

[Ethan Winer]

there's something pretty fundamentally wrong with a practically new computer that is crashing so frequently.

Agreed 100 percent. If the computer was crashing before the audio software and sound card drivers were installed, that's a clue to return it and buy another brand or model. If it was stable until the software and drivers were installed, it's probably not the computer itself or the OS.

--Ethan

 

[Ethan Winer]

let someone else deal with all the hardware and drivers.

Yes, that's why I mentioned buying a computer from a specialty shop. It costs more than a stock Dell or Asus etc, but it saves you hours / weeks / months / years of learning about system tweaks and troubleshooting. I happen to like the geeky stuff! But a lot of people don't, and that's fine.

--Ethan

 

[Doctor Varney]

So yeah, I kind of hope there will be a DAW online, on some site that I can record too and the site will take care of all the stuff, kind of like SOUNDCLICK or SOUNDCLOUD, but having the DAW available too. Something like that might be cool..let someone else deal with all the hardware and drivers.

I kind of hate that idea. On first blush, I find it a frightening prospect. Mainly because I'm old and am used to owning things, exclusively. Though, perhaps as time moves on, I might adjust to "Having my head in the clouds..."

 

[Bobbsy]

I kind of hate that idea. On first blush, I find it a frightening prospect. Mainly because I'm old and am used to owning things, exclusively. Though, perhaps as time moves on, I might adjust to "Having my head in the clouds..."

I think your instincts are good, for the next few years at least.

Just to put the idea in perspective, USB2 has an effective data transfer rate of around 280Mbps--and some people claim that's not fast enough for the stuff they want to do (though it handles 16 tracks at 24bit/44.1 with ease). However, right now my internet connection to the exchange is around 4Mbps. I'm on a waiting list for a fibre optic service when it's available (they're installing it in my city but my neighbourhood will be one of the later ones to get it) and even this will only provide 100Mbps. Worse still, this is only the link to the hub...net congestion between me and the DAW server would be an unknown quantity.

Second, though, putting your DAW on the net wouldn't save you any hassling with drivers etc. since you'd have to have an interface at your end to convert your audio to data that can be fed to the cloud!

...so I think we'll be working locally for a while even if we can archive stuff to the cloud for storage.

 

[Doctor Varney]

A friend of mine who works in top level IT predicts that someday, computers will be sold without hard drives. That you will just purchase a connective 'dumb terminal'. These Google/ Chrome/ netbook things appear to be the beginning. By then, I suppose the sky will be chock full of satellites and the the corporations and government will be able to scan your face through the obligatory built in cam while you're having a wank, to determine if you're doing something illegal. Your only defence will be to 'Stay British' and keep a stiff upper lip.

 

[Bobbsy]

Your friend may be right but it's going to take one heck of an improvement to the network infrastructure before things like multi track recording will be possible in real time.

 

[Chili]

A friend of mine who works in top level IT predicts that someday, computers will be sold without hard drives. That you will just purchase a connective 'dumb terminal'.

That's actually how computers started out. One main computer and many dumb terminals. But back then, all the data stayed on the premises, not in some cloud across the internet.

 

[Chili]

I think your instincts are good, for the next few years at least.

Just to put the idea in perspective, USB2 has an effective data transfer rate of around 280Mbps--and some people claim that's not fast enough for the stuff they want to do (though it handles 16 tracks at 24bit/44.1 with ease). However, right now my internet connection to the exchange is around 4Mbps. I'm on a waiting list for a fibre optic service when it's available (they're installing it in my city but my neighbourhood will be one of the later ones to get it) and even this will only provide 100Mbps. Worse still, this is only the link to the hub...net congestion between me and the DAW server would be an unknown quantity.

Second, though, putting your DAW on the net wouldn't save you any hassling with drivers etc. since you'd have to have an interface at your end to convert your audio to data that can be fed to the cloud!

...so I think we'll be working locally for a while even if we can archive stuff to the cloud for storage.

Actually, I don't see the hurdle being in the data transmission, but rather in the processing efforts on the server side. If you think about it, you would really be uploading only one or two tracks at a time when recording, and streaming just one stereo track when you're mixing. I'm sure an online mixing site would use some kind of compression until you're ready to render a final mix. So, data transfer wouldn't be a big obstacle.

The problem would be all the processing would have to be done on the servers. All the track summations, plug-ins, editing, and whatevers would have to be done on the server. Imagine if 1000 people were trying to mix their projects at the same time. And what if some wanted to use virtual instruments. Lots of cpu horsepower would be needed.

 

[Lt. Bob]

just as soon as some big server has a major crash and a million people lose their precious photos and data forever you'll see folks understand why for anything important you want your own personal copies.
It's the same reason you want important papers in a safe deposit box and a second set in your possession.

 

[Doctor Varney]

Your friend may be right but it's going to take one heck of an improvement to the network infrastructure before things like multi track recording will be possible in real time.

Yes, well, imagine what Charles Babbage would have made of today's average PC/ Notebook!

Processing speed, random access memory and the amount of data made available to the average homestead has increased exponentially (?) At a fast rate, anyway. Apparently, there has to be a slow-down point as the next material is developed, that won't burn up like a match. Once new ways of making circuits even smaller are achieved, and lasers are used to transmit energy and data at the speed of light, it will pick up again.

It's been said that the sheer rate of computer development makes bending space to facilitate space and time travel a labour-intensive waste of time and energy. Potentially, a mini Universe could eventually be created inside a vast network of supercomputers for us to explore, virtually, without ever needing to leave the planet. In this scenario, the future has ramifications for our past and present, since it implies that there is merely a one in so-many-million chance that your entire life's experience is NOT just a piece of software, developed for research and entertainment purposes. Which means this conversation we're having right now, could be just part of a future history lesson.... and Stonehenge was put here to bring in American tourists...

Sorry to cut this conversation short, but a flying saucer has just landed in my back yard and a naked person with a very large head is tapping on the window...

 

[Ethan Winer]

just as soon as some big server has a major crash and a million people lose their precious photos and data forever you'll see folks understand why for anything important you want your own personal copies.

I agree, though "in theory" large server banks are supposed to be backed up properly. But I'm not willing to risk my entire lifetime of stuff based on someone else's backup practices. I have seven (!) backup drives, and two are off-site with friends.

--Ethan

 

[Lt. Bob]

I agree, though "in theory" large server banks are supposed to be backed up properly. But I'm not willing to risk my entire lifetime of stuff based on someone else's backup practices. I have seven (!) backup drives, and two are off-site with friends.

--Ethan

I completely agree. My motto is "better safe than sorry".

A similar example is when I play a gig at the same place 2 nights in a row they'll always tell me "Oh just leave your stuff here " ....... I don't.
Because if something DID happen they'd say, "Oh gee ..... that's never happened before" ...... but it'd be my loss that I'd have to pay for.
I don't trust ANYone else to protect things that are only important to me.

 

[nsureit]

I'll "one-up" ya on the old school side of things. About six months ago, I scored a ten year old FOSTEX PD-4M DAT machine off eBay, new-in-box! It had never been used. I checked the hours on the heads when I got it, and it had been tested in factory only.

I use it to record our band of grumpy old men and women at our one or two gigs each month. I have some very nice studio quality microphones that I use to mic the room. There's only three analogue inputs on the FOSTEX, so I have to be creative in their placement. I then upload the audio (slowly in real time) to my super sophisticated laptop and do whatever tweaking I can ( a little EQ, a little comp here and there using SONAR X2). I then convert the tunes to MP3s and publish on our band's private website for our own amusement and giggles.

The only downside to room recording is that I'm at the mercy of the sound guy. Sometimes he mixes the room poorly, applies too much reverb to some channels, let's some channels run too hot, etc. I got no control over that.

Why do I use an old tape machine? Because it's fun, and sounds cool. No other reason, really. Just a fun hobby.

Here's a rough mix I did using the FOSTEX. It's crude and muddy, but we got a kick out of it.

http://www.soundclick.com/player/single_player.cfm?songid=12069676&q=hi&newref=1

 

[phil fridge]

Well i'm with you on non computer recording....i started years ago on a TEAC 144 portastudio, then an Fostex A80 reel to reel, then Fostex D90 hard disk......i then got a studio in a box, a Korg D16XD, absolutely brilliant...then i tried computer recording, in the shape of a Cubase system, absolutely hated it....aside from the fact PC'S crash, if you are using a mixing desk with pots, pans, faders etc i dont have to muck around with a mouse and stare at a pc screen and all that add on software stuff!!
I think in years to come stand alone recorders and mixing desks will become like the valve is to guitar amplification and vinyl is to music reproduction, it works best for musicians! Now i may not be so young but my mates sons are in their teens and very much into recording and i can tell you even though they are using pro tools with a mac they hanker after analogue gear.
I ditched the cubase and interface and bought a Fostex 2424VL and a new mixing desk , i wont be trying pc's again.
Its a shame the only portasudio out there with 24/32 tracks seem to be the DP Tascams , which are thwart with problems but i think you will find that Korg may be keeping some new ideas along these lines under wraps.

 

[dobro.732]

Okay; it's all been said and agreed: pc's offer more possibillities in editing, tracks etc. opposed to portable dig. recorders.
Portable recorders though have one major advantage: THEY ARE PORTABLE!!! . Want some real drums added to your recorded song?
Pick up your easy to carry recorder, some mikes and go to wherever the drums are, or the hefty Hammond B3 guy etc.etc.
Something like bringing the Mountain to Moses or vice versa.
Eventually export the in situ recorded and other tracks by fi. ADAT to your PC (fi Cubase) and edit, add some more tracks and so on.
It also gives you a back-up of the portable to your pc in the process!
So my set up is: I record on portable, add stuff elsewhere, export to pc by means of an ADAT soundcard, add more PC tracks if desired in Cubase, mix and edit. Only issue is: ADAT exports with 8 tracks at a time. So: to synchronize the 16 or 24 tracks from the portable, add pulses or record a clapper or whatever to (fi.)track 1, 9 and 17 of the portable. So you can (visually) lay them in synch on the timeline of Cubase or other program.
Grtz, Cas

 

[acousticvillage]

I spent a good few years with my AKAI DPS 16 - 256 virtual tracks, built in FX and as intuitive as you can get from hardware Hard disk recorder. I still use it for mobile recording, getting ideas down with friends, working on ideas when the mood takes me....easy to transfer the audio to a PC via SPDIF. However, once I got a decent PC and Cakewalk Sonar I haven't looked back. There is just no comparison.

You CAN make great recordings from a hardware unit...of course you can. But I think today you can make these recordings easier and in a shorter period of time. But I will never give up my AKAI...still perfect after 12 years and great for on the road.