a lot of questions... any help would be appreciated.

  • Thread starter Thread starter saruin
  • Start date Start date
S

saruin

New member
hi.

here's my situation.

i've got about $1000~$1500 to spend, and am thinking of making a cakewalk sonar based recording system.

so far, i'm thinking of getting the m-audio omni studio w/ delta 66 soundcard, and the steinberg wave lab. and since hardware based synth/sound modules seem to be quite expensive to me, i'm thinking towards getting software synth's instead...

so i guess i will either
1. get nothing (meaning no hard/soft synth) and try to use beta-wdm drivers and dxi provided by sonar, or
2. spend some more money and get a gigasampler.

and these are my questions.

1. if i get a gigasampler (thinking about gigasampler 64) now, would it be worth the money? i mean, would it be significantly better compared to dxi even after wdm drivers get non-beta?

2. to use a gigasampler, all i need is a gsif compatible audio card? would i need anything else than that? also, how much difference will different models of gigasamplers (se, 64, 96, 160) actually make sound quality-wise? which forum can i check to learn more about gigasamplers?

and finally...

3. if i use either dxi or gigasampler w/ a soundcard that does not provide any sound of its own, would i still be able to use these soft synth sound when i do things other than sonar (such as watching a video clip, playing computer games, etc.) ?

sorry there're too many questions. if you can give me any advice on any of these questions i got, it would be greatly appreciated.

thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Don't Do It!!!

Why, on earth, would you want to have a DAW recording system?... because digital is the "in" thing?

For $1000-$1500, you'll just be scratching the surface of digital recording, DAW, and the like, but $1000-$1500 buys a HELLUVA LOT of [used] ANALOG recording gear, that's hour per hour, pound for pound, more fun and less headaches than digital recording or DAW.

You know, I'm an analog fanatic, analog collector, and home recording hobbyist, and that's just my 2c worth.

Thanx. Good luck with whatever you choose. Recording is just plain fun.
 
thx for your reply reel person.

in fact, i kinda like the idea of analog recording. it surely does sound more interesting than digital.
but the only problem is that i need some kind of sampler because i'm far off from having enough instruments. no piano, no sitar, no cello, no orchestra, no drums......

i just need some (decent) sound generating thing.

would that be possible with analog method, too?
 
Sure, no problem. I'm not speaking as Recording's Authority, or anything,...

and understand, there are at least a thousand different ways to cut a record.

I do prefer analog, yes, it's much easier and simple, has a lot less pitfalls than with digital, still does a respectable job, and your dollar goes a LOT further when you consider analog systems.

Sure, you could record sampled/synthesizer sounds with analog recording gear. People have done it for years. They still make standalone synthesizers, keyboards, modules & whatnot, don't they?

What you want to do is feasible, with an analog recording system, and also some fancy synths. I have a pretty lengthy background in recorders and home recording, but I'm all fully instrumented, and not the person to ask about synthesizers.

There's all sorts of gear out there, to be found, gotten and used, that will satisfy your needs, and/or help you meet your goals, analog and digital alike. People basically fall into camps, on the Analog vs Digital thing, and granted, by new equipment standards, analog is dead [except for the cassette Portastudio], and the only NEW gear you can get is digital.

I never used to promote used gear, and I've always preferred to get NEW equipment, but sadly, with the state of modern recording today, the Analog is basically a used-gear market. Now, I still recommend people try to find near-mint, low usage analog recording, and forget digital. Digital's so trendy and gimmicky, and it's really not for me. I do MUCH better on my analog recorders. I have enough computers at work, and chatting on this bbs.

Then again, you have your other members who swear by digital, and think I've just missed the boat. You know, go figure, but to each their own.
 
i think i'm just gonna get a sound blaster card and use sound fonts...

my reasons are,
1. it's probably cheaper that way than getting a sound module, or a sampler, or a gigasampler, or whatever else out there.
2. i already have a upgraded computer, a keyboard (w/o synth), and cakewalk sonar. going analog at this time (=having to get some kind of sound generating machine) might cost me more than just getting one soundcard (and maybe a mic preamp. i'm not sure)...
3. i have yet to figure out how serious i am with this whole recording thing. for now, i guess it'd be better for me to spend as little as possible than getting mediocre stuff and regret later.

in your opinion, am i being reasonable enough?

if i do get a sound blaster and use sound fonts, do you think it would work well with sonar? (the idea of not having wdm drivers kinda bugs me a bit... will creative lab develop wdm drivers?)
also, would i need a mic preamp for micing? if i would, is Behringer Ultragain PRO MIC2200 a good choice for that?

thanks in advance.
time to check out the soundcards forum...
 
Sure, I understand. I have a computer, too.

Recording on DAW [digital audio workstation] software, onto your computer hard disc, is very, very, very popular, and you'll find that most modern studios and most 'modern' home recording enthusiasts are recording on DAW.

DAW features and functionality make it very, very popular.

Join the crowd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top