All I got is a red guitar, three chords . . and 3,000 dollars.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Squashboy
  • Start date Start date
squashboy,

The Gina has no MIDI interface and no MIDI synthesizer. If you want these features, you need an additional card. If you have outboard MIDI synths, you just need a MIDI interface.

If all you are going to need is to play audio data (tracks you record, digital audio loops, etc.), the Gina will suffice.

Oh, one more thing -- if you want to play audio CDs from the computer's CD-ROM or CD-R drive, I'm not sure if the Gina card has a connection for the audio cable from the drive... if not, there's another use for an additional card.

By the way, I have a M Audio Delta 66 and a SB Live.

-AlChuck
 
squashboy, If you do decide to go with an overclocked celeron 566 (to 850) with the Abit BE6II motherboard, check out www.sunshinestar.com. I've built a few computers and used them a couple times. Their stuff is guarnteed and, more importantly, they have good customer service. This should save you a couple bucks and relieve you of the headache of having to figure out how to overclock on your own (if you were even lucky enough to get a chip that did). This setup would all be running on a 100mhz bus, so you wouldn't necessarily need 133mhz memory...of course it would save you the headache of having to upgrade in the future if you chose to do so.

Also check out anandtech.com and go to the forums. Tons of information there, but more importantly a Hot Deals forum where you can really find out how to get the best deal on stuff you may need...for your computer that is.

Also you can check out brassfield.net and click on Dealz Connection. There is a ton of links to price comparison sites, forums, deal sites, etc. Alright, probably more information than you actually needed, but what the HEdoublehockeystick, aye :).

Now if I only knew something about music.
 
(With reservation for not knowing American price levels).

Actually, I'd take a whole different approach to the whole shebang.

If you are new to this, what you IMHO need is not whats in your list at all. Having a megabang computer with HD recording and stuff will give you loads of options and a great sound, but you need loads of processor stuff and, all HD recording sequencers I have used are a PAIN. Using Cubase is a constant BATTLE against the will of the program. That type of setup is for semi-pros, I'd say.

No, instead, get an eight-track of some kind. Digital, analog, whatever, and a mixer to go. No way you need more than $1500 on that, probably not more than $1000. If you wanna get off cheaply, then an old Analogue Fostex 8-track with a mixer should do the trick. I bought my 8-track for $400, and have a 16 channel boss mixer that probably only would go for $2-300.

Cliff K (another newbie) got his Fostex AND an 8-4-2 mixer for $300...

Then you have somewhere betwenn $1500 and $2500 go to put on other stuff. I'd advice you to put down around $200-$300 on a good condenser mic, and you will probably need a $100-$200 preamp for that too. I got a deal on an Oktava condenser and a tube preamp for $300, which is really cheap.

Also you need a compressor, a delay and a reverb. Probably a good stereo multi-effect box can give you this. Those come in ALL proce ranges, you'd probably spend $500-$1000. Some of the digital portas have reverb and stuff built in, which lets you off cheaper.

Thats what I would recomend.
Computers are just loads of hassles (trust me, I'm a computer engineer) and unless you want to build a semi-professional studio and maybe make your own CD's from scratch, I wouldn't bother.
 
I don't mean to come down hard on you regebro or even say that you're wrong. I'm just presenting my view on the subject.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Actually, I'd take a whole different approach to the whole shebang.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's of course up to you. However...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Having a megabang computer with HD recording and stuff will give you loads of options and a great sound, but you need loads of processor stuff and, all HD recording sequencers I have used are a PAIN.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

(One of) The good thing about computer recording is that you don't need a bunch of processor stuff. Simply download a new reverb or fuzzyvoicer or whatever and play around.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Using Cubase is a constant BATTLE against the will of the program. That type of setup is for semi-pros, I'd say.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then use a simpler program. Try n-Track. It really rocks and is really easy to use. Also, don't we all want to be semi-pros

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>No, instead, get an eight-track of some kind. Digital, analog, whatever, and a mixer to go.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do that and you're stuck with eight tracks (which may or may not be sufficient) and if you go analogue, welcome to maintenance and tape cost.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>No way you need more than $1500 on that, probably not more than $1000.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That may be true if you buy used or at RadioShag.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>If you wanna get off cheaply, then an old Analogue Fostex 8-track with a mixer should do the trick.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sure it would but the maintenance etc.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I'd advice you to put down around $200-$300 on a good condenser mic, and you will probably need a $100-$200 preamp for that too. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

$200-300 will get you a condenor mic but not a good one. Unless you're really lucky and can buy one from someone who think it's broken because his mixer doesn't have phantom power.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I got a deal on an Oktava condenser and a tube preamp for $300, which is really cheap.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll admit that it's was probably a good deal. What Oktava was it?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Also you need a compressor, a delay and a reverb. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, here we go with the rack fillers. They do cost if you want them to sound good.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Probably a good stereo multi-effect box can give you this. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the quality?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Thats what I would recomend.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And you're fully entitled to do so.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Computers are just loads of hassles (trust me, I'm a computer engineer<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Computers are like girlfriends - you have to treat the nice to get the best out tof them. Trust me, I'm in the business of both.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>and unless you want to build a semi-professional studio and maybe make your own CD's from scratch, I wouldn't bother<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But isn't that what we all want to do?

I think analogue can be easier to use if you know the stuff already but as a beginner, I think the DAW rout is the way to go.

Just my lenghty two cents

/Ola




[This message has been edited by ola (edited 06-29-2000).]
 
Yes, you can "download" a reverb. It usually costs money though, just like a hardware one, AND it uses up your processor power. THATS what I mean with that you need a lot of processor power. If you are going to do 16 tracks with filters and reverbs and stuff on your computer, you need a heckuva computer.

Yes, we all WANT to be semi-pros, or even pros. But the fact is that if you are a newbie, you aint a semi-pro. You can spend $100.000 on a studio of you want, but it will still sound like shit of you are new to recording. I'm sure you know how to get a lot of good sounds out of a semi-pro studio, but a newbie won't know that. It takes YEARS of hobby time practise to learn that. And by that time all your fancy computer equipment will be outdated anyway.

On the other hand, if you DO know what you are doing you can get some really good stuff done on crappy equimpent. I've made loads of good sounding recordings on a (second hand) Yamaha MT2X four track casette recorder.

And honestly, with $3000 to spend, you aint gonna get semi-professional quality anyway, because you STILL need to put down $1-2000 on microphones to reach that quality.

With the type of music that was described in the original post, which was mainly acoustic, the microphones are extremely important. Instead of putting all that money into fancy computer systems and stuff, put them down into good quality microphones and effects. It's worth it.

And I don't understand this affection to new equipment. I've bought most of my stuff second hand, and never had a problem. The only thing that was bought new in my whole recording set up was my BOSS compressor I bought 15 years ago, my BDX compressor (5 years ago) and a Behringer Ultramizer I bought four days ago. Everything else was second hand. And everything works without a glitch.

( B t w, It was an Oktava MK-319, and an ART Tube MP. Made my guitars crisper and my song more transparent.)
 
just a few added bonuses...

with a computer you can file your tax return , print labels and jewel cases for your cd's , surf the web , balance your checkbook , look at porn , meet women , build websites for your music , create graphics for your site , keep in touch with out of state friends , find old friends , gain incredible knowledge from sites like these , and did i mention look at porn?

ive been into homerecording for almost a year.. i came here knowing nothing , and now a year later i succesfully built a dual processor system complete with raid storage and the works.. to say that you have to be around for years and years to graduate to your own daw is nonsense.. i have never in my life touched an analog 4 track..

i agree , i dont like cubase..i use vegas pro and its much easier to use..

you dont have to be a computer geek to build a computer.. its sorta like hitech legos.. you follow the directions and in the end , you get what you want.. the hardest part is installing the O/S .. everything in a computer is interchangeable parts.. everything conforms to the same standards being pci , isa , agp , ide , or dimm .. its not exactly rocket science..

- eddie -
 
Okay, I’m back on this side of the planet now. Tired, jet-lagged, but ready to get some recording gear. Regebro, do understand your suggestions, and I have considered that more than once. It seems like a good way to go because it would sure be a lot easier to figure out and use. It might even cost less. But I do need a new computer anyway, so it seems like if I’m going to fork out money for a computer I might as well get a good one, and let it do my recording for me. Also, even though I don’t have any equipment, I’m not exactly new to recording. I’ve recorded three albums in local studios, so I have a pretty good idea of what goes on in the recording process. (This confidence may disappear as soon as my first computer problem shows up, ha ha)

As for soundcards, I am glad that I was living in China and was in a position where I could only research the information without running out and buying something. Recently, I’ve been looking less at the echo cards, and I’m looking seriously at the Digi 001 with Pro Tools LE for PC. It seems intuitive, relatively inexpensive, and like it could do whatever I wanted it to. It seems like it wouldn’t be too difficult to figure out. It would also make upgrading rather easy. There are also several other studios near where I live that use Pro Tools, in case I wanted to collaborate. My only hesitation with the Digi 001 is that it has only been on the PC version for a little while, but browsing Digi’s forum, I have decided that if you are using the right set up it can really work. Some people didn’t have the right PC, and they’re having problems with Digi 001, but I’m building my own, so I should be able to get it running smoothly.

And, looking at our bank account, it seems like 3,500 is not entirely out of the question now. So I’m heading to the local music store to take a look at demos. I’m sure I’ll check back in for more advice. Later,

Squashboy.
 
Eddie, I'm just saying that you get at least as much bang for the buck with NOT using computers AND it's easier to use. Also, everybody has been busy talking about what type HD to use, when the IMPORTANT part of getting a good sound is the input chain, i e microphones, preamps and compressors.

It does seem like prices for decent sound cards have dropped also, so the difference seem to be $1-200 less than I thought, but even if you DO need a computer anyway, you'll need a much heftier and more expensive computer too.

But hey, maybe I'm being silly. Maybe I'm just so bloody tired of working with computers all day that I don't think it's fun anymore. Maybe non computer geeks actually think it's fun having to fix all the problems.

I've been trying to do HD recording for a year or so, hoping to get better quality than my 4-track. The hassle never was worth it, and I just ended up recording less songs. In the meanwhile, the prices of 8-tracks, both digital and analog, has dropped immensly, so now I got an eight track, and are back on track (pun intended) doing what I should do: Recording.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by regebro:
Yes, you can "download" a reverb. It usually costs money though, just like a hardware one, AND it uses up your processor power. THATS what I mean with that you need a lot of processor power. If you are going to do 16 tracks with filters and reverbs and stuff on your computer, you need a heckuva computer. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um, I don't mean to be picky (well actually, I love it) but as you're shouting, you wrote "processor stuff" so it was kind of open misunderstanding, right?

If you want to do 16 tracks with effects, yes you need a heckuva computer. We were discussing the specs for one... It's far from within reach.

Even if you have to pay for the SW effect, it will be cheaper to fill the "rack" with quality effect if you take the computer route.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Yada yada bout equipment not being everything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True of course but it's easier to get good results with good equpiment, not necessarily expensive or complicated. Yes, you can achive works of wonder on simple equipment but as a newbie, it's easier if you have good equpment. As an example, I always thoght that it was the extra years of practice that made my friend able to play the guitar withot buzzing and unintentional blue notes. Then I tried his guitar and that beast was almost playing by itself. I ended up buying it and everyon that tries it comments on how easy it is to play. BTW, I'm a semi-pro guitar player and I would never have gained the self confidence with my old guitar.

Conclusion: Good equipment is more helpful for beginners than for pros.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"mic is important."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Take that really expensive mic and plug it into a cheap recorder and voila - a cheap sounding recording. Not really money well spent.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"second hand works just as well"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're born under a lucky star. Congratz.

/Ola
 
Well, I thought this discussion really needed another viewpoint. I was right.

It seems like a lot of people get really upset because I'm saying that the path they have chosen may not be the right one for everybody else, and that it probably isn't right for people new to recording. Not much I can do about that.

At least Squahboy sais he has considered this option, which is good. I was worried he hadn't. If you are convinced this is the way to go for you, do it.

I've made my point, and if you can't accept it, too bad for you. At least maybe some people reading it thinks things over.
 
What's the matter regebro? Did I step on a sore testicle?

All I have done is countering your arguments with arguments. If you cannot accept that, then that's your problem. I'm sorry but "My opinion is rigth, end of discussion" just doesn't cut it.

I think that you think that the mixer/rack/recorder approach is easier because you started out on that and now have to re-learn and re-think. Right? That's always the worst. Doing the same thing with new tools that you're not used to. Sure, both have their pros and cons. Latency is not computer recording's best feature but saving the seetings is pretty handy.

I still think that the computer route is easier for beginners as the editing and "undo" possibilities are better. As long as you don't come up with argumets that hold up to a simple counter-argument, I will continue to be of that opinion.

Yes, you made your point - you're a quitter. I cannot accept when you throw up a bunch of arguments and when people counters them and presents their view you act like a Ricky Lake freak and goes "Talk to the hand".

/Ola
 
If somebody got their sore spot tampered with it's Ola, obviously. I'm not the one being upset and claiming that what the other one sais is "yada yada" and calling people "quitters".

I made my point, and I countered your counter arguments when I think you were wrong. I have absolutely no idea why you are so upset, just because I happen not to agree with you.


[This message has been edited by regebro (edited 07-01-2000).]
 
Ola, everybody knows that boxes are easier to get going and record with than computers. You take them out of the packaging, plug them in and push 'record'.

Everybody also knows that computers have more versatility, flexibility and potential for expansion and variation. And more hassles.

So why you wanna take Regegro apart? Poor baby.
 
Regebro - First off, I appologise for the "yada yada" bit. I really meant "snipped stuff"/"words that you can read above" and not "irrelevant". I realise that the wording was very poorly chosen and I cincerly appologise for it.

However...

Me caling you a quitter was due to you writing "I made my point and if you can't accept it, too bad for you". That's like writing "I'm right, end of discusison". I do not accept your point/opinion just because you claim something. I respect your opinion and will gladly discuss it by exchanging arguments, leading to a conclusion even if it is that we disagree. I still don't feel that you have countered any of my arguments, just re-stated your opinion.

I honestly do not beleive that the "box" route is easier for beginners. When I compare my computer "studio" and a friend's "box" studio (yes the quotes are supposed to be placed thus), I think that my setup is easier to use. He is constantly fiddling and re-patching while I feel that all I need is a couple of mouse-clicks away. Maybe his equipment is exeptionally difficult to use and maybe it's because my job involves figuring out the functionality of poorly desiged SW on a daily basis but I could not have gotten my first song laid down as fast on his gear as I did on my computer. I simply took the computer I had, downloaded a trial copy of n-Track, plugged a mic/pream into the chep sound card that I had and recorded. After an evening, I had an entire song (poorly) performed and mixed. There's no way that I could have done the same on my friend's equipment.

The box versus computer route seems to be in the same league as Mac vs. PC and analogue vs. digital. Try sorting them out without name-calling.

Friends?

/Ola
 
I tried some computer recording, but went with a "box" digital multitracker because of my previous analog experiences (I didn't own it) and the fact that I basically know very little about computers. It was a no brainer...for me.
Your actual results may vary.
Oh yeah, and I actually do have a sore testicle, so be nice.
Really I do!
____________
wawazzat?
the iceman
 
Sure, friends!

If you drop a newbie into a studio, things will be complex. But we are talking about building a "studio" from scratch, here, so any studio will be confusing. I rather drop a newbie onto a portastudio than into a computer, if theres a choice, for the ease of use. There are some cheap digital 8-track with built-in effects out there now. That and a good mike will take you a long way.

But sure, if you already have a computer with a crappy soundcard, computers are cheaper to get started with, because you only need the HD recording software, and
n-track is very cheap, that I gotta admit. It's just a tenth of what Cubase and the likes cost.

Maybe N-track is really simple to use. I have never used it and haven't even heard of it before I entered this website. Or maybe it just fits your mindset. In any case it takes off somthing like $200 from the price of computer based system, and I wasn't aware of that before. You still need to put out over $500 if you want a soundcard that has multiple in and outs and the same sound quality as an old analog 8-track though. :p
 
I agree that a digital porta studio with built-in effects and a good mic will go a long way. A "regular" computer, a decent sound card and a good mic will probably go just as long. I'd rather drop a newbie on a computer though. For me, as barely more than a newbie, computers are easier to use. Maybe as I don't have any previous "analogue" or "box" experience other than as an onlooker at the previous mentioned friend's studio.

My prosumer 8 I/O soundcard cost $350 and n-Track $55. That's a pretty cheap start I think and I'm sure that the sound quality beats most cheap digital porta boxes and low-end effects. :)

I also hope that people who want to get a studio of their own consider the "box" route as well as the computer route. I'm so convinced of the computer route myself so I will recommend it to anyone who wants to start recording.

I agree that the followers of the way of the computer tend to be a bit carried away when it comes to the nitty-gritty details of the perfect computer but if you read all the "gear slut" postings in the dragon cave, I think that there are just as many gadgetoholics amongst the followers of the way of the box. The question of the best $300 large diaphragm mic hits us all :)

/Ola
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Yes, you can "download" a reverb. It usually costs money though, just like a hardware one, AND it uses up your processor power. THATS what I mean with that you need a lot of processor power. If you are going to do 16 tracks with filters and reverbs and stuff on your computer, you need a heckuva computer. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, now don't think everyone's ganging up on ya, but I couldn't help but add a quick comment ;)

Exactly how would you expect to do 16 tracks with reverbs and filters on a RTR 8-track? You're not comparing apples to apples. And I'm getting 16-tracks dry without my single 7200 RPM IDE HD even breaking a sweat, BTW. Your milage may vary.
 
squashboy? are you out there man? squashboy come home.. we miss you.. earth to squashboy .. tune in squashboy.. :)

- eddie -
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top