Forgive me if I'm posting this in the wrong section. I'm new here. I would like to upgrade from my cassette based Tascam 488. I need more tracks and editing capabilities. I'm guessing digital is the way to go but should I go stand alone unit such as the Roland 1680 or since I don't own a computer yet, buy a computer and kill two birds with one stone? I can buy the 1680 and effects cards for around $2500. What will everything I need cost me going the computer route? Any difference in the sound quality between the two different ways? Which will have the steeper learning curve. Which way will be more easily updated? Any and all opinions welcomed! Thanks
Computer based recording VS stand alone workstation?
- Thread starter Fireside
- Start date
Jon X
New member
I think what monty is refering to is the fact that there have been lots of people lately post things here like "I'm rich, tell me everything there is ever to know about recording in my million dollar state of the art studio" or something similar. I don't think that's the type of post you intended, so I'll try to answer your main questions. You might want to watch those open ended questions such as "Tell me everything I need..." though.
Personally, I think you would be better off with a computer if you have other uses for it in mind besides recording. You could get a workable computer setup for about the same price as the 1680. Sound quality between a good computer setup and the 1680 will be about the same. The computer will give you more options in both hardware, software, and future upgrades. Edtiing is easier on the PC. It won't be as portable as the 1680. If you are looking for an all in one, portable, buy it/plug in/start recording solution, then the 1680 is a good machine. If you want a computer for other purposes and also be able to use it as a good digital recording setup, then by all means the PC can handle it.
Now, if you want any more info, just ask specific questions and I'm sure most people would be glad to help. Search the BBS for things such as what sound card options you have concerning the computer and you will probably be able to answer your own questions.
Personally, I think you would be better off with a computer if you have other uses for it in mind besides recording. You could get a workable computer setup for about the same price as the 1680. Sound quality between a good computer setup and the 1680 will be about the same. The computer will give you more options in both hardware, software, and future upgrades. Edtiing is easier on the PC. It won't be as portable as the 1680. If you are looking for an all in one, portable, buy it/plug in/start recording solution, then the 1680 is a good machine. If you want a computer for other purposes and also be able to use it as a good digital recording setup, then by all means the PC can handle it.
Now, if you want any more info, just ask specific questions and I'm sure most people would be glad to help. Search the BBS for things such as what sound card options you have concerning the computer and you will probably be able to answer your own questions.
Armistice
Son of Yoda
As a current owner of a VS840 I can tell you that eventually you will run into "headroom" problems with the Roland device. Don't get me wrong, they're great machines, it just depends upon what you want to do with it. From memory the 1680 will have you submixing groups of tracks down to stereo to get a reasonable number of possible tracks, the same way as the 840 does. There is also the problem of effects and upgrading. Personally I'm upgrading to a PC based system because I can see that, no matter how big a machine Roland put out, it's got physical limitations in its design, and after a while this will bug you. Hope this is of some use!
Thanks everybody. Sorry, haven't been on this board long enough to know what kind of posts start to bug people. By the way, I'm far from rich. I've been saving and trying to learn for about 3 years now and finally have the bucks to upgrade to digital but I want to make the right move because the funds were soooo difficult to come by that I don't want to make a mistake.
Both stand-alones and computer systems have their merits, but I prefer the Roland for recording and mixing and computers for mastering and burning to disk.
A couple of thoughts regarding computers:
1) Crashes are inevitable - I don't care what platform you're running (although Macs are better with audio). The Rolands are designed specifically for recording and crash much less often than PC based systems pushing 16 or more tracks of uncompressed audio.
2) PCs are noisy - try your best, your still likely to end up with a higher noise floor in your recording using a PC due to R/F and other interference.
3) PCs aren't portable - try lugging one out to record your next show.
4) PCs are still pretty expensive. You may be able to get a 500MHz box for cheap these days. But add a sound card with some digital in's and some decent multi-tracking software and the costs begin to climb. Mastering tools and fx are more $$$. Don't forget a ton of RAM.
Undeniably, the PC set-ups have advantanges as well. We just shouldn't be blind to the current realities of computer based recording (at least at the low $$$ entry level).
A couple of thoughts regarding computers:
1) Crashes are inevitable - I don't care what platform you're running (although Macs are better with audio). The Rolands are designed specifically for recording and crash much less often than PC based systems pushing 16 or more tracks of uncompressed audio.
2) PCs are noisy - try your best, your still likely to end up with a higher noise floor in your recording using a PC due to R/F and other interference.
3) PCs aren't portable - try lugging one out to record your next show.
4) PCs are still pretty expensive. You may be able to get a 500MHz box for cheap these days. But add a sound card with some digital in's and some decent multi-tracking software and the costs begin to climb. Mastering tools and fx are more $$$. Don't forget a ton of RAM.
Undeniably, the PC set-ups have advantanges as well. We just shouldn't be blind to the current realities of computer based recording (at least at the low $$$ entry level).
monty
Banned
Fireside....I bought a separate computer just for digital recording using Cakewalk and a VS880EX, which as you know is similar to the 1680. I still record to analog before I put it into Cakewalk for editing, because I, personally, like the sound better. I'm not sure if I'm even going to keep the 880 as it seems to sit unused most of the time. This is just my personal choice, and I'm sure a lot of people will think I'm nuts, but for the type of stuff I record, I just like the sound better. There will probably be times when I will want to use the computer for initial tracks, but so far the analog stuff sounds better. Also I have heard some great recordings done on tape based (Tascam Porta type) equipment. Before you spend a lot of that hard earned cash, ask yourself if it is going to be worth it for the amount of difference in sound quality, relative to the type of stuff you want to record. If you are recording noisy music, the Tascam may be okay. If you want to do a lot of editing the PC based stuff would probably be better, except you will have to find ways to phatten some of your sounds, which is going to cost more money. What I gained in editing ease, I lost in phat sounds, with the PC. As I said, some people will think I'm nuts, but when it comes down to hard earned cash, you have to ask yourself if it is really worth it for your particular application. Don't be fooled by all the hype.