computer vs. multitrack

  • Thread starter Thread starter kurdt31
  • Start date Start date
K

kurdt31

New member
Wondering what the best way to a home recording set up, multi-track or computer.
 
Just wanted to add a little more information. I have a 500 GB computer with 4GB or RAM. I was wondering the best route to go, multi-track or home computer. I have played guitar for 26 years, with 14 years in bands. I want to do this for myself, just to get some fairly professional, with drum loops, recordings going. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I am a creatively starved musician, who is jone-sing for a good creative outlet to record with. Thanks
 
If I was starting now I'd go PC, but I'm still using multitrack recorder until it breaks...

You can probably get yourself set up with Reaper, a good enough interface, drum software and a few useful mics for $500 or not much more. Your existing PC will work just fine. Drum loops are easier to do on PCs, BTW, that's the one thing I don't do on my multitrack..
 
Reaper, is that the program name? And what is a good interface to go with? Also, I know going the computer route is a little higher learning curve, and I, basically, have no recording experience. Would you still recommend going the PC road?
 
I would recommend PC/interface/Reaper as well, even though I use Cubase. You will need to do some learning tho. Nothing comes without a bunch of learning time. Unless you just hire someone to record your music. That would be a different forum though right?......
 
Is Reaper better than Cubase? And what's a good interface to go with? Remember, I am a totally dumb newbie here . And I am willing to take the time to learn.
 
"Which interface" is asked every day here. Take a look through the list of posts, there is no one 'right' answer. When I started I went with the stand-alone recorder because I didnt' want to mess with the computer I had at the time. Wish I had read more and saved the money, although I did learn a lot.
Reaper is a great deal for a DAW at $60.
For the interface you have to ask yourself 'what is the maximum number of separate tracks I may want to record at one time?"
 
kurdt31 said:
Just wanted to add a little more information. I have a 500 GB computer with 4GB or RAM. I was wondering the best route to go, multi-track or home computer. I have played guitar for 26 years, with 14 years in bands. I want to do this for myself, just to get some fairly professional, with drum loops, recordings going. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I am a creatively starved musician, who is jone-sing for a good creative outlet to record with. Thanks
Click to expand...


I think if you already own the computer go with a PC based DAW. I also throw a vote towards reaper.
 
+1 on Reaper. It's a great program. Very affordable, very capable, and good forum support.
You can download the entire program and try it for free. At $60.00, it's far less expensive than other recording software. Here is the link...
REAPER | Audio Production Without Limits

They also have a good forum, which can be extremely helpful when you need a question answered regarding Reaper...
REAPER Forums - Cockos Confederated Forums

If I may suggest...be sure to download the Reaper User Manual when you download Reaper for install. This will help quite a bit.
 
Like Armistice, I'm a standalone man. I stand alone ! I just love the compactness of it all and at the end of the day, whichever route you take, whichever one you learn, you'll make music and experience the agony and the ecstacy. You will learn everything you need about recording, regardless of analog or digital, reel to reel or cassette, standalone DAW or computer based DAW. If you are looking to go standalone, there is plenty of used stuff about. Tascam, Boss, Roland, Akai, Yamaha, Korg, Fostex and Zoom were the front runners at the start of the century and their residue lingers on. For now.
I have to say though, that in terms of longevity {upgradability}, the computer based DAW is king. It's the way the manufacturers have forced the market. The rest of us are like that dying breed of Jedi knights in the face of the republic......
 
grimtraveller said:
I have to say though, that in terms of longevity {upgradability}, the computer based DAW is king. It's the way the manufacturers have forced the market. The rest of us are like that dying breed of Jedi knights in the face of the republic......
Click to expand...

There has been a disturbance in the force, young Skywalker...

I was quite disappointed, when I decided that the AW4416 was getting long in the tooth, with what was available by way of standalones.... where was the 24 channel monster with inserts, automation, multiple aux busses with great effects, compression and EQ separated and available on all channels, hardware metering AND the ability to hook it up to multiple humoungous screens so you could really see what was going on there... doesn't exist. Bastards! Seemed a logical progression to me...
 
Thanks, everyone! This gives me some information to check out. Sounds like computer is the way to go. I realize it's personal preference, but in this day and age computers definitely rule. I'll have to check Reaper out. I'll probably be back with more questions ;) but I'm grateful for the responses I've received. Thanks again :)
 
@ loveofjazz Thank you for the links. I will definitely check them out ! :)
 
If you go DAW, Reaper is the best. If you cant figure it out in Reaper, then why waste $200. $300. $400 or more on Cubase, Sonar, or *hack, spit* Pro Tools? If you figure it out in one, then you can figure it out in any of them, but by that time you will realize that Reaper is way more powerful than any HOME recordist will ever need anyway.

Just remember to google for tweaks to make your computer ready for recording, don't try to do multi track recording with the existing "integrated sound device" on your motherboard, get a real pro level sound card instead, remember that recording software and anti-virus do not mix, recording and automatic Windows updates do not mix, and ideally you can get a decent video card that will let you use two monitors.
 
soundchaser59 said:
If you go DAW, Reaper is the best. If you cant figure it out in Reaper, then why waste $200. $300. $400 or more on Cubase, Sonar, or *hack, spit* Pro Tools? If you figure it out in one, then you can figure it out in any of them, but by that time you will realize that Reaper is way more powerful than any HOME recordist will ever need anyway.

Just remember to google for tweaks to make your computer ready for recording, don't try to do multi track recording with the existing "integrated sound device" on your motherboard, get a real pro level sound card instead, remember that recording software and anti-virus do not mix, recording and automatic Windows updates do not mix, and ideally you can get a decent video card that will let you use two monitors.
Click to expand...

I will disagree here a bit. I recommend Reaper, when budget is of concern. Even then, I would recommend trying demo versions of every DAW you can get your hands on. You won't really even know which one is right for you, until you have some basic knowledge of how Daw's work. Try Reaper first. Then, once you have built up some basic feel on how it works, then try others. You may stay with Reaper, or you may find another that works for you better. It is never a 'waste' if a program works better for the way your brain wraps around things. I myself love Cubase, and do not like how Reaper is setup. That is just me. It does not mean either is better. Oh, and I really friggen loath PT. but once again, that is just my personal opinion.

Your own experience will tell you what you want to use. :)
 
Thanks for all the responses everyone. I think I may have a go with Reaper, because why waste money on a more expensive program when I am just starting out? That is a good point. Thanks again. I am sure I will return with more questions ;)
 
jimmys69 is right. Try Reaper first, get a feel for the things you need to know that apply to all programs. Then try more demos. Only you can ultimately decide if it is worth the extra money to you (first time purchase price, and on-going upgrades have prices too) to have the different "look and feel" that various programs offer.

For myself, I ended up deciding that the look and feel of Sonar, for example, was great but it was not worth the cost of the upgrade vortex sucking big money out of my wallet every year. I learned that when I'm listening to the final mix on cd, I don't sit there and think about which program I used to make the track. There was simply way too much stuff in Sonar that I will never use anyway.

You will eventually travel down similar paths, and face similar decisions.
 
jimmys69 said:
Hey, I grew up near your area. Weir st. in Omaha. :)
Click to expand...

At least you grew up. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a handicap in my world. When everyone else was growing up, I was jogging around the state capitol trying not to get harrassed by all the Qorridor Queens on south 15th street. Couldn't wait to move outa that hood.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top