is it really worth it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nomorenoless
  • Start date Start date
N

nomorenoless

New member
oh my anger explodith. can't find a free digital 4 track that's worth the effort. 400mhz is all i've got so the newer ones geek out on me. i'm too poor to buy anything for about 2 months. anybody know where i can get a good un? anybody know where i can get cakewalk guitar 2 for cheap? not the demo. i used it all up. it won't let me have another. it worked best so far out of all of um. i'm looking for software more than i'm playing. not good. help for the poor newbie anyone? so many glitches in this digital style of recording that today i'm wondering is it really worth it? i'm tempted to go back to my 4-track cassette. but its so slow. and no digital editing.
 
You could wait 2 months and get n-track, or look around for a free multitracker called Tstar. There are other cheap ones out there too.

I think Goldwave's Multiquence is still cheap as well. I've used an old old version of Multiquence on a 400mhz machine without problems (only ever found one bug in the program--don't know about newer versions). It ran as many as 12-15 tracks at once without hiccuping (much depends also on whether they're stereo tracks, how many Multiquence effects are used, etc.).

It's worth it to stay digital. It takes longer to learn the ropes than with a four-track cassette, but you'll be better off in the end, even on a slow machine with a cheap soundcard. You won't sound like a pro, but it will sound better than the average four-track cassette. Worst case you can spend the next two months writing and practicing so that when you can buy something you'll have stuff all ready to go. :)

Hope this helps!
 
Ask yourself, "Why do I need something other than my quick, easy, fun to use 4 track?". Don't complicate your life unless you have to. Like you said, you're not making music you're fricking around with your pc now. Nothing wrong with the 4 track you have. Nothing beats the quck, easy to use 4 tracks if you're just laying down some ideas and jamming. Play now, save up for something that will grow with you. You'll thank yourself later.
 
That might be good advice for you as well. A 400mHz machine might not be capable of some of the things that your 4-track is.

You might want to consider sticking with the cassette machine until you have the funds to upgrade your PC or maybe look into one of the all-in-one digital recorders from Roland or Boss etc...

Whatever you decide to do, try not to get to frustrated with your equipment, and make the best of what you got! I know it's tough sometimes to do that, but think of all those little kids in Africa that don't even have Radio Shack!
 
does size matter?

Sorry for the slightly misleading header...

You'd be amazed at what you might be able to do with your machine. I'm running Cubase VST 5.1 (24 bit version) and can get about 24 tracks of simultaneous audio for playback (at 24 bit, 44.1khz) , including appropriate EQ, Effects, VST instruments, etc. (more or less than 24, depending on the amounts of the above...) Here's my humble system....

PII Celeron processor 466mhz (not overclocked)
7200rpm Quantum Fireball HD - 20 gig
384 MB RAM
Win98

Essentially, your drive speed will give you the higher track counts. YOur processor will give you effects, EQ, VST instruments, etc..... processing power!! So.... the difference (to oversimplify a bit) between my current system and a 2Ghz system with the same specs otherwise will simply give me more processing power for effects, eq. I still won't get much more than the number of tracks I'm currently getting!

Samples, etc. are loaded into RAM.... if you use large sample banks/libraries, then the more RAM, the better.

Chris
 
thanks helpful people. i got the t-star and its working pretty good. i just can't go back to cassette though. i just dig sitting there, putting down a track, and jamming along with it till i come up with fitting leads, fills, sounds, etc. i luv touching that button and being back at the start without rewinding. yes i do. thanks to chris for the tech-type info. its never been broken down to me like that before. that gives me very good insight on how to upgrade without having to starve, cause although my ideas and music are rich, my pocket book is not. i like this website. i am so much better off having come here. peace and thanks.
 
Could use Pro Tools Free Version. Allows you to have 8 tracks.


Requirements:
Intel Pentium II - desktop or laptop, single processor, 300 MHz or faster
Intel Celeron, 300 MHz or faster
 
just a quick something. i downloaded n-track, but it wouldn't work right with my k6-2 processor. it warned about this in the requirements section of the download page, saying about known incompatabilities, but i thought i'd give it a shot. the first track recorded ok, but when i tried to put down the second, it sounded like i had extra delay on there. i looked at my guitar settings, not remembering changing them, and discovered it was the n-track. (shrug). i guess that's what they meant by incompatable. peace.
 
boops. correction.

boops. i had problems with "pro tools free", not n-track. sorry about that. i haven't tried n-track yet. n-track had 45 second recording limit on the demo, and that just ain't nuff time. pro-tools is the k6-2 incompatable one. so sorry. my brain skipped a beat there.
 
I had a K6-2 400mHz in my old machine and let me tell you, it was a freakin' dog for recording on. Any more than four tracks with no effects and it was crash city. Obviously, your hard drive speed, memory, and OS are gonna have an effect on this one way or the other as well. Assuming all that those components are the same vintage as your computer, you are probably in for a frustrating experience recording on that machine.

Save those nickels and dimes brother!
 
I would just like to add that I also was using a 450 pentium for a long while up until a couple of months ago....I was getting up to 20 tracks with a judicial amount of effects without much of a problem.......I hear alot of folks who complain about problems with a processor that slow but at the same time...my experience tells me otherwise.

Anyhow, forget the 4 track man....& you'll be happy you did.
 
I believe that the Pentium II is in a whole different class that the K6-2 as far as audio is concerned. Something to do with the FPU being inaccurate I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top