Minimum Requirements for a New PC

Hi guys! just wondering if anybody here can provide their opinion. I've never taken classes/lessons on recording. I taught myself, and I'm a musician. I've been making progress in getting a sound that meets commercial use minimum parameters, but I'm not "there yet". I"m confidence in my musical skills, but certainly not in recording.
My question: would I be able to produce (I know nothing beats recording in a professional studio) professional sounding tracks with the gear I own, specifically, if the computer I'm using has the capability to produce that:
iMac, on OS Catalina
2.9 GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5
memory: 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
I'm using a Focusrite Clarett 8 pre, and also have the "solo"
I don't mind investing in a better interface, like an Apollo, but, does it matter if you're only recording VST's?

you can hear my work on my website:


dreemeternalmusic.com

Samples

The slap! Fire Horizon Symphonair Serenite Aeturnus You belong Piece in mind Sunday song Action theme Dark symphony Tierra en mis hojos Dark Bellz Came for you The lighthouse Muscle car Sax jingle …
dreemeternalmusic.com dreemeternalmusic.com

Thank you!
 
The interface has very little to do with what you're creating if all you're using is VSTs. It's only purpose is a "soundcard," assuming you're using it to drive headphones/monitors, and maybe a MIDI keyboard input, right?

You don't mention the DAW, but since you're still on Catalina I'm assuming a pretty old system - you might be somewhat resource limited, so probably have to freeze tracks, get creative with busses and maybe even bounce some sub-mixes/folders to keep from running out of gas.

I wouldn't spend a dime on an interface. Your monitoring setup is probably going to help you get to that more professional sound, and a good selection of reference tracks. (IMHO/2¢)

Well, Catalina is pretty old in MacOS years - is your iMac limited to that? IIRC that was the last version that supported 32-bit, so if your other software is 32-bit with no upgrade, or, perhaps, an expensive one, I probably would move along. (I have a now mothballed Mini that I kept there solely for the 32-bit version of Acrobat Pro I used, but just recently I decided maintaining 2 systems was not really worth it.)

p.s. might have been better to start your own, new thread for this.
 
Hi Keith! thanks so much for the advice. I'm new to this page; I'll start a new thread next time.
I'm using Logic Pro 10.6.2
I don't have any tracks freezing, or latency problems, or anything. Just, I'm at a point where I need "just this much" to get there, but can't seem to.
I'm using Ozone 9 for mastering.
I'll look into upgrading my operating system.
in your opinion, is a i5 core still good enough for such results?
thanks
 
dreemeternal said:
Hi Keith! thanks so much for the advice. I'm new to this page; I'll start a new thread next time.
I'm using Logic Pro 10.6.2
I don't have any tracks freezing, or latency problems, or anything. Just, I'm at a point where I need "just this much" to get there, but can't seem to.
I'm using Ozone 9 for mastering.
I'll look into upgrading my operating system.
in your opinion, is a i5 core still good enough for such results?
thanks
Click to expand...
Well, if you can get work done, it's enough. When you start having trouble mixing in real-time, i.e., with glitches, clicks, pop-up messages, it's not enough, though freezing tracks and the like can get you very far down the road with the same hardware, at least, if your workflow allows that. Me, I do very little with VSTs - mostly small, acoustic stuff, and I have a faster (3.8Ghz) quad core i5 and it's more than enough. I have a lot more memory in my system, but don't know how that would impacts VST usage in Logic, which I also use. (The memory was really done for photo editing, since this system has become my "everything" system now.)

Some folks use SSDs to improve performance in various ways - moving projects and/or VSTs to external SSDs, etc., but I'm not the guy to make those recommendations. I do have my system and apps, including all of Logic and plugins on the system [2TB] SSD. Project files are on external spinners, though.
 
dreemeternal said:
Hi guys! just wondering if anybody here can provide their opinion. I've never taken classes/lessons on recording. I taught myself, and I'm a musician. I've been making progress in getting a sound that meets commercial use minimum parameters, but I'm not "there yet". I"m confidence in my musical skills, but certainly not in recording.
My question: would I be able to produce (I know nothing beats recording in a professional studio) professional sounding tracks with the gear I own, specifically, if the computer I'm using has the capability to produce that:
iMac, on OS Catalina
2.9 GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5
memory: 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
I'm using a Focusrite Clarett 8 pre, and also have the "solo"
I don't mind investing in a better interface, like an Apollo, but, does it matter if you're only recording VST's?

you can hear my work on my website:


dreemeternalmusic.com

Samples

The slap! Fire Horizon Symphonair Serenite Aeturnus You belong Piece in mind Sunday song Action theme Dark symphony Tierra en mis hojos Dark Bellz Came for you The lighthouse Muscle car Sax jingle …
dreemeternalmusic.com dreemeternalmusic.com

Thank you!
Click to expand...
Best to start your own thread for new questions.
This thread is from someone looking for computer buying advice in Feb. (y)
 
dreemeternal said:
Hi Keith! thanks so much for the advice. I'm new to this page; I'll start a new thread next time.
I'm using Logic Pro 10.6.2
I don't have any tracks freezing, or latency problems, or anything. Just, I'm at a point where I need "just this much" to get there, but can't seem to.
I'm using Ozone 9 for mastering.
I'll look into upgrading my operating system.
in your opinion, is a i5 core still good enough for such results?
thanks
Click to expand...
I shall strongly reiterate the words of others here Dreem "start your own thread!" But, since what I have to say is common to the whole of recording activity here goes...

Monitoring, monitoring, MONITORING! You cannot produce quality results unless your monitor speakers* and room are of a level of quality such that they do not affect the sounds you produce. A gross example would be speakers that produce a strong 'boomy' bass. The effect of correcting that would be to make your recordings bass light on better systems. But it not just a lack of such extreme effects that you are looking for in monitors, it is much more subtle than that as you especially want the mid range to be free of 'colouration' so that voices for example are of a natural quality. What you can't hear you can't fix.

There is of course no free lunch here! The basic areas of, quality, wide bandwidth, low distortion, sufficient loudness and price are mutually exclusive. You CAN have loud and cheapish e.g. but the other parameters will suffer.

*Headphones. Yes, some people do good work with them but IMHO they should be an addition to good speakers in a well treated room. Not the total arbiter.

Dave.
 
I'm curious about the statement saying does it matter as I'm only using VSTs? There are amazing sounding VSTis and terrible sounding ones. There are huge memory gobbling ones and really frugal ones. VSTi means nothing really, like when people use the word MIDI - as in it sounds a bit MIDI, when they mean inept, or basic or just poor. MIDI doesn't have a sound, and nor really, do VSTi's in quality terms - that is set by the complete system.

I've got cubase on an old Mac, with an old interface I grew out of on another machine. Plugged into the same speakers or headphones, quality is irrelevant - it sounds the same. The same VSTis, the same source files. The headphones and speakers when swapped make obvious differences in sound. The interfaces, VSTi updated versions and drivers, software and DAW versions really don't. I can work on the same song on ANY of myself computers. Even the interfaces, which do sound different are really, really small changes.
 
What exactly do you mean by "commercial use minimum parameters"? AS others have alreadd pointed out, most times this is about monitoring - if you can;'t hear accurately what you are recording, how can you make judgement calls on the mix?
 
rob aylestone said:
I'm curious about the statement saying does it matter as I'm only using VSTs? There are amazing sounding VSTis and terrible sounding ones. There are huge memory gobbling ones and really frugal ones. VSTi means nothing really, like when people use the word MIDI - as in it sounds a bit MIDI, when they mean inept, or basic or just poor. MIDI doesn't have a sound, and nor really, do VSTi's in quality terms - that is set by the complete system.

I've got cubase on an old Mac, with an old interface I grew out of on another machine. Plugged into the same speakers or headphones, quality is irrelevant - it sounds the same. The same VSTis, the same source files. The headphones and speakers when swapped make obvious differences in sound. The interfaces, VSTi updated versions and drivers, software and DAW versions really don't. I can work on the same song on ANY of myself computers. Even the interfaces, which do sound different are really, really small changes.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you were replying to, but to clarify, my comment was about the impact of an interface would have on VSTs. I tried to be clear that their computing resource requirements were an area I'm not commenting on.
 
I listened to a number of the OP's samples, and it appears that he's able to use some decent VSTs. For the most part, I think they would be work for basic background music on things like TV and radio commercials. A few sounded a bit "fake", like some of the trumpet/brass sounds for the Mexican themed tracks. They would probably need some tweaking, like compression to make sure things sound consistent while not intruding on the voice-over. It will depend on the market and the budget of the customer.

I agree that the interface would probably yield the least amount of improvement, and it didn't sound like there was much in the way of microphone use.

As for the Core I5 IMac, I'm guessing that it's 2nd or 3rd generation , so it's like comparing a 1940s Buick Straight 8 to a present day V8 turbo. Current processors are hugely more efficient in data processing capability. Can your OS be updated to a later version? If not, the it's probably time to look at an update/upgrade. At some point, you'll start to run into situations where the programs won't update because of the OS limitation. I was just discussing this with a friend this weekend. He was replacing his old Mac because his browser version is no longer supported by things like his bank. He can't upgrade to a new browser because the OS won't support the latest versions. I ran into this with an old Android tablet. Microsoft's Internet Explorer 11 is no longer accepted by lots of websites. End of Life issues are a real thing.

I'm not a Mac user, but from what I've read, the Mac Minis are very good when configured with enough RAM and SSD space. $1000 for a 16GB/512GB M2 Mac Mini would be a lot more of an upgrade than $1000 for an Apollo Twin interface.
 
I listended to some tracks on dreemeternal's website.
There's a lot of content there. It is not bad at all.
If it were considered lacklustre, that might be due to attention to detail, and mix levels. Just what I felt.
The website is very to the point, without any baggage that might show it to be amateur.
I think it could do with a bit more personality. Perhaps even just a photo of the maestro at work.
 
ecc83 said:
I shall strongly reiterate the words of others here Dreem "start your own thread!" But, since what I have to say is common to the whole of recording activity here goes...

Monitoring, monitoring, MONITORING! You cannot produce quality results unless your monitor speakers* and room are of a level of quality such that they do not affect the sounds you produce. A gross example would be speakers that produce a strong 'boomy' bass. The effect of correcting that would be to make your recordings bass light on better systems. But it not just a lack of such extreme effects that you are looking for in monitors, it is much more subtle than that as you especially want the mid range to be free of 'colouration' so that voices for example are of a natural quality. What you can't hear you can't fix.

There is of course no free lunch here! The basic areas of, quality, wide bandwidth, low distortion, sufficient loudness and price are mutually exclusive. You CAN have loud and cheapish e.g. but the other parameters will suffer.

*Headphones. Yes, some people do good work with them but IMHO they should be an addition to good speakers in a well treated room. Not the total arbiter.

Dave.
Click to expand...
Thank you!!
 
rob aylestone said:
I'm curious about the statement saying does it matter as I'm only using VSTs? There are amazing sounding VSTis and terrible sounding ones. There are huge memory gobbling ones and really frugal ones. VSTi means nothing really, like when people use the word MIDI - as in it sounds a bit MIDI, when they mean inept, or basic or just poor. MIDI doesn't have a sound, and nor really, do VSTi's in quality terms - that is set by the complete system.

I've got cubase on an old Mac, with an old interface I grew out of on another machine. Plugged into the same speakers or headphones, quality is irrelevant - it sounds the same. The same VSTis, the same source files. The headphones and speakers when swapped make obvious differences in sound. The interfaces, VSTi updated versions and drivers, software and DAW versions really don't. I can work on the same song on ANY of myself computers. Even the interfaces, which do sound different are really, really small changes.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I meant I'm not recording live instruments for the most part.
 
TalismanRich said:
I listened to a number of the OP's samples, and it appears that he's able to use some decent VSTs. For the most part, I think they would be work for basic background music on things like TV and radio commercials. A few sounded a bit "fake", like some of the trumpet/brass sounds for the Mexican themed tracks. They would probably need some tweaking, like compression to make sure things sound consistent while not intruding on the voice-over. It will depend on the market and the budget of the customer.

I agree that the interface would probably yield the least amount of improvement, and it didn't sound like there was much in the way of microphone use.

As for the Core I5 IMac, I'm guessing that it's 2nd or 3rd generation , so it's like comparing a 1940s Buick Straight 8 to a present day V8 turbo. Current processors are hugely more efficient in data processing capability. Can your OS be updated to a later version? If not, the it's probably time to look at an update/upgrade. At some point, you'll start to run into situations where the programs won't update because of the OS limitation. I was just discussing this with a friend this weekend. He was replacing his old Mac because his browser version is no longer supported by things like his bank. He can't upgrade to a new browser because the OS won't support the latest versions. I ran into this with an old Android tablet. Microsoft's Internet Explorer 11 is no longer accepted by lots of websites. End of Life issues are a real thing.

I'm not a Mac user, but from what I've read, the Mac Minis are very good when configured with enough RAM and SSD space. $1000 for a 16GB/512GB M2 Mac Mini would be a lot more of an upgrade than $1000 for an Apollo Twin interface.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the advice, and comments; I really appreciate it and will strongly consider it!
 
I didn't listen to the OP's, but horns/winds are hard to do if you've not spent time playing one, or at least singing seriously enough to get the phrasing nuances. Then, of course, it takes good software/samples/VSTs. (I played a lot of trumpet off and on - first instrument and bands, but packed it all up some time after '08 when I started playing guitar again. It's a lot easier on the lips ;).)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top