ollie99
New member
along the lines of reaper, studio one and record?
my ongoing quest for a straightforward, no nonsense daw
- Thread starter david henman
- Start date
- Status
along the lines of reaper, studio one and record?
david henman
New member
...got it. i've gotten quite good at recording, arranging, editing and creating drum tracks with garageband, in the context of what i do in my home studio, which is to create song demos.
and, in fact, some of garageband's limitations actually work well for me.
for example, there is only one kick drum, two snares, one floor tome, one ride cymbal, one closed hi-hat etc.
i could easily get carried away "shopping" for "just the right kick drum" and, by the time i found it, that precious moment of inspiration would be long gone.
david henman
New member
...yes because, as i mentioned, my recording engineer works in cubase.
i want to do what ever i can to make the process easier for him.
he often sends me a stereo bed track - wav file - of a song we are in the process of recording at his studio.
this way, i can spend hours experiementing with, for example, guitar tracks - on my time instead of his.
then i can create wav files, ideally in cubase, to send back to him.
ollie99
New member
You dont need to use cubase to create wav files?
david henman
New member
...no. but one way or another i will be using cubase:
scenario one: i find out that cubase has no plans to introduce software similar to garagaband/record/studio one. but, i stick my copy of cubase le, setting up a template that will only be used when i am recording tracks for ken, my recording engineer.
scenario two: i find out that cubase DOES have plans to introduce software similar to garagaband/record/studio one, and that is the software to which i commit, effectively killing two birds with one stone, as it were.
Hey David I have made no rude comments towards your disclaimers and I assure you no one is attacking you not even RAMI, just reading some of the post I can see why some people in here might question your "comments" if I can put it lightly.
This next comment I mean, I will not disrespect any man when it comes to things of this nature but an exp eng would know that the metronome and parameters would be in settings or options. I dont know Reaper but Im guessing if you select the metronome (thas proly on the transport somewhere) you would find all you need. Again no disrespect that much exp and trouble with a simple click track..you can see how people would question that. I have never looked up how to work a metronome on any DAW cause its simple (Create Click track, DONE...). I googled reaper metronome problems and couldnt find anything only thing i found was that if the metronome couldnt be heard then NOTHING could be heard and you would need to check your Main Outputs which made sense...Me Im not judging cause I dont know.
This first statement is what sparked the whole "questioning" process..I mean you having 50 years exp (which I am not denying or one to question) In our line of work would know that this is not labor intensive. Now if you had a GB session and I had GB of course we could see the easy transfer of work casue we could transfer the entire session as it was mixed that is understandable. But the actual transferring of files is not "that" labor intensive they all work the same way if I transferred to Cubase, Pro Tools, Logic, hell even Acid Pro its all done by 1 file type WAV. "EVERYONE" (including you) would know this and would know that its fairly easy and simple. Why? cause not everyone has the same DAW anyway, but everyone works with the same file type, 1 file type is what makes it simplistic. I mean a 50 year vet would know that already heck a 10 yr old kid with a CD he is trying to make into MP3 knows. Its that been that way for years (not saying you are less aware or less-knowablgle on the topic... just saying) you could see why someone would question or challenge the comment.
This next comment I mean, I will not disrespect any man when it comes to things of this nature but an exp eng would know that the metronome and parameters would be in settings or options. I dont know Reaper but Im guessing if you select the metronome (thas proly on the transport somewhere) you would find all you need. Again no disrespect that much exp and trouble with a simple click track..you can see how people would question that. I have never looked up how to work a metronome on any DAW cause its simple (Create Click track, DONE...). I googled reaper metronome problems and couldnt find anything only thing i found was that if the metronome couldnt be heard then NOTHING could be heard and you would need to check your Main Outputs which made sense...Me Im not judging cause I dont know.
Another one that spark my curiosity... personally. Again Im not judging people and how they wanna mix long as it sounds good fine by me. I find that some eng hate comp and rarely use it. Me I cant mix without a strawberry kiwi slushy! But finding you have 50 yrs exp and you dont use EQ EVER! That will also raise some questions...
All eng have to deal with learning curve of digital software & DAWS, its safe to say there is a learning curve with everything in life period. Some highly exp eng here stated there strains with some software themselves. Now is everyone gonna have the same learning curve No! everyone learns differently and at a different pace. Dose that mean one is smarter, or better than the other individual NO! Just means he learns things a bit different. Regardless the short comings everyone was in agreement wether genius or idiot Reaper was the faster most easiest DAW to learn with the fastest learning curve. If you can ever, EVER! get 5-10 people to agree on a situation of learning and all concur on the effects of the learning are marginally the same you can bet your bottom dollar that their probably correct. Rarely do you find a collective vision on a topic such as this. Im pretty sure we are all (including RAMI) are leading you in the right direction as best we can.
Im sorry I may not be folowing, What? When? and How? Will Cubase a stienberg company will make "software" that is similar to Garageband "made by Apple". Record "made by PropellerHead" and Studio One, made by "Pre Sonus"...Who ever is doing this please send me their email I want Pro Tools, & Logic and Reason ALL IN ONE SOFTWARE TO!!
You know what? David why do you need a new DAW do you Mix or Record? Do you record bands and mix or just mix the tracks? Im confused and if you have 50 years exp why you relying on some Rec eng if your doin all the work and have all the exp. What would you be doing with this DAW "EXACTLY"!!!
david henman
New member
jaynm26: Hey David I have made no rude comments towards your disclaimers and I assure you no one is attacking you not even RAMI, just reading some of the post I can see why some people in here might question your "comments" if I can put it lightly.
...rami has done nothing but attack and demean. he seems pretty determined to embarass himself. i just don't want any part of it - already wasted far too much time being a part of his pissing contest.
This first statement is what sparked the whole "questioning" process..I mean you having 50 years exp (which I am not denying or one to question) In our line of work would know that this is not labor intensive. Now if you had a GB session and I had GB of course we could see the easy transfer of work casue we could transfer the entire session as it was mixed that is understandable. But the actual transferring of files is not "that" labor intensive they all work the same way if I transferred to Cubase, Pro Tools, Logic, hell even Acid Pro its all done by 1 file type WAV. "EVERYONE" (including you) would know this and would know that its fairly easy and simple. Why? cause not everyone has the same DAW anyway, but everyone works with the same file type, 1 file type is what makes it simplistic. I mean a 50 year vet would know that already heck a 10 yr old kid with a CD he is trying to make into MP3 knows. Its that been that way for years (not saying you are less aware or less-knowablgle on the topic... just saying) you could see why someone would question or challenge the comment.
...i can't comment on this. my recording engineer mentioned to me that converting the garageband wav files i send him involves spending time (which is precious - we both have families AND day jobs, not too surprising in this day and age) converting them to cubase, and i have no reason to disbelieve him. his other concerns involved recording speed and sampling frequencies, which evidently differ between garageband and cubase. again, i have no reason to disbelieve him. my only concern, in this context, is to be as accomodating as i can.
This next comment I mean, I will not disrespect any man when it comes to things of this nature but an exp eng would know that the metronome and parameters would be in settings or options. I dont know Reaper but Im guessing if you select the metronome (thas proly on the transport somewhere) you would find all you need. Again no disrespect that much exp and trouble with a simple click track..you can see how people would question that. I have never looked up how to work a metronome on any DAW cause its simple (Create Click track, DONE...). I googled reaper metronome problems and couldnt find anything only thing i found was that if the metronome couldnt be heard then NOTHING could be heard and you would need to check your Main Outputs which made sense...Me Im not judging cause I dont know.
...the instructions in cubase regarding the metronome/click track are dead simple. on a couple of other projects i/we had created, i could (and still can) hear the click track.
on the template i was trying to create, i could not hear the click track, no matter how many times i read, re-read and followed the instructions.
Another one that spark my curiosity... personally. Again Im not judging people and how they wanna mix long as it sounds good fine by me. I find that some eng hate comp and rarely use it. Me I cant mix without a strawberry kiwi slushy! But finding you have 50 yrs exp and you dont use EQ EVER! That will also raise some questions...
...mainly, i find that i don't need it. so, why waste precious time? what would be the point? all i am doing is creating song demos. i usually get the sound i'm looking for, ar at least an acceptable sound, when i begin developing a song.
but, perhaps more to the point, i don't have an intimate grasp of eq. that is something that i leave to the pros. sure, i'll adjust the lows/mids/highs on my guitar amp, or my pedals.
i have just found that my time is better spent focusing on other, more urgent (to me), aspects.
attention to detail as regards sound quality, fidelity etc is pretty subjective, anyway. take a listen to the drum sounds on some of bob dylan's recordings, or those of blue rodeo, to name just two examples. sure, i can appreciate sonic perfection and beauty, but i also enjoy listening to raw energy, like the stones, the who etc.
All eng have to deal with learning curve of digital software & DAWS, its safe to say there is a learning curve with everything in life period. Some highly exp eng here stated there strains with some software themselves. Now is everyone gonna have the same learning curve No! everyone learns differently and at a different pace. Dose that mean one is smarter, or better than the other individual NO! Just means he learns things a bit different. Regardless the short comings everyone was in agreement wether genius or idiot Reaper was the faster most easiest DAW to learn with the fastest learning curve. If you can ever, EVER! get 5-10 people to agree on a situation of learning and all concur on the effects of the learning are marginally the same you can bet your bottom dollar that their probably correct. Rarely do you find a collective vision on a topic such as this. Im pretty sure we are all (including RAMI) are leading you in the right direction as best we can.
...i had to ask myself, since i have no desire to be a professional recording engineer, is there a valid reason why i should learn how to be one. is there a valid reason why i should spend even a minute of whatever time i have left learning the skills, knowledge and craft of a professional recording engineer when my actual goal is to be write songs, sing them, record them, play guitar on them and, ultinmately, take them to a professional recording studio and have them recorded by a professional recording engineer. the answer to that question is, to me, pretty obvious.
and, yes, i have acknowledged, and responded to, on quite a few occasions, that there is a consensus here that i should try reaper, and that i do intend togive it another try. i'm not sure what else i can do to make that any clearer.
...rami has done nothing but attack and demean. he seems pretty determined to embarass himself. i just don't want any part of it - already wasted far too much time being a part of his pissing contest.
This first statement is what sparked the whole "questioning" process..I mean you having 50 years exp (which I am not denying or one to question) In our line of work would know that this is not labor intensive. Now if you had a GB session and I had GB of course we could see the easy transfer of work casue we could transfer the entire session as it was mixed that is understandable. But the actual transferring of files is not "that" labor intensive they all work the same way if I transferred to Cubase, Pro Tools, Logic, hell even Acid Pro its all done by 1 file type WAV. "EVERYONE" (including you) would know this and would know that its fairly easy and simple. Why? cause not everyone has the same DAW anyway, but everyone works with the same file type, 1 file type is what makes it simplistic. I mean a 50 year vet would know that already heck a 10 yr old kid with a CD he is trying to make into MP3 knows. Its that been that way for years (not saying you are less aware or less-knowablgle on the topic... just saying) you could see why someone would question or challenge the comment.
...i can't comment on this. my recording engineer mentioned to me that converting the garageband wav files i send him involves spending time (which is precious - we both have families AND day jobs, not too surprising in this day and age) converting them to cubase, and i have no reason to disbelieve him. his other concerns involved recording speed and sampling frequencies, which evidently differ between garageband and cubase. again, i have no reason to disbelieve him. my only concern, in this context, is to be as accomodating as i can.
This next comment I mean, I will not disrespect any man when it comes to things of this nature but an exp eng would know that the metronome and parameters would be in settings or options. I dont know Reaper but Im guessing if you select the metronome (thas proly on the transport somewhere) you would find all you need. Again no disrespect that much exp and trouble with a simple click track..you can see how people would question that. I have never looked up how to work a metronome on any DAW cause its simple (Create Click track, DONE...). I googled reaper metronome problems and couldnt find anything only thing i found was that if the metronome couldnt be heard then NOTHING could be heard and you would need to check your Main Outputs which made sense...Me Im not judging cause I dont know.
...the instructions in cubase regarding the metronome/click track are dead simple. on a couple of other projects i/we had created, i could (and still can) hear the click track.
on the template i was trying to create, i could not hear the click track, no matter how many times i read, re-read and followed the instructions.
Another one that spark my curiosity... personally. Again Im not judging people and how they wanna mix long as it sounds good fine by me. I find that some eng hate comp and rarely use it. Me I cant mix without a strawberry kiwi slushy! But finding you have 50 yrs exp and you dont use EQ EVER! That will also raise some questions...
...mainly, i find that i don't need it. so, why waste precious time? what would be the point? all i am doing is creating song demos. i usually get the sound i'm looking for, ar at least an acceptable sound, when i begin developing a song.
but, perhaps more to the point, i don't have an intimate grasp of eq. that is something that i leave to the pros. sure, i'll adjust the lows/mids/highs on my guitar amp, or my pedals.
i have just found that my time is better spent focusing on other, more urgent (to me), aspects.
attention to detail as regards sound quality, fidelity etc is pretty subjective, anyway. take a listen to the drum sounds on some of bob dylan's recordings, or those of blue rodeo, to name just two examples. sure, i can appreciate sonic perfection and beauty, but i also enjoy listening to raw energy, like the stones, the who etc.
All eng have to deal with learning curve of digital software & DAWS, its safe to say there is a learning curve with everything in life period. Some highly exp eng here stated there strains with some software themselves. Now is everyone gonna have the same learning curve No! everyone learns differently and at a different pace. Dose that mean one is smarter, or better than the other individual NO! Just means he learns things a bit different. Regardless the short comings everyone was in agreement wether genius or idiot Reaper was the faster most easiest DAW to learn with the fastest learning curve. If you can ever, EVER! get 5-10 people to agree on a situation of learning and all concur on the effects of the learning are marginally the same you can bet your bottom dollar that their probably correct. Rarely do you find a collective vision on a topic such as this. Im pretty sure we are all (including RAMI) are leading you in the right direction as best we can.
...i had to ask myself, since i have no desire to be a professional recording engineer, is there a valid reason why i should learn how to be one. is there a valid reason why i should spend even a minute of whatever time i have left learning the skills, knowledge and craft of a professional recording engineer when my actual goal is to be write songs, sing them, record them, play guitar on them and, ultinmately, take them to a professional recording studio and have them recorded by a professional recording engineer. the answer to that question is, to me, pretty obvious.
and, yes, i have acknowledged, and responded to, on quite a few occasions, that there is a consensus here that i should try reaper, and that i do intend togive it another try. i'm not sure what else i can do to make that any clearer.
david henman
New member
...i have already answered this question quite a few times. we really are just going around and around, no?
sigh...
i'm a singer/songwriter/guitarist. the purpose of home recording, for me is as follows:
1. to create demos of my songs
2. to experiment with the arrangements, parts, etc
3. pre-production - ie demoing a song (for free) before taking it to the studio
up until two years ago, i was using a korg d3200, probably the ultimate portastudio. before that it was a tascam, before that a roland, before that a tascam cassette portastudio, and so on.
i noticed that the portastudio industry had come to a dead stop.
plus, for the past twenty years, everyone i know has been saying: "dude!!!! you HAVE to get into computer recording!!!!"
i have always suspected that there would be advantages that would come with computer recording and the ones i found most attractive were editing/arranging, and archiving.
i also liked the idea of being able to "see" my tracks on a screen, and to work with virtual drum machines with virtually unlimited memory.
mjbphotos
Moderator
To everyone else who has tried to help David: give up. Unless you have a cheap grageband-easy-to-use DAW that will record 8 tracks simultaneously (not sure why he needs this when the most he uses is 3 drum mics), you can't help him. He doesn't want to be helped any other way. Also sounds like his 'recording engineer' friend is tired of him too (why else the excuse of 'labor intensive' moving tracks from GB to CB?)
I've never used the Reaper metronome, but took a quick look, there is 1 page of instructions in the manual, sect 3.9. Seems pretty straight forward.
I've never used the Reaper metronome, but took a quick look, there is 1 page of instructions in the manual, sect 3.9. Seems pretty straight forward.
ollie99
New member
The only way it would take a lot of time was if you were importing many many wav files but if you are only recording guitar tracks like you said then no it shouldn't, and any proper recording engineer should know this. even if it were two wav files, if you just gave them to me on a memory stick I could go into my daw, click on import media then select the files and bam they're there.
david henman
New member
Im sorry I may not be folowing, What? When? and How? Will Cubase a stienberg company will make "software" that is similar to Garageband "made by Apple". Record "made by PropellerHead" and Studio One, made by "Pre Sonus"...Who ever is doing this please send me their email I want Pro Tools, & Logic and Reason ALL IN ONE SOFTWARE TO!!
...i'll try and be a little clearer:
garageband is an extremely straightforward software. it has saved my sanity. i find it easy, and fast.
a few months ago, i saw ads by a company called presonus promoting software called "studio one", which also purports to be extremely simple and straightforward.
and, now i see that propellerhead is bringing out software called "record", which also purports to be extremely simple and straightforward.
i could be wrong, but it appears to me that these programs are designed for guys like me who find the more sophisticated programs - you know, the ones designed for professional recording engineers - too daunting.
unecessarily daunting, given that we are not, and have no desire to be, professional recording engineers, but simply want to demo our work.
so, i will probably be deciding between reaper, which has been recommended quite a few times here, studio one and record.
BUT!!!!!
since my goal, at least in part, is to make life easier for my recording engineer, who uses cubase, i thought that i would at least send an email to my contact at cubase to see if they have plans to introduce software similar in its simplicity and ease of use to garageband, studio one and record.
because i sense that there is a market there. obviously, so do presonus and propellerhead.
because, if cubase DOES plan to introduce such software, i could essentially accomplish two goals with one purchase.
does that answer your question?
david henman
New member
...try breathing through your nose.
ollie99
New member
It doesn't answer mine, what daw you use will not affect anything after you have exported the file into wav and given it to your recording engineer
david henman
New member
...again, i cannot comment on this. i am not an engineer. my engineer, who i happen to admire and respect, simply suggested it would make his job easier if i send him my tracks in cubase. i am simply trying to accomodate him.
i have no idea why this is such a problem for so many here.
if i can find a way to accomodate him, great. if not, well, at least i tried.
ollie99
New member
Okay, well I've been trying to avoid being so straight forward with you, so have a go at me all you like when I'm going to say it straight like rami was. If your engineer thinks that having a wav file from cubase to cubase is any easier than another daw, then he is wrong (and obviously doesnt know his stuff if thats the case).
The only possible problems you may have is with tempo, for example, if you tap the tempo at the beginning of a project and it comes out with decimals, then those decimals will go on and on so if you were to put in the number in the original project then it will ever so slightly go out of time, but all you need to do is make sure the tempo in both projects are rounded to the nearest integer so that won't happen.
The only possible problems you may have is with tempo, for example, if you tap the tempo at the beginning of a project and it comes out with decimals, then those decimals will go on and on so if you were to put in the number in the original project then it will ever so slightly go out of time, but all you need to do is make sure the tempo in both projects are rounded to the nearest integer so that won't happen.
david henman
New member
...you're certainly welcome to you opinion on this, and good on you for taking the high road. i don't understand the point of turning this into a pissing contest - that is embarrassing even for those who don't participate.
and, again, i have no idea. it's really not important to me. i have a good relationship with my engineer, and it is important to me to demonstrate my willingness to at least try and meet him halfway.
ollie99
New member
well okay then, I've said what I need to so I'll leave you to it and hope you sort something out
- Status