software fx vs hardware fx

  • Thread starter Thread starter bill elder
  • Start date Start date
B

bill elder

New member
Yes, I'm a newbie and I apreciate greatly all the help I'm getting here in this forum.
I'm thinking about buying the ark dp24/96, but do I need all the hardware fx on it or will the cw pro 9 software fx be good enough on the mixdown?
I'm especially concerned about the compression on the software. Is it good or do I need to rely on hardware compression?
The only benefit I see, (I could be so wrong) on the ark 24/96 hardware is the pre amps, but do I need the hardware reverb and eq on it? Why? When these are in the software.
Is there a noticable difference of fx in the hardware compared to the software fx?

another question - I want to use an external separate hard drive for all my recording. How does that work when the sound card is internal and the hard drive is external? Can it be done? Duh
 
recording to external Hard drive:
just make where u save all ya wave data on the external drive letter for ex.... C is main D and E or the other 2 internal F is external set all the audio recording ina folder on F

H/w Fx vs software i'm not too familiar wit hardware but people i have come in contact say the software version of equipment doesn't compare to the hardware...i have no idea cuz i juse use software but yea the cakewalk fx are pretty weak u gonna need some new software fx anyway if u wanna use software
 
I dont believe you can use the 24/96's effects during mixdown, only during recording.....
 
I could rerun an origional track thru again to another track channel and use the fx to fatten up. , for a dry and then wet effect, using the software fx, in fact I could do this again for three tracks with a different effect and then pan them differently. That would be some goo fat stuff if you mix it tastefully.
 
Teacher, as far as plugins, the good stuff is right up there with hardware effects.....you just cant expect a $20 compressor plugin to touch a $200 RNC.....

Bill, that sounds like a lot of trouble to add effects...if you go thru all that trouble to add reverb to a track and then you listen and it was a tad too much, you have to re-record it....if you use a plug-in, you tweak the effect as it is played until you get it right....

dont settle on the dp24/96 because of the effects because what ive heard of them, they arent all that great....as far as the preamps, they are fine, but Deltas are better......look into the Omni Studio by M-Audio (Delta) as you will find that the features on it are far better than the dp......
 
yo gidge...i can't confirm or deny ur comment if u aren't already a member become one @ recording.org....and say that computer plugins are up to the h/w stds and i guaranttee u that every "pro" meaning dudes that mixed for Jay-Z, elton john...etc.. will tell u HELL NO...i dunno if its an old man bias or what but i believe'em they convinced me
 
I would have agreed up to about 2 years ago, but today soft plug-ins are as good as, in some cases batter than, their hardware counterparts.

Gidge is right in his remark - hard or soft, money counts. You cannot expect a cheapass VST plug-in to obtain the same quality as a very expensive TDM one.
But - look at a TC soft reverb for instance. At least as good as its hard counterpart, much cheaper, and you can apply it to as many channel as your DSP allows.

Other issues come into play as well:

- Generations of conversion. Often going outside a DAW for effects in a mix means going through 2 additional conversions. Unless you have extremely high quality D/A and A/D, your sound quality will suffer.

- Everytime you go outside a DAW to add an effect you will incur latency in the track, in other words the signal will be delayed compared to the other tracks. Do this enough times and your entire tracklist will loose its "tightness" , it will sound discombobulated. If, lets say you have 18 tracks and move one out for some compression, you need to calculate the speed of the return and move the remaining 17 tracks back in time to compensate.

In summary - a good rule of thumb is "once you go digital - stay digital".
Of cause if you use hardware as a front-end when tracking, the above is irrelevant.

Finally, there are exceptions to the rule, as always. Especially at the real top end there is equipment which simply cannot be replace by software counterparts. Inevitable this is really expensive stuff, like for instance the compressors I use for mastering, which cost as mutch as a small new car
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top