Which direction should I go in computer based or Studio in a box

rog999

rog999

New member
Dear All

I would welcome any views on this subject.

Currently I have a mixer plugged into a tascam DP02.

I am very happy with this set up except I can only record two tracks at a time. Which when playing live with freinds is a big limitation. The recordings are great but every thing is on two tracks so it cannot reall be mixed after recording. I make do with trying to get the best sounds I can using my mixer.

I laso have a laptop 2Ghz pentium dual processor 2Gb memory running Reaper. I also have a stealthplug which I mainly use for bass guitar and a single midi interface for drum machine and keys.

The question is this. In order to increase the number of tracks I can record at once do I upgrade my DP02 and get say a 2488 neo OR should I buy something like a firestudio mobile and start using Reaperr and my laptop to record on instead.

I dont have the money to upgrade my laptop, so another question is would my laptop be powerful to run Reaper with a firestudio mobile and record say 8 tracks at a time. maybe adding another 4-8 tracks as overdubs.

The 2488 neo is more expensive but it I dont need to worry about it running out of memory or latency issues, I know it will work.

Which route would you go down and what are the benfits, drawbacks of these two options?

Roger
 
I have recent experiences of a somewhat more extreme nature than you may be likely to have, but very similar.

Recently replaced my DP-01 with a Zoom R16, because of the same 2-track limitation you landed on. I can now record up to 8 tracks simultaneously, play back up to 16. Have not done much with the R16, yet, so I can't comment on it's utility. I am looking forward to using it.

Last July, we contracted with a rock-n-roll summer camp, for, among other things, recording of the bands. The core of our recording system was a pro-quality 32-channel analog board, and a Tascam HD24. We recorded the bands in both a project studio, and a live concert. We had ZERO issues with the equipment.

You can see, I have no experience with an interface/recording to a computer. But, my experiences with a "box" have been positive. I like the one-unit portability of a "box," and I believe non-computer based units will be more stable. Technically, ALL three- DP-01, R12, even HD24- are dedicated computers that record tracks, and this is what (I believe) makes them more stable- the machine is optimized for that one purpose, rather than being asked to process words, crunch numbers, or surf the 'net.

So, my suggestion is go one-box.
 
Both are great without a doubt. I'm of the opinion that any system will work. My bias is the studio in the box because that's where I'm at. The computer route gives you more options but the studio in the box enables you to do everything that you need to plus more. I can't argue against the computer/interface route {neither would I want to - it's awesome in the right hands} because I've seen it in action ~ it can be every bit as portable as a standalone as things are getting smaller all the time. I guess I'm used to the portastudio type thingy and the learning curve can be easy or hard depending on how you're wired. And besides, my sister lives in Oxford so vote for me !! :D
 
Thanks for your replies up to now, maybe I should start a vote on this.

However I am definately erring towards another Studio in a box, I use Reaper a little and amplitube for bass but it seems to me that you have to spend more time with the recording process using a computer. Its a double edged sword, a computer is so much more flexible there is not limit to what you can tweak and change. But I would prefer to spend that time playing my music, I want to spend as much time playing my music as I can and keep the sounbd engineering part down to a minimum. My impression is that a studio in a box is more likely to allow mne to do this.

Once I can afford it I think I will be going for the Tascam 2488 Neo

Oh and grimtraveller, I used to live in West London

Roger
 
Well , I can record 14 tracks at once with effects on each track with a Lowly 2.4ghz celeron D (single core) with 512mb Ram so a Dual core 2ghz laptop should have no problem with 8 tracks .... I use a delta 44 and a Delta 1010lt (14 tracks pluss midi) and have a rack of Mic preamp I build which I run into the delta cards ......

My guitarist has a Zoom 16 track recorder , this thing cost my guitarist close to a grand and my measly $250 setup blows it away in sound quality and ease of use ...... the Zoom only does 16 bit at 44.1khz and has some PSU humm .....

Cheers
 
That amazes me that you can do so much with that amount of processing power and particulalry that amount of memory.

I see that one of those delta interfaces is a card that installs interneally in your pc. My computer is a laptop so that option wouldnt be available to me. Do these delta cards have some of their own memory built in?

If I went the computer route, I would have to have an external interface. I suppose the question is would something such as the firestudio mobile give me such great performance that you are getting with you delta cards.

I guess there must be some threads showing how well certain pcs cope with different interfaces. I will see what I can find.

R
 
Yes , I am surprised at how much I can do with a shitty PC .... when mixing and mastering I probably have 3 plugins per track with at least 8 tracks pluss a couple on the total mix so about 30 total and haven"t had any problems with skipping or anything , then again I mostly use those free VTS"s on the net and I only use this pc for recording so there is nothing else running on it , and because the audio is routed through the PCI Buss there isn"t a bandwidth issue which you might get from USB .....

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top