Why do I need all this equipment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Berbo
  • Start date Start date
Well no just energy consumption, but also room, confrotability and all that.
I just need someone to explain to me that there is a big advantage to having physical hardware as opposed to the software which carries the hardware.
 
There are many threads here to explain every ones opinion on this matter.

But for me I want the hardware. The software emulates the hardware sort of good but just doesn't cut it.
 
I just need someone to explain to me that there is a big advantage to having physical hardware as opposed to the software which carries the hardware.

A lot of famous high-end hardware devices (most notably compressors, reverbs, and equalizers) have a signature sound that is standard on commercial recordings. Engineers with highly trained ears who have access to these devices are intimately familiar with their sonic characteristics and know which ones to use on a given track. There are plugins (e.g., those from Universal Audio) that attempt to imitate them, but digital emulation can only go so far. For the most part, if you don't know what those particular models are, or when and why big name engineers use them, you're not really missing anything.
 
As I said with all the advances in recording technology, is there a need to have all that hardware around that eats your electric bills and energy.

You called these people idiots not me, I wanted to hear what they had to say otehrwise I would not have spend the time to make this post.

I didn't call them idiots. I just said that if there were no point in buying a bunch of hardware and they did it anyway - they would be idiots. Of course they may be idiots either way. But for the most part they are pretty smart. I was in a strange mood when I wrote that. Basically all I was saying was that if the gear was pointless people wouldn't buy it - they do so it must have some purpose they feel is required.

Everyone has covered it all here pretty well - plug-ins emulate gear - an emulation will not always be as good as the real thing. I think there is enough emulated plug-ins available to get a decent sounding recording, but some hardware just can not be reproduced on a computer.
 
I think i got it, thanks.
Now i searched for a thread where to start, but can't really find what hardware to get and how to connect everything.
Could anyone provide me with a link.
 
there's also the whole obsolescence problem with plugins and software in general.

If you bought a UAD 1 DSP card to run plugins you're SOL now if you want to run their newer plugs unles you want to pony up an extra $500 - $2000 for new cards and if you bought a TC powercore DSP system you just got shafted as they just dropped all support for the product.
Stuff that worked in Snow Leopard may be glitchy in Lion. If you run a Mac PPC anything after logic 8 you have to hack to get it to run as its now for an intel mac only. apple dropped all support for the PPC platform. Stuff that was hassle free in an XP system turns into a blue screen crash fest in 7 and so on
There are plugins that are great but are 32 bit and don't bridge well if you are running a 64 bit system and can be real gltichy. There are plugins that work well on some DAWs but cause crashes on others. There are plugins that work well on some systems but will be glitchy with different hardware configurations.

And finally there are some plugins that you have to pay to update so you pay and pay and pay

AND there are plugins that just work great too


On the other hand there are hardware units from the 1950s thru to the present still working in studios today. Good hardware retains value unlike software and can often be resold for close to what you originally paid if you find you no longer need a piece or have out grown it. If you can handle a soldering iron and have a good supplier of tubes you can keep hardware running for decades.
And there is hardware that is noisy, blows the fuses in your house every time you turn it on. throws up a block of static right in the midlle of the perfect take and so forth

Both options can be a pain in the ass and both option can be as sweet as honey. You pick the cool aid you prefer to drink
again there is no right or even one way to do it, do what works for you

I like a mixture of both YMMV
 
Last edited:
As I said with all the advances in recording technology, is there a need to have all that hardware around that eats your electric bills and energy.

You called these people idiots not me, I wanted to hear what they had to say otehrwise I would not have spend the time to make this post.

What kind of recording do you want to do? Solo acoustic stuff? Full bands? Rappin' over dope beats?
 
What kind of recording do you want to do? Solo acoustic stuff? Full bands? Rappin' over dope beats?

I would do my own music with guitars and Saz instruments, which then over that I woudl record, other instruments would be in DAW. This would be a rock jazz mix.
Also I do hip hop beats and lyrics.

What hardware would you suggest for both.

@Bistoll - Thanks for your reply, appreciated.
 
The sticky threads up top would be a good place to start. :D

Thanks for this and I did read it before you poste dit here, but I did not read how to connect all that hardware to a DAW (reverb, mixer, compressor, synthesizer, etc...), that what I really need to know
 
Thanks for this and I did read it before you poste dit here, but I did not read how to connect all that hardware to a DAW (reverb, mixer, compressor, synthesizer, etc...), that what I really need to know

Thats one of those "It Depends" questions.
It depends on what you have and how you want to use it

So, for example, if I want to track vocals through a hardware compressor, aside from the compressor I need either an external pre and an audio interface or an audio interface/mixer with inserts

So in this example if I have an external pre I would connect:
Mic > Pre > Compressor > interface > Computer
If I have an interface with inserts I would connect
Mic . interface/mixer > Compressor to insert > interface/mixer > Computer

If I dont have either an external pre or an interface/mixer with inserts I would not be able to use a hardware compressor for tracking

Now if I wanted to use that same hardware compressor on a recorded track during the mixing process, I would have to:

Rout track to Output 3 > Interface Output 3 > Compresseor > Interface Input 1 > new track in the computer (Input/output numbers just for example)
So in this example I'm sending the signal out of the computer into the compressor for the effect and then back into the computer and recording to a new track, which I would then have to compensate for the latency introduced by the roundtrip in and out of the computer (some Daws, such as reaper, can do this for you)

There are lots of other applications but this should get you thinking about how the signal flows
 
Last edited:
Who in the world is Ethan LaRoche ?

Yes Im a noob at this, so just bare with me.
with all the advances in home recording technology.......
Do I need all that equipement on the racks that I saw in a number of pictures posted on this forum ?
If you put these three statements together and do a little lateral thinking about Home recording.com, then the general tenor of the OP's question is valid, logical and sensible.
It is constantly being implied or directly stated by quite a number of members that really, the whole software/plug in/DAW via the computer kaboodle is the way to go. It's no longer mooted as the way of the future, it's pretty much seen as the way of now. Numerous are the threads and posts that extol the virtues of all things digital. Many that try to fly the flag for singing in tune or recording drums with one or two mics and not sample replacing or just miking an amp when recording guitar etc are often snickered at or accused of snobbery. While one may say "that's a different argument", it's not ~ it's part of the same bigger recording picture. Analog, standalones, hardware, these are generally cast in the role of 'dated'. So often when someone posts a question asking how a mixer can be utilized into their set up, the advice is often "don't bother ~ just get an interface, a DAW and you're good to go" or words to that effect. The analog forum has been moreorless tolerated as the last dying throw of the recording dice, it's adherents seen almost as modern day Jedi knights in the original Star wars movie, an all but obliterated bunch of scattered loyalists to a once noble purpose that really plays no significant part in the present republic. :D Many of the knowledgable have gone on record as saying that plug ins are a better way to go than their hardware counterparts. So with all that and more in mind, if you put yourself in the position of a noob or someone that lurks the forum, perhaps looking for direction in how to go about recording their music or voiceovers, if they go back over the last two years and soak up the multitudes of threads, there's a more than good chance that they will have come to the conclusion that Berbo espouses in their question. Whether there are lots of people still shelling out for hardware is in a sense a red herring ~ because the impression is that they are far outweighed by those that are fully digital and computerized. So for me, it's a more than valid question, do I need all that hardware stuff ? After all, there's some cool music being made by people on HR without it.
Sometimes, as human beings we can have this way of saying "the way I do something, my chosen method and tools are the best way & tools" without actually saying that. Sometimes implying something is far more powerful and effective than actually stating it.
 
I think you'd need a decent set of monitors and some kind of room treatment to start with. Then a decent mic preamplifier. I'd lose that USB mic altogether. A decent large diaphram condensor that would do double duty for vocals and acoustic instruments and a dynamic mic for amps. This is what I would need at a minimum if I were working by myself. If a band was coming in, all that would go up expotentially plus a recording interface that would accomodate as many simultainious inputs as you require. You'd also need enouigh headphones to go around and a system to drive them.
 
Thanks for this and I did read it before you poste dit here, but I did not read how to connect all that hardware to a DAW (reverb, mixer, compressor, synthesizer, etc...), that what I really need to know

It's hard to connect external effects to a DAW because most audio interfaces don't have inserts or aux send/returns for connecting them. There are tricks for looping them through other inputs on the interface or whatever, but latency increases every time you go in and out of the interface. My suggestion would be to learn the basics using DAW plugins first. These will help you learn how the effects work and what they do to the sound. Then once you start developing your own style and have the skills and means to take it to another level, start planning your gear purchases based on your style of mixing. As others have said, good mics, preamps, etc., are far more important than which effects you use at this point.
 
If you put these three statements together and do a little lateral thinking about Home recording.com, then the general tenor of the OP's question is valid, logical and sensible.
It is constantly being implied or directly stated by quite a number of members that really, the whole software/plug in/DAW via the computer kaboodle is the way to go. It's no longer mooted as the way of the future, it's pretty much seen as the way of now. Numerous are the threads and posts that extol the virtues of all things digital. Many that try to fly the flag for singing in tune or recording drums with one or two mics and not sample replacing or just miking an amp when recording guitar etc are often snickered at or accused of snobbery. While one may say "that's a different argument", it's not ~ it's part of the same bigger recording picture. Analog, standalones, hardware, these are generally cast in the role of 'dated'. So often when someone posts a question asking how a mixer can be utilized into their set up, the advice is often "don't bother ~ just get an interface, a DAW and you're good to go" or words to that effect. The analog forum has been moreorless tolerated as the last dying throw of the recording dice, it's adherents seen almost as modern day Jedi knights in the original Star wars movie, an all but obliterated bunch of scattered loyalists to a once noble purpose that really plays no significant part in the present republic. :D Many of the knowledgable have gone on record as saying that plug ins are a better way to go than their hardware counterparts. So with all that and more in mind, if you put yourself in the position of a noob or someone that lurks the forum, perhaps looking for direction in how to go about recording their music or voiceovers, if they go back over the last two years and soak up the multitudes of threads, there's a more than good chance that they will have come to the conclusion that Berbo espouses in their question. Whether there are lots of people still shelling out for hardware is in a sense a red herring ~ because the impression is that they are far outweighed by those that are fully digital and computerized. So for me, it's a more than valid question, do I need all that hardware stuff ? After all, there's some cool music being made by people on HR without it.
Sometimes, as human beings we can have this way of saying "the way I do something, my chosen method and tools are the best way & tools" without actually saying that. Sometimes implying something is far more powerful and effective than actually stating it.

You believe that digital recording without much hardware is better because it always improves/gets updated and hardware meeds to be replaced?
 
You believe that digital recording without much hardware is better because it always improves/gets updated and hardware meeds to be replaced?
Actually, I deliberately didn't give my opinion. All I stated was that over the years, an impression has been created that computer based recording and the attendant software is the real deal and that by implication analog/standalones/hardware is time consuming and cumbersome in comparison. So your question is a valid and good one. I'm sure lots of people wonder this.
Personally, I think everything works, however anyone chooses to use it/them.
 
Hardware can be time-consuming and cumbersome by comparison. But if that's the only way to get the sound you want, what else are you gonna do?
 
I look at it like this ~ hardware is no more time consuming and cumbersome than editing. As a supporter and user of both analog and digital, software and hardware I'm useless for an argument;
I love them all !:D
 
I want a sweet tube preamp for my vocals so I can sound like Barry White.
 
I think you can get a testicle upgrade for the BW sound akkadekka!

I use him all the time as a example to people who thin he has a deep voice. It's not particularly low in the range. Just rich as fuck. Bastard.
 
Back
Top