|
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | Originally posted by Gallerinski:
OK, silly question but ... you have a mac desktop and now you need a windows laptop to do work. OK, fair enough. But why do you need audio and DAW capability on the laptop when you've already got the nest possible solution sitting right on your desk? I thought someone might ask that...
Unfortunately, I had to give up my office a couple of years ago, so one of our kids could move into it. Right now my Mac is stuck in the corner of our home theater, which just isn't a good spot to record.
I was wondering if there were some minimum specs because I want to avoid latency issues. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Steve, latency is usually a symptom of the external audio interface you choose. IEEE1394 (Firewire) generally has the lowest latency, though USB3 is starting to show some promise.
Lack of processing speed and disk access will produce a whole slew of other issues. But again, if you're doing light recording (1-4 tracks) a routinely optimized notebook will handle it. And I completely understand your space issues - we just moved into a new home. "Open floor plan" = no rooms suitable for me to record in. I'm going to build one in the garage.
You're doing the right thing - research before you buy. Just make sure you have fun! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 5567
Location: Blue Ridge Mountains | PC's (anything short of absolutely the top of the line, state of the art, custom-assembled systems... say $5-7000CAD) just don't have the horse power to do large sessions and once you look at it from that angle, the MAC Pro series is actually cost effective. John, I have to disagree: because I own two top of the line new computers: A new HP Pavilion Elite HPE w/Core i7 and 9 gigs of ram - 1 TB Hard drive etc. and my new laptop: a Dell Studio 16 also with Core i7 and 6 gigs ram w/500 GB hard drive, etc.
Both run the new Windows 7: I had used XP but the new 7 is fantastic...and it doesn't compare to the fiasco that was Vista...both computers are blazing fast and can handle what ever I ask of them...I have Pro Tools on both and have no problems like I experienced over the last several years w/XP based PC and laptop (Stephen can attest to that)...
Again, I use the Mac primarily for my main studio w/Logic DAW...
My PC's are used for all my business and church work...the laptop is primarily for mobile use (I travel quite a bit). The changes to the new computers (my first since 2004/6) are incredible...
But the cost for each was under $1500...what a bargain from years ago when a top of the line computer cost between 2 and 3 large... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2004
Posts: 382
Location: USA | get a digital work station...they are as aforadable as ever. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | Originally posted by Waskel:
Just make sure you have fun! That's a key piece for me. I don't mind some work or a learning curve, but in the long run if it ain't fun, or at least satisfying, I ain't gonna do it!
Mike, the Studio 16s are very nice. I run a creative services department and just bought a studio 16 XPS for our video editor. If he can edit HD footage on it, It should be a good solution for audio recording.
I was hoping to be under $1,000, but maybe I'll look at the Studio 16.
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | Originally posted by Styll:
get a digital work station...they are as aforadable as ever. Is that what you use for your recordings? What setup do you have? You get some great results! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2005
Posts: 4081
Location: Utah | Latency should not be a problem with any mid-performance laptop as long as you are only doing a reasonable number of tracks, say up to ten or so.
The cheapest POS discount laptop you buy today will outperform my old laptop. If all I have are a couple of tracks with no effects, latency is close enough to zero. Adding tracks and especially adding complexity with VST plugins and ACID loops will hammer the processor and hard disk resources, making latency a problem.
The specs that are probably the most important will be the amount of RAM, the speed of the RAM, hard disk read/write speed, and plenty of spare room on the disk (nearly full disks will kill your computer's speed).
USB vs Firewire? I think that is starting to get into the fine tuning aspects. As long as you are using a direct USB connection and not an external hub it should be adequate for two channels.
When it comes time to buy the interface device you may want one with more than two inputs. There are lots of ways to make that happen. The big question is if you want to simultaneously record more than two channels or if you are content to mix multiple inputs down to two channels and then record those. Note that two channels means two mono channels or one stereo channel. Also, will you want to someday migrate to the Mac? That may suggest some different priorities. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2010
Posts: 370
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba CANADA | Originally posted by stephent28:
Avatar, you are stating your opinion but it is obvious you don't know what you are talking about.
I'll put my PC rig up against yours any day of the week (and I don't even know what you have). Stephen, obviously I am stating 'an opinion'. There are as many variations in recording setups as there are musicians.
I am sure your system works just fine for you. As dones mine.
My comments were directed to creating an affordable system that will work consistently, do what you need it to do, when you need it to do it and not rely on expensive (read exotic) hardware.
I've had people who own professional studios come down and have their jaws drop when they see what I can run on my poor, old budget PC. However, when I take sessions created here to some trendy, up-market studios... running seriously expensive gear (usually PT-based...), only to have them choke. This has happened more than once. They figure running 20-30 audio tracks is a big deal (mostly because audio is all they do...). They invariably have to bounce the non-audio tracks in order to get them to run. As far as I'm concerned, if you have to bounce VSTi's to audio (loosing your editability...) in order to get a session to run, the system probably isn't as good as you think it is.
Also, on multiple core systems try installing a third party load analyzer and see what your multiple cores are actually doing while running a serious session. Several of the better known PC DAW's can't even take advantage of the extra resources.
Obviously there are exceptions and a 'serious' PC can do amazing things as well, but the amount of extra, over and above you have to do to get a PC to compete with a straight-out-of-the-box MAC G5 isn't worth the effort... either in time or money (a fact... not an opinion ;) ). |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | I just finished my first track using the BR600 output to audacity. I played it live into audacity, all the tracks at once, but I did do a bit of mixing on the fly. The electric guitar up to the 2nd break was one track and from the 2nd break on was a different track. I couldn't get one guitar part all the way through that I liked.
This works ok, but I am definitely interested in using the computer for more active mixing and editing. Also the vocals are dry, I'm trying to figure out how to add some reverb to the vocal track on the BR600.
The song is posted on my poor neglected ning page warts and all. I know both the performance and the recording need work, so I am open to suggestions. Give it a listen.
Designzilla ning page
Again thanks for all the input. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Originally posted by Avatar4550:
If offered ANY machine with Vista or Windows 7 on it, the first thing I would do is blow up the OS and put in XP. Both of the later OS's have so much needless baggage that can't easily be disabled or removed making either a non-starter in my opinion.
XP can easily be tweaked to run no more than 16-18 critical processes for recording (you'll never miss most of the others anyway as Microsoft packs their OS's with tons of uncessary crap...). Try trimming away the fat on MS's newer offerings and you're likely to run into problems.
To operate 'seamlessly' (has MS EVER made ANYTHING that ran 'seamlessly'...?) both Vista and Windows 7 pretty well have to be given carte blanche to do anything they want, whenever they want which doesn't really lend itself to a dependable, dedicated recording computer... This is the part that shows you know nothing about the current Windows 7 64bit platform.
I can easily run 25+ tracks with 10+ VSTi's and 30+ plugs without the slightest hiccup.
I could probably run much more than that but haven't seen the need.
I am not arguing the merits of PC vs Mac.
Use whatever fits you and your personality best. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | and seriously none of this relates to the original laptop question.
Designzilla.....sounds like you got it figured out!
Have fun.....make music! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Originally posted by stephent28:
Have fun.....make music! That is the point, yes? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Originally posted by Waskel:
Originally posted by stephent28:
Have fun.....make music! That is the point, yes? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 5567
Location: Blue Ridge Mountains | Have fun...make music!
Makes sense!!! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12761
Location: Boise, Idaho | When I get to "record music" on my bucket list, I hope I can find this thread, but it will probably be all new technology by then. I did manage to get rid of some malware on the home PC within a week, though, so I'm getting more techno savvy. I hate it. I'd rather use my old Sony reel to reel. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2008
Posts: 1456
Location: Texas | Originally posted by Avatar4550:
Obviously there are exceptions and a 'serious' PC can do amazing things as well, but the amount of extra, over and above you have to do to get a PC to compete with a straight-out-of-the-box MAC G5 isn't worth the effort... either in time or money (a fact... not an opinion ;) ). I assume you meant to say "Mac Pro" instead of "Mac G5"? The G5 was discontinued in 2006 when Apple switched from PowerPC-based processors (G3, G4, G5, etc.) to Intel-based systems.
AFAIK, current comparably-equipped Macs and PCs are actually pretty similar in terms of raw processing power. They both use the same CPUs and similar hardware. So, comparisons really boil down to cost, ease-of-use, and speed/efficiency of the OS. There are abundant in-depth comparisons of MacOS vs. Windows all over the Internet, we really don't need to rehash those here.
Also, we're not talking about building a professional studio are we? I think it is fair to say that you can put together a good home-based system with either OS.
Besides… This is the OFC… we don't care which OS you use… just which guitars you play… ;)
Designzilla: Your original question said you have a Mac desktop, but that you need to get a Windows laptop because of your current Adobe software investment. If you'd really prefer a Mac laptop, and your Adobe software is your only conflict, I'd suggest that you contact customer-service at Adobe and ask if you can do a "cross-grade" to Mac versions of your Adobe software. I believe that they used to have a cross-grade program, I don't know if they still do, but it might be worth a try? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2005
Posts: 4081
Location: Utah | There is always the option of running Windoze on a Mac. There are a couple of ways to do that. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | OK, we have a winner! I just picked up a Toshiba Satellite - Intel® Core™ i7 Processor / 16" Display / 4GB Memory / 640GB Hard Drive / NVIDIA GEforce 310 graphics card. I like it!
This should work, right?
Thanks for all the help!
Now about that software... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | For software, you can try Reaper. It is a free unlimited use trial (unless you keep it and continue to use it then they ask for a very reasonable $60).
Then there is Audacity, Cubase (that I use), the Sony series of products (Acid that Waskel uses), Presonus Studio 1 and a lot more out there.
They all have strengths and weakness's so read a few reviews and see which one meets your needs.
Your laptop should not have ANY PROBLEMS running a DAW for what you are looking to do. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | Thanks Stephen! I'm going to try out Reaper. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 3969
| Steve, you'll still need an interface to get the music signals into digital form and then into your computer, either by USB or firewire.
I use Reaper and have been happy with it. Be aware that if you're on a 64-bit platform and decide to use the 64-bit version of Reaper (or any software DAW) that a lot of useful VST plugins haven't yet been ported to 64-bit, and so won't work. I use the 32-bit version of Reaper for that reason, so I can keep using all the effect and instrument plugins I've accumulated. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | Serge, I have a line 6 Tone port for an interface.
Thanks for the heads up on the 32 bit versus 64 bit version of Reason. That's really good to know. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Steve, I am running an Intel i7 920 @ 2.67 Ghz with Windows 7 64bit and 6 gig of ram and I go both ways with the 64/32 versions of Cubase and just the 64bit version of Reaper.
True that the overall selection of 64 bit plugs is lacking as developers tend to drag their feet but the performance gain is pretty good with a 64bit DAW.
I bought a copy of jBridge (I think about $20) and it works outstanding. Allows you to use a 64bit DAW with 64 or 32bit plugs or do the reverse and use a 32bit DAW with 32 or 64bit plugs. Also allows a 30 day trial run before you buy it.
Doesn't work 100% with everything but the general consensus is that it works with about 95% or more which is good enough for me.
Maybe by this time next year most of the plug manufacturers will have 64bit versions available and alleviate some of the issues but the bottom line is that there will still be some wonderful gotta have plugs that will never be updated to 64bit cause the company is no longer in existence........and in these cases, jBridge is just a no-brainer to own. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 2150
Location: Orlando, FL | Thanks Stephen. I downloaded the trial of jBridge. I'm going to try it with the 64 bit version of Reaper. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Steve, just read the directions carefully cause they can be a bit confusing but once things are set up properly it runs really well.
I am sure there is a lot of talk about using jBridge on the Reaper forum. |
|
| |
Laptop recommedations for recording
