Do NOT ... repeat ... do NOT get a Mac. PCs now are just as capable of doing anything a Mac can do music-wise and you'll have more hardware/software options and pay 1/3 of the cost. P.S. a lot of the software you can spend big bucks on you can also get without spending anything on ... if you catch my drift.
I agree with you concerning Mac vs. PC. Especially considering the problems the MAC's have had with Core Audio and direct monitoring. However I cannot agree with the advocating of software theft in the form of cracked software. There are too many affordable solutions for the hobbiest available and I can 100% guarantee stability and feature issues with all available cracked software. It may seem fine for a while but when you dig in you will have problems. Those that do not have problems are only scratching the surface of the application or are lucky. Utilizing a computer for audio recording/mixing is problematic enough without blindly adding known issues to the mix.
the cubase4 isnt stolen. it came with an audio interface he doesnt use. its called cubase LE4 i dunno what the LE stands for.
LE is the light version and ships free with various interfaces. It is still fairly functional as long as you do not plan on working much with midi or virtual instruments.
This is mostly wrong. I ran cracked audio software for years and the only serious issues I came across were the same issues that plagued the legit versions of the software. I run EnergyXT now, bought and paid for, but for someone just starting out it's pointless to plunk down a chunk of change on software that you're not sure you're really going to get any use out of. Try it first. Reaper is also a good, inexpensive, audio host.
I agree with everything you said except **** Sugar Hill. Those cats won't teach u **** but how to clean bathrooms unless you pay them and enter one of their programs. Go to San Jac Central and enroll there. You will learn from great people who don't beat the bush. Regardless this field is only for those who don't care about money because you won't be making any.
It is exactly correct. This type of consultation is what I do for a living. I appreciate that you have experiences that tell you differently however my knowledge on this subject is extensive and not limited to a certain system or a certain version of cracked software. Add in the recent legal actions of companies such as Waves and there is no advantage to using cracked audio software these days when there are many affordable options that will suit most through the learning process. EnergyXT being one example of a piece of software designed to get someone to the next level in their learning curve.
Yea, I realize that, but on my current track, I'll be a music teacher. Not exactly a 6-digit salary. I've already accepted the fact that with my interests and passions, I'm going to be either pretty poor or pretty miserable. I choose pretty poor. I love teaching and I love music, and this recording thing is fascinating to me, so I'd might as well try it out when I'm young and have the time.
any Rode or Neumann mic will give you what you need, but if you add in a high end preamp and know how to mix you can get away with murder in terms of cheap mics, i used to have an avalon myself, vocals came in beautiful. I run cubase 5, im a pc and cubase person, windows 7 is perfect for recording with 64bit capability to get the most out of your ram but like previously stated most plugins are not 64bit compatible yet, still run a 64bit daw and record on an interface at 24bit 96k and your good to go. make sure your interface is 24bit and 96k capable, after recording at that you'll never go back to 16bit 44k I have a shure sm58 never used it for recording but its awesome for live performances.
This is probably an accurate statement for consumer grade conversion but is not entirely accurate when discussing the true reasons behind the differences in bit and sample rate. I doubt this will matter much to anyone here but the true scoop is this: Manufacturers do not want you to know this information - but you can achieve the same or better quality at 16 bit, 44.1khz as you can at 24bit, 192khz if the converters are built correctly. Bit depth directly relates to how much dynamic range you have available for recording while sample rate refers to the highest frequency you can record. Converters are designed with something called a Nyquist filter. The Nyquist theorem states that when recording utilizing a PCM based system the sample rate utilized when recording will capture frequencies at half of that rate. The converters are designed with a steep filter which cuts off frequencies above that rate to prevent intermodulation artifacts that will occur without it and be present in the audible spectrum. The problem is that a steep filter is expensive to design and have it be transparent. In order to save money they use oversampling and use a cheaper filter design that unfortunately is not steep enough to be out of the way of the highest frequencies. If you are using consumer or pro-sumer grade converters this is the reason that recording at a higher sample rate yields a noticeably better sound quality in the upper frequencies. What you are doing is moving this cheaply designed and manufactured filter out of the range of human hearing so it has less affect on the audible spectrum of recorded program material. In respect to bit rate the extra dynamic range can be important, but for most modern music is completely useless due to the fact that everything ends up being compressed into the top 10dBu of available headroom for most popular releases. For cinema it makes more sense to utilize the expanded dynamic range due to the expanded dynamic range of the material. There are two reasons that DVD is typically 24bit, 48khz. The dynamic range is useful for the content and the slightly higher sample rate helps move those cheap consumer grade converters (and their associated Nyquist filters) a little further outside of the audible spectrum. It is entirely possible to design a 16 bit, 44.1khz converter that will sound every bit as good as the best 24bit, 192khz converter - it is just more expensive. The reason that those with better professional conversion at their disposal still utilize higher sample rates and bit rates is more for archival purposes for future file formats and the associated issues with sample and bit rate conversion than it does with quality. There are also other reasons, such as effects like EQ and the benefits of utilizing those effects at higher sample rates, but the overall perception that the "resolution" is higher in the raw recorded program material is false when comparing quality conversion.
Yes I do know its the standard and yes I do know how to use it. I've used it on a SSL. I know every short cut and I just hate it because when I went to school I wanted to record in reel like the ****ing Beatles But noooo, I have to go with digital. I could teach a 10 year old to use Pro tools but I guess that's a good thing.
Not to mention the problems that full blown ProTools has with latency compensation among other issues. The bottom line is that all of these tools basically do the same things. ProTools is standard in respect to Post Production but it isn't the standard for traditional studio work these days - just one of the tools available. There are plenty of options utilized by professional studios these days that are not Avid products. Schools, by and large, are useless in respect to real world employment in this line of work. Experience is much more in demand though the education can be worth it depending on the student's utilization of the knowledge and tools available through such programs. 99% of graduates from such programs will never work in the audio field beyond temporarily pushing a broom for little or no pay. The cold hard reality is that the entire industry pales in comparison to the money generated by a single baby diaper company.
One time Dido said she was in her kitchen and recorded parts of her third album "Safe Trip Home" and then she said she used one program that is called Logic 8, and it was great. So you can give it a try. Here it is the link where I found the info: http://www.didomusic.com/us/news_and_diary/news/latest_ask_dido_answers/
depends what kinda music your looking to record. a rap/electronic studio looks alot different than a rock/country studio. but generally...... 1) computer-get a mac if you have the money, they are perfect for music recording but there are some pc's that will get the job done to. I recommend 2 gigs of mem and at least 150 gigs of hd space. 2) Software-Pro Tools is the industry standard for recording software. But ive also used Logic Pro, Ableton live, Cubase, and Reason and they all get the job done. but to start out i would say get protools or logic(mac only) 3) Recording interface--Few that ive used are lexicon alpha and the presonus audiobox, but the one that i got the best quality from was the apogee duet(mac only). it has a usb output and cable and midi inputs. record vocals, guitar, keyboard/synths, anything w a midi or cable output straight into ur computer. 4) Mic- Anything from BlueMic is great. i suggest the blue Yeti. usb hookup with amazing quality. theres some other stuff you will need, but its to late rt now, will post later.
I recently specified 30 audio interfaces for MAC based work stations running ProTools, Logic and other typical software at a university school of music (Music composition lab). I evaluated many audio interfaces, the Duet being one of them. The Input/Output is extremely limited and the converters are less dynamic range than other products at that price point. It isn't a bad unit, but the conversion is not up to typical Apogee quality. Add in that you are trying to power a microphone preamplifier, and its associated 48v phantom power, off a computer's power supply and that device didn't make the cut. The Presonus Firestudio Mobile is what ended up being specified for this particular project due to the expanded I/O and the ability to interface with a Z-systems spdif switcher for overall room monitoring (controlled via Crestron and RS232). Part of the reason is the available external power supply (although still typically inadequate at this level) and the fact that for some reason Presonus put their highest quality converters in this particular device in the Firestudio range of products (119dB converters vs. the Duet's 114dB converters). My two cents
