I am new to recording. I have a Zoom PS-04 Palmtop 4-track. I want to update soon. I would like to record myself and my band. I have a cheaper, new Dell Inspiration 2200 with 40 gigs. If I update should I get a recorder with more tracks like a portastudio, or get a computer based recorder and interface (i am thinking line6 toneport )? What are the pros and cons of entry level computer recording?
Computer Recording VS. External recorders
- Thread starter G&Legacy
- Start date
innerdreamrecords.co
TrippyVinylologist
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
Hi - well computer recording is great but it can be a steep learning curve and unless you have a laptop not very portable. The advantages that are immediate is the editing functions on a computer but if your tracking in the old fashioned way like they did with 2" 24 track then it might not be an issue.
Hi - well computer recording is great but it can be a steep learning curve and unless you have a laptop not very portable. The advantages that are immediate is the editing functions on a computer but if your tracking in the old fashioned way like they did with 2" 24 track then it might not be an issue.
TwilightOdyssey
Darkness on the edge of Tone
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
Non-linear editing
One-stop shopping for recording, mixing, and mastering
Built-in drum machines, click tracks, tempo and time signature maps
Internal synthesizer plugins
Cons:
You will be limited by the amount of RAM and hard drive space
It is difficult to monitor what is going on with recording software if you're also performing at the same time
Personally, I like using a stand-alone DAW, and then exporting the tracks as WAV files and using the PC just for mixing. This enables me to bring the DAW wherever it needs to be. It's also (relatively) lightweight and keeps the PC at home where it belongs.
Pros:G&Legacy said:
Non-linear editing
One-stop shopping for recording, mixing, and mastering
Built-in drum machines, click tracks, tempo and time signature maps
Internal synthesizer plugins
Cons:
You will be limited by the amount of RAM and hard drive space
It is difficult to monitor what is going on with recording software if you're also performing at the same time
Personally, I like using a stand-alone DAW, and then exporting the tracks as WAV files and using the PC just for mixing. This enables me to bring the DAW wherever it needs to be. It's also (relatively) lightweight and keeps the PC at home where it belongs.
D
DeadSkinSlayer3
Guest
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
I prefer computer recording... you can edit/mix/record things so much easier, and it's a ton faster.
I prefer computer recording... you can edit/mix/record things so much easier, and it's a ton faster.
TwilightOdyssey
Darkness on the edge of Tone
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
ANY method of recording is easy once you get used to it. More often than not you need to learn to work around the shortcomings of a particular system, though. I had this experience recently when I switched from using a drum machine to using a Cubase/Drumkit From Hell combination. Everyone told me how much 'easier' it is to use DFH. It's not easier at all. It is a more powerful and flexible way to write drum parts, tho.
One CLEAR advantage of computer-based recording is that the price of admission is much less than a DAW, but as for speed, ease-of-use, portability, and features, a DAW is clearly superior.
I can understand why someone would prefer using a computer over a stand-alone DAW, but your generalizations are a bit sweeping, don't you think?DeadSkinSlayer3 said:
It really depends on the DAW you're using. Even a $1,000 stand-alone unit will have a display that will let you zoom in down individual samples, if you wish. Plus, you have on-board multi-effects processors, mic preamps, a mixing console with real faders, multiple inputs and outputs, as well as the ability to sync the console up to whatever editing software you want for mixing.
ANY method of recording is easy once you get used to it. More often than not you need to learn to work around the shortcomings of a particular system, though. I had this experience recently when I switched from using a drum machine to using a Cubase/Drumkit From Hell combination. Everyone told me how much 'easier' it is to use DFH. It's not easier at all. It is a more powerful and flexible way to write drum parts, tho.
One CLEAR advantage of computer-based recording is that the price of admission is much less than a DAW, but as for speed, ease-of-use, portability, and features, a DAW is clearly superior.
D
DeadSkinSlayer3
Guest
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
I guess it depends on what you want to do.... When I write, I'm always mixing and writing drumparts with it, as well as exploring with effects, layering, etc, as I go. For me, it's much easier to use a mouse/keyboard and monitor to move parts around, add plugins, tweak things, etc, as I go. I also find Battery2 (I use a piecemealed kit, many pieces from DFH) much easier to use than punching beats in on a drum machine, but I'm usually programming more complex beats than I could ever play in real life, and I'm always changing beats/feels around.
I honestly feel confined when using a standalone DAW. If I want to record at a certain part, or crossfade, move a whole section of a song around, etc... it's much easier and faster with a mouse.
If you need portability, though, then a standalone DAW would be better. I use mine as a writing tool and for getting my demo's across to singers, other bandmates, MySpace, etc, and the way I work with it is hard for me to do with a standalone unit.
That, and I layer things so many damn times it's hard to keep track of it all without colors/names/big flashy things :laugh2: .
I guess it depends on what you want to do.... When I write, I'm always mixing and writing drumparts with it, as well as exploring with effects, layering, etc, as I go. For me, it's much easier to use a mouse/keyboard and monitor to move parts around, add plugins, tweak things, etc, as I go. I also find Battery2 (I use a piecemealed kit, many pieces from DFH) much easier to use than punching beats in on a drum machine, but I'm usually programming more complex beats than I could ever play in real life, and I'm always changing beats/feels around.
I honestly feel confined when using a standalone DAW. If I want to record at a certain part, or crossfade, move a whole section of a song around, etc... it's much easier and faster with a mouse.
If you need portability, though, then a standalone DAW would be better. I use mine as a writing tool and for getting my demo's across to singers, other bandmates, MySpace, etc, and the way I work with it is hard for me to do with a standalone unit.
That, and I layer things so many damn times it's hard to keep track of it all without colors/names/big flashy things :laugh2: .
TwilightOdyssey
Darkness on the edge of Tone
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
DAW = Digital Audio Workstation.
Yes.G&Legacy said:
DAW = Digital Audio Workstation.
75lespaul
New member
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
Exactly! Here is just a bit of how I use things. Hopefully I can help our forum brother out by sharing my experiences.
I have Sonar 5 producder edition. I started with Sonar some years ago, upgraded to Sonar 2.1 and now to Sonar 5. For just plugging in and recording quickly, Sonar is a dream. That being said, a lot of other software can probably do the same thing for a lot less than Sonar. Sonar 5 is LOADED with stuff I may never get to use, but for what I want to do, the price was well worth it. I come from the era when it would cost about a million dollars to set up a recording studio to do what Sonar does for $500!
I have Sonar on three computers. One in the basement where my "big" amps are, one in my bedroom on the 2nd floor where I do most of my drum & sequencer programmng, and one on my laptop just in case. I also have a Boss BR864 digital 8-track for easier portability and scratch pad for writing.
All this sounds great, right? Well, It took me years to put together this setup and the computer in my bedroom cost about $3k all by itself because I loaded it up with memory for recording. Sonar was a bitch to learn because of my time constraints. I'd learn something, then by the time I got to use it again, I forgot what I learned the last time! When there were hardware or software problems it could kill a whole session troubleshooting and I'd be so annoyed I wouldn't use it for weeks. Now that I'm out of work for the past three months with a back injury, I made it a point to learn Sonar 5 and it is awesome. I spend a few hours a day with it and the learing curve is steep, but well worth it.
My own personal feeling is that computers are better--if you've learned how to use all that stuff. An outboard recorder, whether it be tape or digital will probably have more limitations but the tradeoff is smaller learning curve, and portability. There are still times when I wish I had my Roland VS-1680, which I owned for literally three days before my wife lost her job and I had to sell it. In three days, I learned how to use it and recorded two things which sounded great. The thing I really like about a recorder like this is NO INTERFACES OR LATENCY. With no interface, there is one less piece of equipment to buy and to have problems with, while latency to me is the most frustrating part of computer recording. I get around it by only listening to what I've already recorded in my headphones, and not the part that I'm playing. I only record vocals and guitar live, and I don't need that in the headphones to record once I've set the levels and gotten the sound.
I love the setup I have now, but before I hurt my back, I was using the Boss BR864 for all my recording because the internal drum machine sounds okay and it's very easy to use. However, it's only 8 tracks and even though it's digital it still loses sound quality when bouncing. You also lose panning ability when bouncing which is very important to mixing, along with seperate volume control, effects etc... Thank goodness the drum track is stereo and is not part of the 8 tracks you record on, which is cool With the computer however, I have no need to bounce tracks because of the "unlimited" tracks. Again, unlimited depending on how much memory your computer has.
WOW this is a long post! If it's too long, I apologize but hopefully it is more informative than boring. :reporter:
TwilightOdyssey said:
Exactly! Here is just a bit of how I use things. Hopefully I can help our forum brother out by sharing my experiences.
I have Sonar 5 producder edition. I started with Sonar some years ago, upgraded to Sonar 2.1 and now to Sonar 5. For just plugging in and recording quickly, Sonar is a dream. That being said, a lot of other software can probably do the same thing for a lot less than Sonar. Sonar 5 is LOADED with stuff I may never get to use, but for what I want to do, the price was well worth it. I come from the era when it would cost about a million dollars to set up a recording studio to do what Sonar does for $500!
I have Sonar on three computers. One in the basement where my "big" amps are, one in my bedroom on the 2nd floor where I do most of my drum & sequencer programmng, and one on my laptop just in case. I also have a Boss BR864 digital 8-track for easier portability and scratch pad for writing.
All this sounds great, right? Well, It took me years to put together this setup and the computer in my bedroom cost about $3k all by itself because I loaded it up with memory for recording. Sonar was a bitch to learn because of my time constraints. I'd learn something, then by the time I got to use it again, I forgot what I learned the last time! When there were hardware or software problems it could kill a whole session troubleshooting and I'd be so annoyed I wouldn't use it for weeks. Now that I'm out of work for the past three months with a back injury, I made it a point to learn Sonar 5 and it is awesome. I spend a few hours a day with it and the learing curve is steep, but well worth it.
My own personal feeling is that computers are better--if you've learned how to use all that stuff. An outboard recorder, whether it be tape or digital will probably have more limitations but the tradeoff is smaller learning curve, and portability. There are still times when I wish I had my Roland VS-1680, which I owned for literally three days before my wife lost her job and I had to sell it. In three days, I learned how to use it and recorded two things which sounded great. The thing I really like about a recorder like this is NO INTERFACES OR LATENCY. With no interface, there is one less piece of equipment to buy and to have problems with, while latency to me is the most frustrating part of computer recording. I get around it by only listening to what I've already recorded in my headphones, and not the part that I'm playing. I only record vocals and guitar live, and I don't need that in the headphones to record once I've set the levels and gotten the sound.
I love the setup I have now, but before I hurt my back, I was using the Boss BR864 for all my recording because the internal drum machine sounds okay and it's very easy to use. However, it's only 8 tracks and even though it's digital it still loses sound quality when bouncing. You also lose panning ability when bouncing which is very important to mixing, along with seperate volume control, effects etc... Thank goodness the drum track is stereo and is not part of the 8 tracks you record on, which is cool With the computer however, I have no need to bounce tracks because of the "unlimited" tracks. Again, unlimited depending on how much memory your computer has.
WOW this is a long post! If it's too long, I apologize but hopefully it is more informative than boring. :reporter:
TwilightOdyssey
Darkness on the edge of Tone
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
75lespaul, there was LOTS of good info in that post!
Not bad for a Joisey boy!
75lespaul, there was LOTS of good info in that post!
Not bad for a Joisey boy!
shredaholic
New member
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
I prefer using my DAW for recording as I loathe sitting at the PC to do it - I spend enough time on the PC already. I prefer the 'hands on' approach of being able to physically move sliders and controls hehe.
For mixing though - I use both. Each has it's own advantages for different type of effects, for example the DAW has some great plate reverb effects yet I might prefer the PC for other reverb types.
I prefer using my DAW for recording as I loathe sitting at the PC to do it - I spend enough time on the PC already. I prefer the 'hands on' approach of being able to physically move sliders and controls hehe.
For mixing though - I use both. Each has it's own advantages for different type of effects, for example the DAW has some great plate reverb effects yet I might prefer the PC for other reverb types.
75lespaul
New member
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
I don't know if this is a good price for either of these, as I paid close to two grand for mine used, but these are incredible machines. You can find specs on the web. The effects are not standard with these units so make sure it either has the card included if you buy it used, or is priced right so you can buy it seperately. Again, these are fantastic units and will probably do everything you need.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLAND-VS-1680-...ryZ41479QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLAND-VS-880-V...ryZ41479QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
I don't know if this is a good price for either of these, as I paid close to two grand for mine used, but these are incredible machines. You can find specs on the web. The effects are not standard with these units so make sure it either has the card included if you buy it used, or is priced right so you can buy it seperately. Again, these are fantastic units and will probably do everything you need.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLAND-VS-1680-...ryZ41479QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLAND-VS-880-V...ryZ41479QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
shredaholic
New member
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
I use a Boss BR1200CD - works great, and you can get a polished CD recorded and burnt so quickly! It's the only one I've owned, but there's so many great features on it I really would recommend it. For example, you can plug a guitar straight into it, and it has a built in Boss GT-6 with amp/speaker/bass modelling! Have a listen to the clips I've posted in this board to see what it sounds like - the recordings I've put up are just very raw clips but still sound good.
G&Legacy said:
I use a Boss BR1200CD - works great, and you can get a polished CD recorded and burnt so quickly! It's the only one I've owned, but there's so many great features on it I really would recommend it. For example, you can plug a guitar straight into it, and it has a built in Boss GT-6 with amp/speaker/bass modelling! Have a listen to the clips I've posted in this board to see what it sounds like - the recordings I've put up are just very raw clips but still sound good.
iekobrid
New member
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
That's more or less how I do it, too. Put together a preliminary drum track on the PC, export to a old-ish Fostex DMT8, lay down 7 tracks, move it all back to the computer, export a rough sub-mix, 7 more tracks, lather rinse repeat.
Certainly not the quickest or most efficient way of doing things, but my brain is still wired in such a way that tactile knobs and faders and punch in pedals just feel 'right'.... at least until I get my DIY PC up and running, and maybe a nice USB workstation controller.
TwilightOdyssey said:
That's more or less how I do it, too. Put together a preliminary drum track on the PC, export to a old-ish Fostex DMT8, lay down 7 tracks, move it all back to the computer, export a rough sub-mix, 7 more tracks, lather rinse repeat.
Certainly not the quickest or most efficient way of doing things, but my brain is still wired in such a way that tactile knobs and faders and punch in pedals just feel 'right'.... at least until I get my DIY PC up and running, and maybe a nice USB workstation controller.
St_Genesius
New member
Re: Computer Recording VS. External recorders
I greatly prefer PC recording, but that's just because it suits my recording style the best. I'm just one guy sitting at home, doing stuff one or two tracks at a time -- which is all that's possible with the Toneport. If I were tracking an entire band at once, especially if I were doing it somewhere away from home, I think I'd prefer a more portable standalone unit (even the biggish ones would be easier to haul than a desktop PC + recording interface) that offered a built-in mixer, many more tracks recordable at once, etc.
I greatly prefer PC recording, but that's just because it suits my recording style the best. I'm just one guy sitting at home, doing stuff one or two tracks at a time -- which is all that's possible with the Toneport. If I were tracking an entire band at once, especially if I were doing it somewhere away from home, I think I'd prefer a more portable standalone unit (even the biggish ones would be easier to haul than a desktop PC + recording interface) that offered a built-in mixer, many more tracks recordable at once, etc.