Help With Choosing Equipment For Studio

Posted on

Singer / Songwriter
Member Since: Jul 18, 2007

I'm a singer/songwriter, and I'm currently using an 'edirol UA-20' as my interface, along with 'Sonar5 Producer' as my software, through a Dell Dimension with Windows XP Home edition. But because this computer has other software, as well as the internet on it, I can't seem to get a good recording with this set-up, because of the CPU% too high, dropouts, and pops. I know this is from my processor and memory being used to much by firewalls & anti softwares. So what I want to do is change to a system only for recording.

I'm looking at the 'Pro Tools LE 003' and the 'Yamaha AW2400'. I've been reading that the '003' can make good quality recordings, and has a great software bundle package, but most comments say it's only good for prepping material for the larger 'Pro Tools' studios. The 'AW2400' seem to be an all around work station with good quality recording, mostly all comments are good about this unit, but does it do a better job than the '003'?. I'm building a studio in one of the rooms of my house, and want to have a system using a computer with no connection to internet or other office type software. I want to use mac as my computer. So do you think it's best to use the 'Pro Tools LE 003' with the 'Mac' alone, or use the 'Yamaha AW2400' as my work station, and use the mac with the 'Sonar5' software for the mixing and mastering? Any suggestions on what is the best way to go?

[ Back to Top ]


Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Jul 18, 2007 10:11 am

Welcome to HRC...but...whoa, hold on there a minute don't jump on such a huge expense so fast...the gear you have should work just fine...you just need some tuning...

You can disable AV's and firewalls during recording, how much other crap does it having running in the background? How many icons are down by your clock? What are they? Do you have broadband internet? If so, do you have a router? Does the router have a firewall? If it does, remove the firewall on your PC (other than Microsoft's that is). What AV software do you use? Norton or MacAfee? They are resource pigs, there are lighter weight AV's, and some are free!

read this www.homerecordingconnecti...tory&id=253

The 003 (or any overpriced PT system) will do nothing that Sonar can't do.

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004


Jul 18, 2007 10:38 am

I agree with what dB posted, and read through the linky he posted.

I posted about this type thing a week ago, and most of the issues apply. This may help you drop background programs you don't need (or want) when recording.

When I record with my laptop, I turn off all the unnecessary things running in memory, using the CTRL-ALT-DEL -> Task Manager -> Processes. I kill the ones I know I won't need, and it works quite well (i'm using a tascam us122 as my interface, I have xp home as well).

If you're set on going a different route, I'd think that sonar will give you more bells and whistles than PT LE will. I wouldn't even think the board is a super-necessity, as there's other very nice devices that will do the same type thing. the Maudio board comes to mind.

Also, if you're thinking to track on the AW2400, I would be inclined to just track on the PC. Getting a current mac just for audio should be able to track in the dozens of tracks before you start taxing it out. Sweetwater has done some test of native mac systems with DP and PT and got into the hundreds with firewire systems.

But I digress.

Having two systems in your workflow doesn't seem to make sense to me, if you can do it all in one system.

Also, here's a note from a review at sweetwater: Bit depth/simultaneous tracks: 16-bit - record 16 tracks, playback 24 tracks. 24-bit - record 8 tracks, playback 12 tracks.

It looks like you can only record 8 tracks at once at 24 bit depth? May be fine, as I don't do more than 4 or 6 at time right now, but for 2k, I don't want limitations.

Spend the $$$ on your preamp banks and audio interface, and you'll be golden.

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 18, 2007 10:38 am

The computer that I'm on is being used as a family computer which is is the livingroom area, and makes it hard to use it to record anything. I have a room upstairs that I'm sound-proofing. It already has my PA & Guitars and keys set-up in there. I want to set-up a system that I can do a more professional recording with, and also be able to use it for recording other musicians as well.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Jul 18, 2007 11:13 am

OK, that's fair play...however, the same issues will apply on your new PC. You will still want an anti-virus on your computer.

That said, the 003 will still lend little more in terms of a more "professional" recording...in theory.

It's the ol' "is the magic in the wand or the magician" story...concentrate more on being a good engineer first...that is the single most important piece of the puzzle.

Secondly a new computer will come with loads of **** running on it too, they all do. You will still need to tune it for maximum performance. All manufacturers put their stupid crap running, their "support services" software, Quicktime, Realplayer and goofy **** that you'll never use.

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 18, 2007 11:51 am

Do I still need to use an anti virus if I'm only using this for recording only?

From you and pjk, I'm led to believe that I just need a good Interface. Being pjk said he uses a 'Tascam', I checked out their selection. I like being able to use a board instead of a mouse, so I was looking at the 'Tascam FW-1082' 10 channel FireWire A/M Interface, and the 'Tascam FW1884' FireWire A/M Interface and DAW. Both seem really good units which would you prefer?

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Jul 18, 2007 11:56 am

ALWAYS have an antivirus on EVERY computer...viruses don't only come from the internets, also shared disks (such as project discs from other studios and such) that may be infected and that sort of thing...the trick is do not use Norton or MacAfee, they are both resource pigs for no reason, I use AVG from Grisoft, it's fast, light weight, effective and FREE.

I personally prefer doing all my mixing on the computer...so I have no valid opinion that would give you decent input either way.

Personally, for now, I'd spend money getting the new PC for your room and use the interface you have...

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 18, 2007 12:06 pm

Good to know about the 'AVG' from Grisoft. Thanks for your input on this. It's helped me get a better view on things.

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004


Jul 18, 2007 12:19 pm

I use the old version us122, which has worked well for me, but there's more people that hate it than love it.

I would hope that it's just a single line, but the new versions of the us122 and us144 seem to have problems as well.

As far as their boards, I don't know anything about those, so I can't give you a real opinion.

I would check the big online music stores, for reviews of the items you are interested in.

As far as the interface, if you're using a mac, looking into how sweetwater ran their mammoth tracks, may be of interest to you (sorry about the 'non-zzounds' links, dB)

www.sweetwater.com/feature/motu/

The MOTU line now has an 8pre, which has 8 preamps on it, and then the other MOTU goodness. It may be a real nice solution for a mac studio.

Presonus also dropped their price on their 8 input firepod, so that's a solution too.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Jul 18, 2007 08:39 pm

Your Edirol unit will work nicely if you would like to stay with that. Once you have a purpose built PC for recording that will eliminate a lot of the trouble you are having.

That said though the Tascam units you listed above will do the same thing, Just one has more bells and whistles then the other. The 1082 has standard 75mm faders and the 1884 has a higher grade 100mm fader. I believe the 1082 will do 10 inputs channels while the 1884 boasts 8, but they actually have more that can be sent to the PC via the aux channels. Both these units are more then capable of running with Sonar 5 PE so I wouldn't even bother looking at another DAW.

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 18, 2007 11:46 pm

After Reading up on the 'Motu' stuff, I think I'm sold on it. This is what I'm thinking of buying.

Motu Traveler
Motu Digital Performer 5
15" 2.2GHz 2GB Ram MacBook Pro

Mackie HR824 Studio Monitors or
Yamaha HS80M Studio Monitors
Haven't decided yet on the monitors.

pjk - thanks for turning me on to the info through sweetwater.

SM7b the Chuck Noris of Mic's
Contributor
Since: Jun 20, 2002


Jul 19, 2007 12:37 am

MOTU makes some nice gear. the traveler is a good choice. Is there any reason why you are going with a Mack book (just wondering). I have a mac as well as a few PC's (i'm not one of the anti mac people) . The big reason i was wondering is that if you stayed with a PC or Laptop you wouldn't have to buy DP or anouther platform. I run sonor 99% of the time but i keep Pro tools and Cubase around for other reasons. DP5 is a little pricy as well. Personally i'd stick with you current set up + a new PC and you should be good to go, unless you need a lot more in/outs .

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 19, 2007 04:16 pm

My reason for 'Mac'is almost all of the new PCs and Laptops are running the new 'Vista'. I think the XP runs fine. It seems everytime 'Windows' tries something to go above what's working fine, it always seems to have some sort of problems with it (ex. Windows ME). So I'm not sure about getting the new 'Windows Vista'. I've heard alot about the Mac's OS X program, which seems to have fewer problems than any 'Windows', from what I've read so far. The reason for equipment change is the 'Edirol UA-20' I can't seem to get that good vocal recording. I have the MXL-2003 for a vocal recording mic, but I just can't seem to get that warm sound from it. I did not have a room like I do now, but I did use sheets in the open livingroom to keep my bounce down. Would the rooms make that much of a difference on my vocal? I seemed to have made better recordings on my 4-track cassette recorder than what I'm doing now. I just can't figure it out, except that I'm missing something in this equation.

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004


Jul 19, 2007 04:26 pm

No problem, if you're thinking to go through SW, then call them up and get a sales rep. This will be a person that stays with you, that you can call with questions, and new ideas, and they can help you out.

All their sales staff are already experienced in the field, so they're quite knowledgeable.

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 19, 2007 06:23 pm

Thanks pjk. I was going to load a song for you guys to listen to and tell me if there's something I'm failing to do. Only problem is I can't upload a song in the manage song area because of some MIME thing that I have no idea what they're talking about.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Jul 19, 2007 06:50 pm

Tommy, you should be able to upload if it is a standard mp3 format. Try using a standard 128kb encoded file and you should be just fine.

As for the laptop with Vista thing, you can still ask for it to be loaded with XP Pro if you wish. Any company doing the laptops and such will be willing to do that for you. Either way, I simply un-install Vista and the do an install of XP.

Lastly, I think you will find that hardware and software in our section for zZounds and a much better price then SW will give you. Have a look there and see.

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 19, 2007 11:53 pm

I don't know what's going on here. I use to have 'MusicMatch' that would let me convert to MP3s, but I had to clear my computer awhile back, and now I can only get the yahoo version that doesn't let you convert. Plus none of my files that are MP3s say .mp3 anymore. Now they all say whatever my media file is now like for(ex. Winamp Media File). I can still move them over to my 'Record Now' and have them converted to an audio file when i'm burning a CD like the Mp3s would do, but that's it. My sonar use to export as MP3 too, but now it say I need to reinstall or upgrade my encoder. I removed my 'Sound Blaster Audigy' awhile back and I'm only using the 'Edirol' as my means of getting audio to my speakers. Could the problem be from not having a soundcard?

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Jul 20, 2007 06:22 am

Yeah, Yahoo has gotten a lot of **** for the downgrade of their musicmatch product...the problem is music match got screwed, Yahoo strippped it of a lot of features.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Jul 20, 2007 08:34 pm

Tommy, if you have Sonar 5 producer edition it was a release that included the full on encoder for encoding mp3. It was no longer needed to re-install the encoder from the old Pro Audio disc.

You should just be able to insert your Sonar 5 disc and go to the extras menu and install the mp3 encoder from there.

And ya, that MusicMatch thing was a bummer, I know my son used it for awhile until Yahoo trashed it.

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 21, 2007 07:59 am

Unfornately Noize2u, the Sonar5 PE doesn't have a full version of the encoder. You would think that it would, as much as it cost me. I explored the disk and all it has in the encoder folder is a set-up for the upgrade, which turns out to be $19. I went to cakewalk.com, and it is told to me there that the encoder was only a trial version. I tried some of the extensions in the encoder extensions folder, LAME/ Monkey/ OGG, but none would open up for me when I used them exporting from 'Sonar'. So I guess I'm stuck at no uploading until there's another way around the 'Mime' field.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Jul 22, 2007 04:02 pm

Yep, my bad. It was just the upgrader for those with previous versions of the full mp3 encoder.

Not sure if your looking to upgrade to Sonar 6 yet but it does have the full install of the encoder with it.

Have you tried to google an mp3 encoder yet? That or hit up KVR www.kvraudio.com and see what they have for free there. Otherwise $19.00 is not a bad price for the full on encoder that Sonar offers.

Also, if you are running Windows XP, the Windows Media Player can take a wav file and save it as an mp3 if you so desire.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Jul 22, 2007 04:06 pm

Audacity has an encoder in it...or more accurately an encoder to plug in to it.

audacity.sourceforge.net

Singer / Songwriter
Member
Since: Jul 18, 2007


Jul 23, 2007 11:54 pm

OK, after much research, listening to input, and reading other threads, I think I've decided to go with the digital workstation, and use a windows formatted laptop to put my Sonar5 PE on. I've decided to go with the 'Korg D3200'. This thing seem to be loaded with just about everything I need. from the interactive session drummer, to the non-destructive track editing. It has 8 pre-amps with the +48v phatom power, loaded with 56 bit effects, and is computer friendly to allow me to move things to and from the laptop. I appreciate all the help and input I got here in this forum. I have to say this forum has been very friendly, and from what I've seen so far 'ego-free'. I'm glad I found this site in my forum search.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Jul 24, 2007 09:27 pm

Well it sound like you have it in the bag then. That is not a bad set up in the end. You get a little portability and have the DAW at home base for the real nitty gritty part of the work and mixing.

And thanx for finding HRC to be a nice place. We really try hard to keep it that way.

And ya, its a rule that we all check our ego's at the door. :-)

And keep up posted with hoe things move on once you get going.

Noize

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Jul 24, 2007 09:35 pm

Quote:
I have to say this forum has been very friendly, and from what I've seen so far 'ego-free'.


Glad you like it, welcome aboard. The only one allowed to be an a-hole is me :-D

Related Forum Topics:



If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.