PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Off-Topic What recording software do you use?

I've been using Ableton Live, Sonar and Audacity.

I also use a Boss BR-864, but transfer to software to edit, mix and master.

Ableton Live seems to have the hardest learning curve (for me).

Audacity is a piece of cake, and works well for what it is.

I've also found this web-based app that's kind of fun :

www.aviary.com

Good luck!

I started digital recording with PowerTracks ProAudio. It is a great sequencer, pretty powerfull and nicely equiped with a set of fine VST's you can use to improve your production. Don't let the (sorry to say this) poor GUI fool you: this is a good recording software.

I currently use Cubase 5. It works great with my digital mixer/DAW controller. The VST's that come with it are fantastic. Cubase works intuitive to me, more than PTPA. But that ofcourse is just personal.

RickeG
i think frankly us ourselves are the limitation rather than any of the
recording software on the market.
most of the well known recordin software these days will do the job.
one reason ive always like powertraks (and now another daw software i also like.)
is no silly dongles. i refuse to buy anything with a dongle intrusive approach.
or custom technology smt which cant be fixed easily like control surfaces.
in summary theres a lot to be said to keeping it simple.
you can do a heck of a load of songs with just ptw and an inexpensive
refurbed used dual core 150 buk pc.
but frankly i hate the current round of el cheapo laptops
with their slow hard drives n fw chipsets that often pose problems.
often tweaking is needed/upgradeing to get them performing optimally.

larry.
zzounds.com has a slew of inexpensive sound devices.
you must test however with your particular pc, and ensure that you get your money back if your
particular pc poses a problem.
for example with firewire some sound devices prefer TI chipsets.

Hi J Larry,

I had just finished my quest for an audio interface for my home studio. After having gone through the disappointing experience of being let down by Line 6 and their Tone Port, I came across this product that for a few dollars more that the latest version of the Tone Port gives you more in/outputs, MIDI interface, XLR, and quality processor software for comping and EQs. And what I like most about it is its quality audio output. After reading many of the reviews about the product, I agree that is their greatest feature. The sound is crisp no matter where I land on the volume scale in my system.

I had looked at M-Audio, and a few others and settled on this because it appeared to be a solid product for my needs and price range. Check it out:

http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.com/pro...ace-?sku=240407

Let me know what you think,
RickeG

Manning, in your comment I was reminded of the outstanding projects by probably the best in Rock recording in my opinion that being the Beatles Sgt Peppers and Magical Mystery Tour. Both were done, I believe, in a four track studio based on information I had heard from their arranger and mentor.

The only setback I can recall myself working with a four track "All those years ago" was after you have bounced the tracks over, if there was something you wanted to fix you were SOL. So, you had to be absolutely sure of not only the dynamics involves in playing the melody, but the volume, panning, and other post production factors before you bounced. Whew! I am so glad we do not have to do that anymore!

However, if you are an artist that can use a four track without the need to bounce, then that is awesome. It's because whenever I hear a song in my head I imagine the instrumental orchestrations of a George Martin with the Beatles, or a vocal arranegment as a Brian Wilsona and the Beach Boys. I cannot conceive how these geniuses did what they did with what little they had comparing to today. Makes you wonder, why is pop music stuck on samples and computerized beats and tones when there is access to do so much more?

Hey Mike,

I enjoyed the tracks you had posted of your remakes of Billy Joel classics. Were you using CuBase for those?

I tend to agree with the 'find what you like and will use' idea.

I started with Pro Tools Free back in the Windows 98 days, when I was starting out. I had BIAB, but PTW at that time wasn't up to the deal, and had no audio.

I used Magix for a while.

I switched to Pro Tools LE, but I had such issues with that program that I went back to PTW.

I use RealBand, and I use Sonar. I also have used other programs which I still like for MIDI editing, but there is no audio.

It's a learning curve.

Bang for the buck, hands down is PowerTracks and RealBand, especially if you have Band In A Box. They are great places to learn the basics, and as RHarv has stated earlier, he does multiple tracks live with his Delta 1010lt card. For a program that only costs you $50 and can accomplish that, it's an amazing thing. Coupled with Real Tracks, it really is one of the best deals out there.

Learn the basics first, and then decide what you need.

Gary

Thanks manning 1 and RickeG for the suggestions and precautions on getting an interface. Since I've never done computer-based recording, it's confusing with all the products out there. Some of the interfaces seem to be made for Pro Tools. But, does the software care what interface is used? I've read lots of reviews of software and the wonderful features each make available for recording. But, none talk about the best ways to get your signal (intruments and vocals) into the software. Maybe they assume that any potential buyer is a recording engineer and already knows this stuff.

Pro Tools, unless you're using Pro Tools M-Powered, requires Digidesign hardware. Since Avid owns both Digidesign and M-Audio, the M-Powered version of Pro Tools will work with some of the M-Audio cards. That's Pro Tools.

Software such as PowerTracks Pro Audio, Real Band, Sonar, Cubase, N-Tracks and others will all work with any card that Windows (assuming Windows, here) will detect. In fact, in my system, I have the on-board Realtek, an Asus Xonar, and a M-Audio 2496. I can use all three. Admittedly, the timing issues get a little hairy in Sonar, but for Real Band or PTW, it's not an issue.

I think one of the things that you should do is to post your requirements, now and for in the future...your expectations...and from there, we can suggest interfaces and software. However, I still stand by my belief that Band In A Box and Real Track is all you need to get you started.

Gary

Gary's immediate post above is almost correct. Up to this point in time, only Digidesign and M-Audio hardware would work with ProTools. However, Mackie have recently announced they've 'Cracked the code' of ProTools hardware exclusivity and offer an alternative to Digidesign only hardware:

http://www.mackie.com/products/onyxiseries/drivers/

Now, unfortunately for those of us using Mackie Tracktion, it appears that they have concentrated on this compatibility rather than fixing bugs of the Tracktion 3 software. In fact it appears they have basically abandoned the Tracktion product for all intents and purposes.

There are many unhappy customers of Tracktion 3. I never bothered with the upgrade to Tracktion 3 from T2, and glad I didn't.

Gary's suggestion that you post your requirements - in this case, I would recommend that you think about requirements only in the sense that you try to think about what you would like to do from a recording and editing standpoint functionally and write those things down.

For example - I'll give you my functional requirements that I used when I selected my interface:

1. I needed a headphone output so that I could isolate the playback to headphones while I recorded acoustic instruments (this rules out many interfaces right off the bat).
2. I wanted to be able to record up to 2 mics at the same time (stereo mic recording)
3. I wanted to be able to use MIDI recording simultaneous to audio recording.
4. I wanted to be able to play back to speakers using analog outputs
5. I wanted microphone pre-amps with phantom power (rules out many interfaces) because I wanted to record condenser mics without having a separate phantom power source. I also wanted fairly clean headroom on those pre-amps (this was tough to sort out and I don't think I did a good job on this part)
6. I wanted PC/Mac interoperability (I thought I was going to buy a MacBook - but didn't)
7. I wanted low-latency ASIO drivers so that I could play VSTi soft-instruments with real-time feel.
8. I wanted the interface to be portable (cuts out any internal cards right off the bat)
9. I wanted FireWire as the interface bus.
10. I had a budget of $300 max

That was basically it for me. I was able to weed through the countless options down to a fairly small sized set of interfaces based on these functional criteria.

Did you notice that M-Audio has a new mixer? I've got to wonder how Avid and Mackie ended up in bed together. "Hey, make us a mixer, and we'll make Pro Tools M-Powered work with your mixers!" Mackie hasn't 'cracked the code' as much as they've been given the key. You still have to buy stuff from Digi to get it to work, and get the 'Universal Driver' which you don't seem to need for any other program.

I also have to wonder if this is a fundamental shift on Avid/Digi's part to make their software more 'universal?' I'm pretty sure that they've been losing a lot of dollars to Cakewalk and Cubase because people are/were getting fed up with having to buy everything from Digidesign, and still having to have a dedicated computer to run the stuff on.

Gary

Gary,

Are you stating that Mackie is making mixers for M-Audio? When this news broke a couple months back, there was no indication that Mackie was given the key. In fact, the scuttlebutt with existing Mackie customers was that Mackie took a huge risk spending so much development time trying to decipher the entry way into the Avid world; whilst abandoning their loyal Tracktion customers.

Avid has had their own mixers/consoles for quite awhile from the 02 series up to the top-deck ICON consoles - no ties to Mackie whatsoever.

If there is some kind of cooperation, it's certainly a one-way relationship in favor of Avid. Can't find any reference to Mackie products on the Digidesign site nor the M-Audio sites.

Perhaps you've got some inside source of info I haven't seen. The NRV10 mixer from M-Audio seems to be much more feature packed than similar offerings from Mackie, and it's been around since 2007. I don't know, I just don't see Mackie/Loud getting into bed with Avid, but I could be wrong. I never thought Mackie would jack around it's customers like it has with it's Tracktion customers.

Scott,
Admittedly, I hadn't looked at the M-Audio line in a while, and it was indeed the NRV10 that I was speaking of. I just was wondering.

However, from the page that you posted a link to, there was this. They wanted you to download a driver, and an 'Authorization Application?' I mean, come on, if they were GIVING it away, or had cracked a code, they wouldn't be charging you for it. Also, I'm sure the DIgi DUC (which I haven't looked at) would also be full of stuff saying that this was wrong, and that it wasn't supported by Digi/Avid. Now, I havent' looked, so it might, but I find it hard to believe that Digi/Avid would allow Mackie to get away with this under proprietary laws, etc.

As to insider information, no, I have none.

Gary