MOTM

I'm considering the purchase of recording software along the lines of 
Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar. I don't mind spending serious money if I 
can get superior features, but if I can get something less expensive 
to do the same thing, I would obviously rather get that.

Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something you're 
happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to be most 
useful?

Thanks in advance for any info :)
~Terry

> Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something you're
> happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to be most
> useful?

Cubase SX - SL might do it for you. I've done about 5 songs (from 10-30
tracks) with virtual instruments, MIDI, audio, VST effects, etc... and it
all works well.

I particularly like the controller draw features. Quite useful for doing
oddball expressions.

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley            In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is not
Synthcom Systems, Inc.  king - he's a prisoner.
ICQ #29402898

Hi Terry -

I use Sonar 2.0 XL if I need to sync MIDI and audio. My CD of MOTM 
stuff was done with that.  I also use Syntrillium's Cool Edit Pro, 
particularly for mastering the final stereo track, but also to record 
directly. Another great program is Acid which is great for stitching 
together cool noises into a more complicated cool noise.  Sound Forge 
has some great audio tools, too.

If I had to pick two, they would be Sonar and Cool Edit. 

Audio Editors are like text editors; you'll probably hear lots of 
religious fervor about one or another.  Pick one and jam!

Mike

--- In motm@y..., "xiphiguy" <tahrens@s...> wrote:
> I'm considering the purchase of recording software along the lines 
of 
> Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar. I don't mind spending serious money if I 
> can get superior features, but if I can get something less 
expensive 
> to do the same thing, I would obviously rather get that.
> 
> Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something you're 
> happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to be 
most 

> useful?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any info :)
> ~Terry

This is all PC stuff.  On the Mac, I don't know, some Mac guy could 
chime in.

BTW, if you're on a PC don't buy emagic stuff (like Logic).  As good 
as it is, they've been bought by Apple and have discontinued support 
of their PC products.  Us SoundDiver users have been left out in the 
cold.

Mike

--- In motm@y..., "Mike Marsh" <mmarsh@s...> wrote:
> Hi Terry -
> 
> I use Sonar 2.0 XL if I need to sync MIDI and audio. My CD of MOTM 
> stuff was done with that.  I also use Syntrillium's Cool Edit Pro, 
> particularly for mastering the final stereo track, but also to 
record 
> directly. Another great program is Acid which is great for 
stitching 
> together cool noises into a more complicated cool noise.  Sound 
Forge 
> has some great audio tools, too.
> 
> If I had to pick two, they would be Sonar and Cool Edit. 
> 
> Audio Editors are like text editors; you'll probably hear lots of 
> religious fervor about one or another.  Pick one and jam!
> 
> Mike
> 
> --- In motm@y..., "xiphiguy" <tahrens@s...> wrote:
> > I'm considering the purchase of recording software along the 
lines 
> of 
> > Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar. I don't mind spending serious money if 
I 

> > can get superior features, but if I can get something less 
> expensive 
> > to do the same thing, I would obviously rather get that.
> > 
> > Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something you're 
> > happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to be 
> most 
> > useful?
> > 
> > Thanks in advance for any info :)
> > ~Terry

> BTW, if you're on a PC don't buy emagic stuff (like Logic).  As good
> as it is, they've been bought by Apple and have discontinued support
> of their PC products.  Us SoundDiver users have been left out in the
> cold.

SoundDiver users were left out in the cold long before Apple acquired
Emagic. I use SoundDiver on the Mac. The program hasn't been updated in well
over a year, is rife with bugs, misrepresented in its advertisements (e.g.,
the Korg Z1 editor was never finished, many editors lack any documentation,
the Motor Mix integration doesn't work with some editors), and tech support
queries go unacknowledged and unanswered.

--Adam

> Audio Editors are like text editors; you'll probably hear lots of
> religious fervor about one or another.  Pick one and jam!

Religious fervor aside, I've used Cool Edit Pro and Sound Forge 6, and for
me SF 6 is head and shoulders above Cool Edit Pro in sound quality in the
EQ, effects, and pitch/time shifting. It's quite a bit more spendy,
though...

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley            In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is not
Synthcom Systems, Inc.  king - he's a prisoner.
ICQ #29402898

> > Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something you're
> > happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to be most
> > useful?


  I'm using Cubasis VST. It's a whopping $70 and sounds top notch. It has all the functions needed for serious audio multitracking and sequencing, if that's all you're after. The low cost means you'll have more dough left for those new MOTM modules coming around the corner. :) 
 
 Andrew

I got Cubasis VST bundled together with my Audigy sound card, and I 
have had nothing but trouble with it; when I play back a track, it 
speeds up and slows down from measure to measure. There seems to be 
nothing I can do to affect a remedy. I'm wondering if this "bundled" 
version is different from what Andrew paid $70 for? I would be happy 
to use this program, at least for the time being, if I could get it 
to behave. Any thoughts?
~Terry
> 
>   I'm using Cubasis VST. It's a whopping $70 and sounds top notch. 
It has all the functions needed for serious audio multitracking and 
sequencing, if that's all you're after. The low cost means you'll 
have more dough left for those new MOTM modules coming around the 
corner. :) 
>  
>  Andrew

I was a diehard Cakewalk user since DOS version 1.02 but I recently 
switched over to Nuendo. I have tried Sonar too-it's ok but still a 
little clunky. I have already completed CDs using Nuendo and have 
only referred to the manual a few times. Cubase Sx is supposed to be 
a lot like nuendo but I can't say from experience.

The RME 9652 card works great with Nuendo and my 01V.

Good Luck,

Z.

--- In motm@y..., "xiphiguy" <tahrens@s...> wrote:
> I'm considering the purchase of recording software along the lines 
of 
> Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar. I don't mind spending serious money if I 
> can get superior features, but if I can get something less 
expensive 
> to do the same thing, I would obviously rather get that.
> 
> Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something you're 
> happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to be 
most 

> useful?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any info :)
> ~Terry

> only referred to the manual a few times. Cubase Sx is supposed to be
> a lot like nuendo but I can't say from experience.

It is. Torn from the same cloth. ;-)

One thing to keep in mind when buying sequencing/audio software: There is
no such thing as a "globally good works for everybody" package - Mac or
PC. Every package on every platform on every operating system has the
potential for disaster and disappointment.

I know many people who hate Cubase VST and who claim it's a buggy POS. But
VST worked flawlessly for me for years. I know people who love Logic, but
I also know a few people who have had it crash on them constantly. Same
deal with Cakewalk and everything else. Most often these problems are
sound card related/ignorance related.

But regardless of what you do get, be aware you'll be in for a learning
curve and aggrivation no matter what.

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley            In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is not
Synthcom Systems, Inc.  king - he's a prisoner.
ICQ #29402898

As for the Mac, I'd go with any of the MOTU audio interfaces and 
MOTU's Digital Performer 3.11, I've been using DP3 since last 
december and switching from a PC to a Mac, showed a huge improvement. 
I think having the interface, audio drivers, and recording software 
manufactured by the same company guarantees the best compatibility. I 
used to use Cakewalk's Sonar XL on the PC with a MOTU 24i interface. 
A cool little program but it was buggy for me. My biggest gripe was 
the shotty support for WDM drivers it was supposedly built for and 
the fact that no matter how hard i tried my 24 channel interface 
would show up as 10 stereo pairs (where did the other 4 channels 
go!?) Latency was an issue on the PC as well. Running a dual PIII 
xeon machine at 800Mhz, the PC seemed to run a lot slower than my G4 
DP 500Mhz machine. Whichever program/platform you choose, be sure to 
use high quality drives and load up your memory, the faster and 
better memory you have, the more stable your audio will run... spend 
a little more money for ECC memory and stay away from "bargain" 9ns 
memory, you get what you pay for. 

 --- In motm@y..., "Mike Marsh" <mmarsh@s...> wrote:
> This is all PC stuff.  On the Mac, I don't know, some Mac guy could 
> chime in.
> 
> BTW, if you're on a PC don't buy emagic stuff (like Logic).  As 
good 
> as it is, they've been bought by Apple and have discontinued 
support 
> of their PC products.  Us SoundDiver users have been left out in 
the 
> cold.
> 
> Mike
> 
> --- In motm@y..., "Mike Marsh" <mmarsh@s...> wrote:
> > Hi Terry -
> > 
> > I use Sonar 2.0 XL if I need to sync MIDI and audio. My CD of 
MOTM 
> > stuff was done with that.  I also use Syntrillium's Cool Edit 
Pro, 
> > particularly for mastering the final stereo track, but also to 
> record 
> > directly. Another great program is Acid which is great for 
> stitching 
> > together cool noises into a more complicated cool noise.  Sound 
> Forge 
> > has some great audio tools, too.
> > 
> > If I had to pick two, they would be Sonar and Cool Edit. 
> > 
> > Audio Editors are like text editors; you'll probably hear lots of 
> > religious fervor about one or another.  Pick one and jam!
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > --- In motm@y..., "xiphiguy" <tahrens@s...> wrote:
> > > I'm considering the purchase of recording software along the 
> lines 
> > of 
> > > Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar. I don't mind spending serious money 
if 
> I 
> > > can get superior features, but if I can get something less 
> > expensive 
> > > to do the same thing, I would obviously rather get that.
> > > 
> > > Can anyone share what they are using (preferably something 
you're 
> > > happy with) and elaborate on which features you have found to 
be 

> > most 
> > > useful?
> > > 
> > > Thanks in advance for any info :)
> > > ~Terry

So far, it would seem as though the idea of computer audio recording 
will present a rather steep learning curve and a good amount of 
mental anguish.  Is there a simple hardware/software combination that 
will allow me to record a smaller number of tracks (8-12)with limited 
bells and whistles?  I don't need a major production studio or tons 
of effects or midi, though a little reverb and compression would be 
nice.

When ever I find a nice PC-based audio interface (Aardvark Q10 and 
others), I hear horror stories about the software.  Frankly, I'm 
almost afraid to lay out my piasters an ANYTHING!  That's bad.  
Honestly, I don't consider myself to be a techno-phobe (quite the 
opposite, really...)

Just what is available that allow me to record a good quality CD of 
my little quartet?  I would really appreciate the group's comments.

Chub- a lot of front-end gear with no place to go...

Yes, I'm beginning to find that out :( It sure sucks for my Matrix-
1000.  Pretty interface, though.

Mike

--- In motm@y..., Adam Schabtach <adam@s...> wrote:
> 
> > BTW, if you're on a PC don't buy emagic stuff (like Logic).  As 
good
> > as it is, they've been bought by Apple and have discontinued 
support
> > of their PC products.  Us SoundDiver users have been left out in 
the
> > cold.
> 
> SoundDiver users were left out in the cold long before Apple 
acquired
> Emagic. I use SoundDiver on the Mac. The program hasn't been 
updated in well
> over a year, is rife with bugs, misrepresented in its 
advertisements (e.g.,
> the Korg Z1 editor was never finished, many editors lack any 
documentation,
> the Motor Mix integration doesn't work with some editors), and tech 
support

> queries go unacknowledged and unanswered.
> 
> --Adam

*sigh* I have both, and prefer Cool Edit Pro, based on the same 
criteria. But I use SF all the time, as well. I have Strats and Les 
Pauls and use them at different times, too.

(Cool Edit Pro 2.0 vs SF 6.0)

Mike

--- In motm@y..., Neil Bradley <nb@s...> wrote:
> > Audio Editors are like text editors; you'll probably hear lots of
> > religious fervor about one or another.  Pick one and jam!
> 
> Religious fervor aside, I've used Cool Edit Pro and Sound Forge 6, 
and for
> me SF 6 is head and shoulders above Cool Edit Pro in sound quality 
in the
> EQ, effects, and pitch/time shifting. It's quite a bit more spendy,
> though...
> 
> -->Neil
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
> Neil Bradley            In the land of the blind, the one eyed man 
is not
> Synthcom Systems, Inc.  king - he's a prisoner.
> ICQ #29402898

I use protools for all my recording.  I don't like it for creating midi, 
but it will play midifiles, so you can record your synth audio output from 
playing the midi.

I have the version that came with digi001 for macintosh and i would 
happily reccomend it to anyone.  I've heard great things about the 
digi002, but haven't used it myself.  (If it's cooler, I'll want to 
upgrade, but that's not part of the five year plan, so I'm avoiding it.)

There's a free version of protools that only supports eight tracks of 
audio (and 48 tracks of midi).  Many people stay with the freebie and are 
very happy.  It is good enough for professional editting.  My wifey has 
been using it for a CD/radio project she is working on for her nonprofit. 
(www.radiom.org)

protools: http://www.digidesign.com/ there's a link at the bottom called 
"Pro Tools FREE"

As far as creating midi goes, i've just acquired Sibelius 
(http://www.sibelius.com/), and all I can say is wow.  But there's no 
freebies on it.

-- 
Celesteh@...     http://www.casaninja.com/celesteh
                                 http://www.mp3.com/celesteh
http://www.pancakesforpinkos.com/  SFW: yes

Look at Cool Edit Pro: $249 for 128 tracks and a ton of effects built 
in: www.syntrillium.com.

Mike

--- In motm@y..., "osthelder" <osthelder@n...> wrote:
> So far, it would seem as though the idea of computer audio 
recording 
> will present a rather steep learning curve and a good amount of 
> mental anguish.  Is there a simple hardware/software combination 
that 
> will allow me to record a smaller number of tracks (8-12)with 
limited 

> bells and whistles?  I don't need a major production studio or tons 
> of effects or midi, though a little reverb and compression would be 
> nice.
> 
> When ever I find a nice PC-based audio interface (Aardvark Q10 and 
> others), I hear horror stories about the software.  Frankly, I'm 
> almost afraid to lay out my piasters an ANYTHING!  That's bad.  
> Honestly, I don't consider myself to be a techno-phobe (quite the 
> opposite, really...)
> 
> Just what is available that allow me to record a good quality CD of 
> my little quartet?  I would really appreciate the group's comments.
> 
> Chub- a lot of front-end gear with no place to go...

Would you be willing to have a dedicated computer for your music software?
If so, I think many of the bug / crash / "POS" issues would be non-existent.
Most problems arise from conflicts between different drivers, extensions,
problems with cracked software, etc. If you keep your machine lean, and use
another computer for your internet and gaming, it will likely behave - PC or
Mac.

A DAW is such a personal thing... I would recommend you try them all out
before you buy. What works for one person, might be unusable for another.
Download the free demos from the manufacturers' websites and try them each
for a while to see what you like & dislike about each.

At the studio, we use a Pro Tools|24 system, and it's AMAZING. I really love
it. I wouldn't replace this setup with anything else for recording the kind
of bands that come in (everything is mic'd or DI'd, no MIDI, nothing fancy).
But... when I work on my own projects, I use MIDI extensively, and couldn't
give up Digital Performer for the way it effortlessly combines both MIDI and
audio environments simultaneously.

Digital Performer... I love it. The only thing I would change about it would
be to put some of the DSP on a chip like Digi has done. But still - I've
gotten 72 audio tracks before, with tons of plugins, before my 450 mhz G4
started to sputter. That ain't bad! As one of my friends observed: "if it's
good enough for Wendy Carlos and Danny Elfman..."  ;-)

best,
- Scott
____________
http://www.red-noise.com
http://www.strawberryplanet.org

These are really good points.  To reemphasize, dedicate your machine 
to music software/hardware.  If you start hanging scanners and stuff 
off of it, you will get instabilities.

DAWs are a personal thing.  If you are just beginning, start with 
reviews and screenshots and see which one appeals most to you.  
Chances are it will become a life-time music partner.

Mike

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Scott Gibbons <scott.gibbons@m...> wrote:
> Would you be willing to have a dedicated computer for your music 
software?
> If so, I think many of the bug / crash / "POS" issues would be non-
existent.
> Most problems arise from conflicts between different drivers, 
extensions,
> problems with cracked software, etc. If you keep your machine lean, 
and use
> another computer for your internet and gaming, it will likely 
behave - PC or
> Mac.
> 
> A DAW is such a personal thing... I would recommend you try them 
all out
> before you buy. What works for one person, might be unusable for 
another.
> Download the free demos from the manufacturers' websites and try 
them each
> for a while to see what you like & dislike about each.
> 
> At the studio, we use a Pro Tools|24 system, and it's AMAZING. I 
really love
> it. I wouldn't replace this setup with anything else for recording 
the kind
> of bands that come in (everything is mic'd or DI'd, no MIDI, 
nothing fancy).
> But... when I work on my own projects, I use MIDI extensively, and 
couldn't
> give up Digital Performer for the way it effortlessly combines both 
MIDI and
> audio environments simultaneously.
> 
> Digital Performer... I love it. The only thing I would change about 
it would
> be to put some of the DSP on a chip like Digi has done. But still - 
I've
> gotten 72 audio tracks before, with tons of plugins, before my 450 
mhz G4
> started to sputter. That ain't bad! As one of my friends 
observed: "if it's

> good enough for Wendy Carlos and Danny Elfman..."  ;-)
> 
> best,
> - Scott
> ____________
> http://www.red-noise.com
> http://www.strawberryplanet.org

> Just what is available that allow me to record a good quality CD of
> my little quartet?  I would really appreciate the group's comments.

The key element is not the software, it's the mic's and pre's. Also, working
in 24-bit and having good DAC's (I'll second the Apogee recommendation).

If you find the idea of de-bugging a computer and learning new software to
be daunting, why not spend the money instead on studio time? All you have to
do is perform, and you'll have access to some great (and expensive) mics,
pre's, a good board, and a professional engineer who will make you sound
great. You can get a great sounding recording for thousands less than
putting together your own studio, odds are it will be less frustrating for
you and will sound better, and by the time you're ready to do your next
recording sessions you won't be looking with disdain at your
computer/software that needs updating. Sometimes a home recording studio is
the wrong approach...

(but sometimes it's the right one...)

Another option is a standalone DAW which is NOT computer-based, like a
Darwin or a DA8. These give you waveform editing, are non-linear, and rarely
- if ever - crash. These are 16-bit, although I think the Darwin's DAC's
sound fantastic and at their current sticker price, <shrug>

best,
- Scott
____________
http://www.red-noise.com
http://www.strawberryplanet.org