What is Digg?85 Comments
- dj_sea2005, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12we use protools in the studio at college. maybe its just the workflow, but i find that its severely lacking when compared to options like Ableton Live 6, Logic, etc.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10I've been using Cubase for years. I can't ever imagine have to go back to those days in a smokey garage with that old tascam 4-track... but I miss them.
- catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I guess it's personal preference but I find workflow going much better on Cubase. It's important because I write a lot at the same time I'm recording.
Pro-tools just got big mostly because of their integrated systems with superior hardware components like A/D/A convertors, etc., but now you can get near that quality with a few hundred dollars and a PC. - davidrools, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7I don't know why you have such PT pride. I use PT M-powered just because it's so everywhere I figured I ought to be familiar with it. But I don't like the idea of being stuck using Digi's hardware interfaces and preamps.
- kevinkace, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8"Don’t rush into getting an audio card, as most computers come with a pretty decent sound card installed straight out of the box."
Very wrong, most cards in computers do not have ASIO drivers, which are essential to making music on a computer. For $100 you can get something that will greatly outperform most standard gaming/multimedia sound cards. - dj_sea2005, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8My studio consists of Ableton live 6 as my main DAW and VST host, while i use Reason 3.0 in rewire mode along side.
its a KILLER combination, works fantastic for electronic based music and Live 6's midi and audio features means that i can sync up my microKORG synth too.
Obligatory music plug: http://www.myspace.com/djsea - EmmSee, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I thought I was the only Digg music composer. My plug: http://www.EmmSeeMusic.com & http://www.myspace.com/emmseemusic
Sonar 6 PE, PreSonus FirePOD, GigaStudio 3 Orch, Reason 3, Absynth 3, Finale 2007, DFH: Superior, Garritan Orchestral Strings, SAM Horns/Trumpet/Trombones, BT Twisted Textures, etc. - satch89digg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I've been getting along great using Apple's GarageBand. It's like a no frills DAW.
- Thud, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I'm right there with you... I'll avoid the shameless plug but I do soundtracks for independent short films... :-p
slightly scaled down version of your studio but it gets the job done:
Sonar 6 PE, Garritan Personal Orchestra, QL StormDrum, QL Colossus, Antares Kantos (one of the coolest synths that nobody uses), and a vintage Wavestation SR. - davidrools, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Yes Reason rocks. Nice icon, btw. Using Reason with Live for live performances is everything I could ask for.
- Ibanezfoo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6SONAR bitches!
- spunkmyer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Any respectable Mac music geek should check out Apple's Logic Pro or if the price tag makes you run in fear then Apple's Logic Express. Lots of power even in the Express version with great support for plug-ins, etc.
Apple's student discounts on software even make logic more affordable. - dotspace, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Good basic article. But there's lots more. If anyone wants to dig more into recording, there are forums at http://www.studioforums.com
- slashgeek, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6There's a lot of good info in there. Thanks!
- eddyc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3The 'for amateurs' moniker is marketing and/or dick measuring bollox.
If you are a half decent producer you could use only freeware and make great sounding record. - EmmSee, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Nice... I definitely need to get QL StormDrum & QL Colossus - those are killer.
- gypsi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I would rather artists and enthusiasts make more music, and unencumbered by insane DRM and copyright practices
- catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I would recommend an interface totally outside of the computer for recording. Firewire works nicely.
- kaffein, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Ableton Live 6 for production, Vegas for recording/mixing and Sound Forge for editing...
- SKLion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Great stuff in that article! I'm in school right now for audio engineering and specialize in post-production. Still saving for my own rig...
- Ibanezfoo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yeah, avoid USB. The new T.C. Electronic Konnekt (firewire) is finally coming around, driver wise. Nice mic pres in that thing.
- eddyc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Have to say regardless of what sequencer / recorder ya use, NI stuff (except for their hardware, bad experience) is pretty sweet, that new Massive synth is phenomenal, Kontakt and Reaktor are classics in their own right as well.
- FierceGrape, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yes but don't try and take your signal to the point of almost peaking all the way through your chain....always leave headroom.
- EmmSee, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Pick up an instrument. The rest is just details.
- heppareppana, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@mayor999
thanks to having outboard gear, mixer with multiple routing possibilities in this case, you don't need to worry about latency. Most of consumer level audioboxes offer you also direct monitoring. But i guess youre computer whiz enough to know this, you just forgot it and ended up making bunch of retarded suppositions.
And yeah I don't think I can hear the difference between 44.1k and 88.2k, though I can spot bit rates pretty easily. When rocking (that's what my life mostly comprises of) it's so easy to forget all this bit depth engineering talk. But true, those frequencies above 22k have always been little bit esoteric to me.
You know, if you'd spend couple minutes of your brain activity and do some simple calculus, it's still those frequencies between 20 and 22k that make people dance or cry or get angry. I have couple CDs (in hideous 16bit/44.1k-format!!!) by well-recognized names to prove it.
Also while youre at it, google or wikipedia or whatever to me that WTF does phase cancellation have to do with latency compensation? - Daunting, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Ableton is a very nice set up. About to make a few songs shortly matter of fact.
Good music btw. - mjmartin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Well, here's my plug: http://mike-martin.com/audio/siren/siren-dr1.mp3 - currently composing a score for a Horror/Thriller/Sci-Fi film.
I've been using sequencers for years, back in the old Sound Studio Gold days, currently own: Nuendo 3, Cubase 4, EWQL Gold XP Pro, EWQL Rare, EWQL Stormdrum 2, PT M-powered, Logic 7 Pro, Soundtrack, Audition, FL Studio, Max/MSP, Melodyne and a TC Powercore - mjmartin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Well, here's my plug: http://mike-martin.com/audio/siren/siren-dr1.mp3 - currently composing a score for a Horror/Sci-Fi indie film.
I've been using sequencers for years, back in the old Sound Studio Gold days, currently own: Nuendo 3, Cubase 4, EWQL Gold XP Pro, EWQL Rare, EWQL Stormdrum 2, Sibelius 4, PT M-powered, Logic 7 Pro, Soundtrack, Audition, FL Studio, Max/MSP, Melodyne and a TC Powercore - mercurysquad, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Dugg for using the firepod - amazing piece of hardware!
- mercurysquad, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I dont know, GarageBand seems like a toy to me. Logic Express is way more comfortable.
- BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"I hear that in Europe, Cakewalk software is considered amateur."
Nonsense. Nearly all sequencers are capable of making top quality music. Price doesn't even matter any more. Most of my favourite audio software is free and is just as good if not better than the commercial stuff I used to use. - mayor999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Oh please. You can't just admit that you were wrong, and then tried to be a dick about being wrong? Stop being a twelve year old.
CD specs don't apply directly to your completely baseless and wrong claim that 88.2 is somehow BETTER than 96, but they do to your claim that the REASON it is better is because 88.2 is a "direct harmonic" to 44.1.
Yes 88.2 is a 'direct harmonic' to 44.1. But that has -nothing- to do with sample rates other than 88.2's nyquist frequency is 44.1, and BECAUSE of that 88.2 sounds better than 96.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You should try going to a AES convention sometime and learn a few lessons.
SSL's are overpriced and overhyped? You were the one trying to impress all of us with your "gear". Endlessly repeating how awesome your monitors were and how they cost you 15,000, and how great your analog board was.
YOUR buisness is the "***** kid show business" because despite having spent some some serious money on some quality gear, you still do not know what you are doing.
I hope you are not representing http://www.badapplestudio.com/ because they just got a bad reputation in my mind from some idiot going around digg with a profound misunderstanding of basic digital audio theory.
You will get much farther in the music industry if you can nut-up, apologize, and just admit that you were wrong. Just an observation. - mercurysquad, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The on-board cards are absolutely *****, mine has a pretty distracting hiss (unless I plug my $10 headphones).
- tms8707056, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1First, a CD is 44.1/16-bit due to limitations of the actual CD spec. Max bandwidth for a CD is 2.0338 Mb/sec. Do the math for a 44.1kHz/16-bit audio CD.
44,100 samples/second * 16 bits/sample * 2 channels = 1,411,200 bits per second (approx 1.34Mb/sec) If the sample rate or bit rate were raised to the next higher option available when the CD spec was created, it would exceed the limits of the spec.
Also, higher sample rates allow the low pass filter (antialias filter) that is used in the ADC to have a more gentle slope. With the nyquist freq of 44.1kHz being 22.05kHz, the filter must have a very steep slope to acheive maximum attenuation before the nyquist freq or aliasing will occur. The steeper the slope of a filter, the more problems it creates (phase problems, ringing, etc.). With a higher sample rate, the nyquist freq is also higher. Therefore, the antialias filter does not have to reach maximum attenuation in such a short frequency range and can have a much more gentle slope. This allows the filter to have less of an effect on the audio and results in flatter frequency response across the audible spectrum (mostly enhancing the reproduction of the extreme high freqencies 16-20kHz). This is what causes the audio to sound better. - caban, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@badapple
You obviously do not have much of a clue about sampling theory.
The talk about 88.2k sounding better than 96k when resampled to 44.1 is a myth and there is no theory or practical tests confirming that that's the case, - Grimboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1FL Studio is a fun app to play around with. A low barrier to adoption is definitely an advantage.
- rfalloon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1yeah reason rewired into cubase is my choice. the only thing i hate is the slow down i eventually get 3/4 of a way into writing a track. teh slow down only comes when i watch the sequencer window in reason and the location bar is in that window that i am looking at. its very annoying
- BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Googling ASIO4ALL usually fixes that..
As a beginner you really don't need a high quality sound card unless you do recording. A set of decent monitoring speakers or headphones should be #1 on the shopping list, unless you're having problems with noticable hiss or distortion. - brightscreamer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Pro Tools is great, but I made the switch to Digital Performer after I completed my album. It's released on my label: www.definitivejux.net
- BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1If you had Sonar why keep using FLS, or vice versa? Don't really see the point in using two sequencers like that.
- BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It goes both ways. The onboard sound on my old abit mobo had no noticable noise at all. My bro uses onboard which seems noise free as well. On the other hand my A8N's onboard has so much hiss it's absolutey useless for any purpose, not to mention annoying.
- juan23, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Buried because I don't want geeks making music :).
No really...very concise and good. - vostek, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2No mention of FL studio? It may not be the end-all be-all of DAWs, but IMO it is the best and most efficient tool for composing electronic music, especially rhythmic and DSP based dance and glitch music. And when used in conjunction with a different flavor of DAW, like Sonar, the possibilities are endless. Many of my favorite artists take this approach to create very dynamic and open-ended sounds.
- InSeverance, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Garageband is a hell of an app for it's price.
It could have easily been sold for $50, but credit to Apple for an app that can definitely be used to put together ideas in a matter of minutes without having to worry about too much bloat.
PodXT + Macbook = dream
(budget student 'studio') - allovayoass, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0actually half wrong.
getting to know each of your top ten components to home recording is a good investment as the outcome leads to good knowledge of the next (soundcard in this case) when your mp3s sell.
ex's:
* Microphone/Instrument
* Microphone/Instrument Cable
* Preamp
* Soundcard
* Computer
* Software
* Studio Monitors - badapplestudio, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"Plugins/outboard gear take time to process. Therefore (especially with plugins) you must time adjust (i.e. delay) everything to match the track with the most processing latency."
- True, but most every major DAW ( I use DP) auto-adjusts. Still good to know how to do it by hand.
"You are limiting yourself to musical compromises/mistakes, what about budget/instruments/time in studio/time mixing/microphone selects etc."
- That's not what I'm talking about. Some of the best sounds that have gone into records were made by accident. The sound on GARBAGE's album for the song "Stupid Girl" that was the tape machine eating itself by accident and it was caught in PT. Hell the whole PIXIES DooLittle album has sounds leaking in all over it. Same with " Major Tom" from Bowie. The drums in NIN's " March of the Pigs " were recorded with boundary mics in a hall. Frank Zappa used to do stupid crazy ***** to get a sound. ZZ Top for one song, actually got a radio station to play their mix over the radio, AM I think, and they recorded that to mix it in with the original. Perfection is overrated and has nothing to do with creativity. Compromises, especially when you have so many choices digitally, get things done and force you to commit to a project.
"As for the 88.2 being a direct harmonic to 44.1 you are correct in the musical sense, but that has nothing to do with sampling theory/why we record at higher sampling rates."
- *****. And I know that because I've tested the results with Apogee AD16's and doing the conversions in Peak 5. Most of the hype about sampling rates is based on marketing. You have to know what's in front of the converter chips on the analog board. Also having a rock solid HOUSE SYNC makes a world of difference too.
"Most of what you read about tweeters being able to reproduce frequencys past the point of human hearing is BS anyway because during the mastering process frequencies above 20K tend to be rolled off anyway for a variety of reasons."
- *****. I can hear up into the 18k-19k region on my ATC SCM50's. And I can definitely feel/sense the air factor on the upper 19k-20k area. Mostly on wind and acoustic instruments. Like Piano. Unless you've heard a pair of ATC's, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. I bought the LCRLsRs speakers from Immersive Studio's in Denver for 15k. And it was money well spent because those monitors are the *****. And having accurate speakers in an accurate room makes a great mix easier. The stereo imaging of those speakers is the best I have ever heard. Same with the Calrec "POLAR" console I got from Nashville. It has a phenomenal sound. Just smooth all the way around. Some of the best EQ and Compression around. It's a poor man's SSL. But better than a SSL.
That is not to say any newbie is going to get these things. You get what you can afford to get, and what you think you need. And not saying you can't make a good song on a laptop. BT does it. But taking it somewhere else with better gear in the end will give it a better sound. But the people who make comments on here about ***** they have never had any experience with are ***** stupid. If your going to be a GearSlut, know what your ***** talking about! Until you have owned or used some of things extensively that I've talked about, don't make comments like you know all about them. - allovayoass, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0lol
- mayor999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0"For example, audio CDs have a sampling frequency of 44100 Hz. The Nyquist frequency is therefore 22050 Hz, which is an upper bound on the highest frequency the data can unambiguously represent. If the chosen anti-aliasing filter (a low-pass filter in this case) has a transition band of 2000 Hz, then the cut-off frequency should be no higher than 20050 Hz to yield a signal with negligible power at frequencies of 22050 Hz and greater."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_frequency
Owch, how does that feel, knowing that everything you thought about digital audio and discrete time sampling was wrong? - mayor999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0@tms8707056
Thank you for stating/explaining it a little bit more eleoquently than me. :) - mayor999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist-Shannon_sampling_theorem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_frequency
So in essence the reason why we use 44.1K is (as I stated above) because it can (without aliasing) record up to 22.05K
Humans hear up to roughly 20k.
You talk about knowing what the converters are doing, if YOU knew, you would know there is a low-pass filter before the converters which cuts down pretty much everything between 20k - 22.05k.
Learn something before you open your mouth Badapplestudio. -
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is