Is Garageband really enough?

[nicholaspaul]

I read a review of Apple Logic where the author was commenting on the complaints of his clients. They said that when he was using ProTools that his recordings sounded 'thin', a problem that vanished when he started using Apple Logic.

[Note: I'm not comparing ANYTHING to Apple Logic Pro or ProTools, just using that as an example]

So, it seems that (contrary to what I had learned from other sources) that software DOES have a sound. I thought it was all just 1's and 0's...

Apart from usability, flexibility, etc, am I still going to get pro recording results from Garageband? I just upgraded to Leopard so my Cubase SE doesn't work anymore, and I'm looking around for a replacement. In the meantime, I need to make music.

I also have a lite version of Ableton Live (7.0.7) that will work in a pinch ....

[Gear: MacBook Pro 2.4GHz/4GB RAM/250GB HD]

Which low budget app is likely to give me great quality recordings, or doesn't it matter?

[drago]

Garageband won't give you pro quality but it works in a pinch... Software absolutely does have a 'sound' but in my opinion it is completely negligable.

[nicholaspaul]

if the software-sound is negligible, what would be un-pro (ok, amateur!) sounding about Garageband? If I do serious recording in Garageband, am I going to grimace at it in five years time?

The more I spend on a range like Cubase, what am I really getting? Except for more sounds (not interested) more plugins (might be interested) and stuff that I won't use (video and extensive MIDI editing come to mind)?

Basically, Cubase SE does all I need. Although I'm sure if I bought something bigger/better I would find some things that make life a tad easier.

[rockerdude]

Pro tools is the industry standard. Just about every studio around the world uses pro tools.Pro tools on a Mac pro and your good to go.

[nicholaspaul]

Right. I'm not interested in Industry Standards. It is more than likely that I am the only person to ever touch these files, so compatibility is not an issue. Just quality.

OK I'll bite... are the Mbox 2 series rigs likely to induce a learning curve like a cliff face, or is it all pretty intuitive?

[rockerdude]

Pro tools.....Pro tools....Apogee.....Pro tools....

[nicholaspaul]

what do you mean by that?

"OK I'll bite... are the Mbox 2 series rigs likely to induce a learning curve like a cliff face, or is it all pretty intuitive?"

[rockerdude]

Well....I have a Home studio Business Sterling Sound Studios and I use Pro tools.I just got into Pro tools about a year ago.A good friend of mine is a producer who has done Papa Roach,Cake,Will I am and many other platinum selling artist.When I was changing recording formats he suggested Pro tools and a Mac.I have a client in my studio now who has the pro tools Mbox set up.He likes it and it's cool because of the session files.He can take home the session files and play around with some ideas and bring em back to me for further work.If I was just getting into recording I would pick Pro tools because of It's compatibility with other studios.The sound quality Must be pretty good or why would All the major studios use it.There are many systems to choose from and nowdays and they are all very capable of putting out radio ready material.It's just a matter of choice and preference.I have a friend of mine (The guitarist)in my cover band who has cakewalk and he argues all the time with me over the Pro tools VS Cakewalk issue.He forgets I have lisened to his recordings LOL....Anyway good luck with your choice.

[nicholaspaul]

Thanks 'dude'. That sounds like solid advice. And you're right, I'm PROBABLY one day going to spring the cash to get someone else to master my 'stuff' so having some compatibility would help.
When it comes to hardware+software, as long as I'm the weakest link I'm happy!

[richiebee]

Originally Posted by nicholaspaul

I read a review of Apple Logic where the author was commenting on the complaints of his clients. They said that when he was using ProTools that his recordings sounded 'thin', a problem that vanished when he started using Apple Logic.

Sounds like someone tells porky pies. Yes, there is a difference between systems (most likely caused by different panning laws), that might make someone unable to get as good a mix on an unfamiliar DAW as on the one they use most frequently. It's not enough to make a mix sound thin to a client. That's just total BS. More to the point. This guy had "clients" (in the plural) who complained, then he bought Logic and remixed everything and they were happy? Wouldn't happen. Just like Judge Judy says. If it doesn't make sense, it probably isn't true. And this just doesn't make sense.

So, it seems that (contrary to what I had learned from other sources) that software DOES have a sound. I thought it was all just 1's and 0's...

You don't need to worry about it. Really. When you're a multi-million record selling engineer... that's the next time that you should even entertain the notion.

Apart from usability, flexibility, etc, am I still going to get pro recording results from Garageband? I just upgraded to Leopard so my Cubase SE doesn't work anymore, and I'm looking around for a replacement. In the meantime, I need to make music.

It's not really about audio quality. Its more about features and workflow. If Garageband does everything you need it to do, then chances are, its enough for you. If you're used to Cubase (in any flavour), I think you'll be disappointed by Garageband, but its not the sound quality. Why not try it out, since it came with your Mac anyway, and just see if it does what you need it to.