Is Garageband really enough?

[uab9253]

Originally Posted by heart attack joe

I use Cubase Studio and I really like it. It is the first PC based DAW I have used so I really have no basis for comparison.

Do you have any knowledge of Cubase LE 4? That is what shipped with my H4. I will explore it unless you warn me away saying that its so limited I should spring for Cubase Studio...[/QUOTE]

There is very little that Studio does that LE4 can't do. I wanted more inserts, sends and the ability to work more seemlessly with EZ drummer, plus the included Halion and Prologue synths. I got mine with a student discount and paid 1/2 price. You should be more than fine with LE, at least to start.

[michaelt523]

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.

The fullness of your recording will not be determined by the software you are using, but by how you record it. If it is an issue with ProTools EQ's, you definitely won't find anything better included with GarageBand.

[Hippofish]

I tend to agree that it's not the program that makes or breaks the quality of the recording, at least not nowadays, but rather how it's recorded in the first place. Some of the built in mastering effects might be different on Logic or ProTools though. I know that using Garageband for myself, is really no different than using Logic Pro. However Logic Pro is full of bullshit that I don't EVER use and Garageband is just right for 98% of my recording needs. One of the only limitations I can think of with Garageband is that it only records in up to 24 bit 48k and can only record 8 channels at one time seperately. For my uses this is plenty. A whole drumkit is usually no more than 8 mics so this doesn't really limit me at all. However if I record the band live in the studio while jamming, I either use my Zoom H4 and just record the room, or switch to Logic Pro and I can record up to 16 tracks at one time.

So the answer the question "Is Garageband Really Enough?" Well no it's not for some people. I can tell you from extensive use with both Logic Pro and Garageband, that for a FREE program that comes with ANY new MAC, Garageband really rocks. I normally record everything in 20bit 44.1 and garageband does that just fine. The few songs I have posted on here under "blood Mother Mountain" were recorded with Garageband at 16bit/44.1k. Take a listen if you want to "hear" what Garageband sounds like.


Michael

[boo]

Garageband will be enough for you until it is not. Then you can switch. I used Logic Express for quite a while before I moved to Logic Studio, and it is a fine little program. Logic Studio kicks butt. I use it in my home/semi pro studio...and the learning curve is steep, but if you want to take advantage of a powerful program, it takes time to learn. Tutorials really help in that regard.

I think that what will hold your sound back is not your software, but your hardware. Nice preamps and mics can do a lot. Nothing I have is really expensive, but I did a whole cd on my motu ultralite that turned out great. I have since upgraded preamps, but the ultralites worked fine.

I have the same computer that you do.

[nippecraft]

Originally Posted by nicholaspaul

So basically, Cubase for easy-to-learn and compatible with other hardware, Protools for longevity and professionalism.

Just for the sake of discussion, by this quote, are you saying that any songs done in Cubase, Garageband, and everything thing else besides Pro-tools lacks professionalism? Granted that PT is the industry standard in music recording, to conclude that everything else is subpar to PT would be such an overstatement, I would think.

anyway, just my $.02. I believe music is the core that binds all these equipments together. It's the foundation of everything that we agree and disagree on about mixing, tracking, mastering, etc.etc. If the music is good, then it's good! regardless of whether it's done with Garageband or Protools. Now if you have the money to upgrade your equipments, then by all means, upgrade. But I personally think that equipments should not dictate that outcome of your music and the mentality that you need to have the best equipments to create your masterpiece. Because that would be called irony. To have a mindset that thinks you need this OMG preamp and this OMG DAW, plug-ins etc.etc, has already limited your creative/artistic genius to create and arrange great music because you think that you don't have the best equipments to do it with.

Anyway just my thought, I have recorded with Sonar and Cubase, and they're all great DAWS! I haven't dabbled with Logic and Garageband because I don't have a Mac, but I'm pretty sure they're great as well! This is just my own humble opinion, as a casual home recording enthusiast, nothing more.

[Hippofish]

I agree with you Nippecraft. There are some subtle differences in sound quality between programs, but nothing that can't be worked around in the mastering process after your recording. I think working with subpar or strange things can make someone strive for an even better recording. I know a guy that has a 4-track Reel to Reel system which is half inch tape and he makes some VERY good recordings. It's all about the passion and warfare between the music and the way in which it's recorded. If you went out and bought EVERYTHING top end and got it home and started messing with it, sure that would be cool, but to have to build it with time and patience can be just as, or even more satisfying in the end.

I like what you said though and to finally answer the question of this thread, well if you like what you are using to record with, than whatever you use is....ENOUGH!

Michael

[heart attack joe]

Thank you to all who took time to answer my post. I have come to the conclusion, after reading the above, that its all good. What I was concerned about has to do with the fact I come from working in studios 40 and 30 years ago. Money spent on equipment(s) had a correlation to the quality of product coming out the phonograph speakers. Cheap recording gear was bad recording gear that hissed and popped and sounded like crap in comparison to high dollar stuff.

Today, it seems that 'digital' has pulled the floor way up toward the ceiling in terms of potential outcome and sound. "Extra" money plowed into a home studio will render more in terms of ease of use and versatility than in sound quality, if I am reading you all right.

In short, I did not read horror stories that would have me hesitate to spend time in Garage Band or Cubase. They may be a Toys R Us approach to recording, but the toys these days are capable of being used to create good sounding tunes.