Newb Here

[Riggs77]

Well I guess you can say I am a newb I only have a Tascam MFP01 PortaStudio. I am trying to debate on two different Digital recorders. I am only wanting to do small time stuff like guitar, madolin and some vocals with my set up. I currently have Reaper on my pc and it basically just confuses the crap outta me. Thanks for having me around.
Ray

[brandondrury]

Good story.

So what's your questions?

In particular, what 2 digital recorders are you looking into?

Brandon

[Riggs77]

Just to make it easy I will post links to the page in Musicians Friend catalog that should make it easy enough plus it will give you all the details. I will most likely buy everything through my local dealer though. Aint nobody ever been able to beat his pricing.

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/produ...age?sku=247102

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/produ...age?sku=702320

These are just what I am starting to look at all kinds of choices out there though. Plus this stuff is all new to me.
Thanks,
Ray

[brandondrury]

Ray, if you have your heart set on a standalone recorder, that's fine, but it's DEFINITELY not the way I would go.

Sure, the mixer, preamps, and that look the same as your basic recording rig, but look at the mixing real estate. I just don't see how a person could seriously mix using a standalone system. Of course, it depends on how you mix, I guess.

I may be a little more demanding about this. I do use certain compressors for certain things. I like having multiply reverb choices. I like being able to automate EVERYTHING! If you are not as demanding when it comes to mixing, maybe it's not as big of an issue.

I always recommend the computer route. ALWAYS! The amount of power in your average $200 program is astounding compared to what a stand alone unit can do.

I actually wrote the following article a while back.
Why Recording Computers Blow Away Standalone Units

Let us know what you think.

Brandon

[richiebee]

I don't think your argument holds up actually Brandon. There is a certain simplicity about standalone recorders. It's not for me, but I know of a few local engineers who do a great job with them. The engineer who tracked our drums and bass uses one (can't remember which). He has a (TV) monitor with it, and to be honest, it looks very Cubase on screen. I'm not sure what effects processors it has, but it is certainly very capable in the right hands.

Cost of the application you use is not everything when considering computer based recording - the performance of the computer, the audio interface... they all factor in. I wouldn't use a stand alone unit, but then again, I need my VSTi's. If I was just tracking bands, I might consider it.

R.

[brandondrury]

I don't think your argument holds up actually Brandon

I wouldn't use a stand alone unit,

Alright, well if my arguments don't stand up, which arguments did I forget to include? Obviously, there is a reason (or reasons) that you wouldn't use a stand alone recorder.

I have no problem with you playing devils advocate, but the devil can't agree in the end.

------------------

I should go back and re-read and possibly re-write the article. I do need to make concessions for the higher end Rolands and such. Some of those are very capable machines. However, I'm pretty sure they cost about $3,000 just to get started. Not exactly entry level.

I should also mention that it's possible to create good recordings on a stand alone box, but I've never seen it done.

I still think the proprietary setup of stand alone boxes is their ultimate downfall. I've played with a few of the Roland boxes. I've got several friends who own them. The amount of time they spent just learning how to do basic functions took way longer than it did for me to conquer the learning curve of my computer audio system and software.

Once you learn how to scroll through all the menus and get serious about recording, you find that your reverb choices, for example, are limited to 10 presets.

Routing is another thing that I find to be terribly inadequate on the stand alone machines that I've used. I live by processing subgroups of drums and guitar and I couldn't imagine a recording system without it.

I would miss being able to duplicate a track as well. It's very rare that at least one song on a record doesn't have a duplicate of a vocal track that I've compressed the crap out of and filtered everything but the high end. The same could be said with the snare drum.

I guess in my article, I need to point out that if you don't need the kind of features that I've mentioned, then you probably won't care. I couldn't imagine any person remotely serious about making a modern recording who does need the kind of features I've mentioned.

I'd guess that a guy recording acoustic guitar and vocal in the same time with a single mic may be happy.

I'm still not convinced.

Brandon

[dach]

Yes Brandon, you are being overruled... stand-alones rule for simplicity - if you can play and don't need to edit much.... and hate computer noise all over your acoustic tracks... yes, there are major issues but you are producing and Ray's just having fun...

I have too many buttons to turn on including crawling under the console and time to wait before I can even think about which one of my mics I'll patch into whichever preamp into whatever compressor into whatever channel on one of my 13-15 partially labeled patchbays into whatever channel of one of my audio interfaces... am I protooling or nuendoing? - where the hell is that song?... and did I make sure to set the channel to both monitor and record??? BTW, what the fuck was I going to play anyway?

but I can't wait to see the next post that says, " I bought it but why don't I sound like Keith Urban?"

- just kidding Ray... I had a blast with just a 4 track RTR for years... go for it dude!

[brandondrury]

Fair enough. I'll back down on this one.

I'm going through a phase where I find simplicity VERY complicated when I need to do a not so simple task.

The notion of this hit me recently when I was writing about what Cubase SX3 does that Vegas didn't. I remember a band had me editing drums for them in Vegas and it was a TOTAL nitemare that took hours and never really sounded like it should. Cubase is WAY tougher to learn, but I could do the same thing in about 8 seconds in Cubase.

Of course, if you never need to make that kind of edit, simplicity wins, but the second your needs get a little more complex, you are screwed.

I must be said, that this particular band really sucked and they were one of those bend over to pay the rent type of projects.

Ray, based on my "arguments" you can decide if you want a stand alone or not. If you don't care about the things I bitch about, then there is no reason to go with the computer thing. Computers definitely have their down sides too. Good luck and don't be afraid to ask questions here.

Brandon

[diagft32]

I take a middle of the road approach. I record my tracks on a Boss br-532. Not the best, but I am quite happy with it. I can then export the individual tracks and import them in Sonar to mix and add software instrumens and such. I really like this setup, as I keep all my recording gear on a cart and can roll it to any room to record. I do not have a dedicated room for this, but have found that each room in my house had different acoustics, and can use this to my advantage. I am a Technology Director by trade, and the last thing I want to do is mess with computers when I get home. I actually resisted and used only the Boss for a very long time, but I am glad I started using Sonar, it has opened up many doors for me. When I am recording, though, I'd rather not mess with computer problems. Each setup has it's strengths and weaknesses, and I feel that I have found the best solution for me is to use each in it's strongest role.

[brandondrury]

It sounds like you've got a pretty solid rig for you. I do like the cart idea.

What kind of music are you recording? More importantly, are your arrangements fairly simple? Do you ever use 60 tracks in a song? I'm trying to figure out how far you can push the stand alone stuff.

Brandon