Recording Equipment

Just wanted to ask a practical question. Been to Tweakheadz. Lots of good info. For those of you who have used both MTRs and Software for recording, what would you suggest for the noob looking for user friendliness?

I have read so much, but really have not seen anything in action. The last recording I did was all tape, done live for the most part. I'm not a geek by any means, but can figure things out, especially if I can see rather than read what should happen. Alot of what I read about software recording seems like a very steep learning curve, can get bogged down in proprietary equipment and file problems, and starts off very detailed and gets more dense from there.

I'm leaning MTR for the full record to mixdown to master route. I'm open to PC, though, mainly because of the idea of trading files and doing remote recording for others, if possible. I have a friend who does that for bass tracks. Seems an incredible opportunity for any musician.

Suggestions?

Thanks

go with a multi-track hard disk recorder. zzounds.com has a better verity than musician's friend. Software is pretty cool if you're using a Mac, but pc multitrack software is creepy because of latency. I record on a BOSS BR1200, and use my computer software for mixdowns. get a hard disk recorder that has USB, so you can transport to computer. Save all files as WAV files, and you won't lose anything. Hard disk tracks are WAV files by default. To make a music CD, you'll need to convert your WAV file mixes to a CDA extention. Cakewalk Sonar, or Guitar tracks Pro is good pc software. But I wouldn't recommend recording to a computer.

No one simple answer IMNSHO. It really depends on your needs, resources and computer processing power. If you need to record a lot of live tracks (more than 4) simultaneously and plan to use lots of plug ins you will need a very modern computer with a ton of ram. I think a DAW is better suited for this where the Protools setup is better for a project studio working primarily 1 track at a time. I use both Roland DAW and Protools/Mac and both get excellent results.

To many computers spoil the broth.

There is unequivocally no substitute for multi-track recording...when you are laying down fresh tracks. I prefer it over SW...

HOWEVER... The mixing and mastering features offered in SW are pretty good... So maybe the best of both worlds can be had..

The Protools* type setup is better for a project studio working primarily 1 track at a time.

Sony Handicam seems to be fun though..depends on your situation.

go with a multi-track hard disk recorder.

If you do, make sure you buy an identical hard drive for it, to replace the one that's in it. Stash it in the closet until you need it. Just like your regular computer, the hard drive is the moving part and it will fail when you need it most. Keep constant fresh backups of all your work, and make sure you know how to replace the hard drive yourself.

.....but pc multitrack software is creepy because of latency........Cakewalk Sonar......is good pc software.

Latency happens mostly to people who try to use their regular home/office computer for multi track recording. If you start with a computer and interface that are specifically made for multi tracking, latency is a non issue. If you run Sonar on your home computer, you will guarantee latency problems.

You ever used Sonar?? Sure it's good, but it's a money pit and it's full of lard and fat and fluff that 90% of the people who buy it will never use. Can you say "annual upgrade for a fee" boys n girls?

Get a dual or quad core computer with 8+GB of fast ram, a fast mother board, and a reliable interface. Then pay $60 bucks (as of March 2012) for Reaper and $25 bucks for the Reaper Power book. If you can't learn everything you need to know about computer home recording by using Reaper then you will want to buy 3 or 4 hard disks and stick with your hard disk recorder.

If you set the computer up right, and look in the mirror and tell yourself you are not afraid of the "not as steep as they said it would be" learning curve, then the software stuff will blow the hard disk recorder stuff outa the solar system and you will never look back. And you will get much better results!

I'm sorry, no offense to any posters above, but it is foolish to tell a noob to start software recording by getting into Pro Tools, or Sonar, or Logic, etc. Unless you want to deliberately discourage the noobs from using a computer to record? Try Reaper. If you cant do everything you want to do in Reaper within 30 days (assuming you actually apply yourself to it) then trust me, Pro Tools and Sonar won't do you a damn bit of good.

Soundchaser59 says: "If you set the computer up right, and look in the mirror and tell yourself you are not afraid of the "not as steep as they said it would be" learning curve, then the software stuff will blow the hard disk recorder stuff outa the solar system and you will never look back. And you will get much better results!"

Hmmmm,
Spoken like a guy who has never spent any time with a stand alone DAW. I see equal results between a DAW vs software to everyone but the "Golden Ears" set. The difference is level of technical comfort. You are obviously a computer geek who understands this stuff and knows what you need/want. The rest of us mortals... not so much.

I am pretty old school and have spent significant time on both digital formats (along with 1/2" 8T, 1/4" 2T, 2" 24T analog tape machines) and I have never lost a DAW hard disc. They don't fail any more often than any computer hard discs. I have had many many software crashes due to overextended resources using computer multitrack software though. I am quite certain it was all my fault but we only know what we know right? If I want to track a live band with 8-10 live recording input tracks I know I can get it done quickly and easily with a Roland DAW. Nice hot live tracks with no computer crashes, no overextended resources because I used one compressor plug in too many. Just good solid results.

More than one way to skin a cat. Work with what you know. When recording 1 track at a time to a solo project I like Protools/Mac just fine. When working with a group of musicians recording live tracks, or recording a fully mic'd drum kit with lots of EQ and compression in one shot, I'll take the Roland DAW every time.

YMMV

I recorded my first CD on a stand-alone Boss recorder because I too was afraid of the whole latency/HD crash thing.
Wissh I had saved the $$ I spent on that recorder - woudl have paid for half of a dedicated reocrding computer, at least. Now it gathers dust.
Reaper is great. I'm using the same computer I use for everything, just 2G RAM (plenty of hard drive space), and my only issues are trying to drive too many VSTi's at one time or too many reverbs (stem rendering takes care of that).
Using a Tascam US800, the latency is minimal/unnoticeable even when recording a MIDI track.
Backup? Oh yeah, do that with any recording method. If using a stand-alone, shoot a copy over to your computer and burn the files to CDs or DVDs. I back up my song files and projects. Blank discs are cheap, recreating hours of work isn't.

Hmmmm,
Spoken like a guy who has never spent any time with a stand alone DAW.

3 years on a Tascam 2488 with a few synths, drum machines, mics, a slaved computer sequencer (Atari 1040 STE!), 24 channel mixer and a 7 foot outboard rack was enough DAW soup for me. The computer does everything that rig did, and a whole lot more, and does it better and faster.

I know what you mean, though, the computer guys had to spend 2 years talking me into trying the software. I had that old rig working pretty good, pushing the envelope with what I had.