quote:

Originally posted by Nightshift or get the best of both worlds with Ableton

Did you choose Ableton mainly because you knew it was easier then Cubase?

If hypothetically speaking, Cubase was just as easy to use, which would you have went with then?

I ask because people have their own reasons for choosing programs (ease of use for one) but if I'm going to go through all the effort of learning a new program, I'm more concerned on its features and capabilites rather then ease of use.

And I know Ableton is very well capable like Cubase, and may do 95% the same as Cubase, but I'm more curious about that other 5% I suppose. It does seem even with as much people condone the use of both FL and Ableton, that in some weird way they have a sort of inherent stigma with certain musicians just not taking them serious for whatever reason.

I'd hate to move to Ableton just to learn those reasons if you know what I mean.

___________________
Sequencers: FL Studio 9XXL & Reason 3.
Main Synth Bass GTs - Pro-53, V-Station, Sytrus, Subtractor, Trilian, Blue, Sylenth & Z3ta.
Main Synth Lead/Pad GTs - Z3ta, Sytrus, Sylenth, Vangard, Albino & Nexus.
Main FXs GTs - Waves Plugins, Soundtoys, Volcano, FL Native FX.
Hardware - Truths, Echo Audiofire, Virus Snow, & Novation Xio Midi-Synth.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox 1) A soundcard will not effect pc performance in anyway. (I still continue to see people arguing they do, and ad write ups claiming they do, but it seems I hear way MORE people who bought a good soundcard, claiming they experienced no difference from their original onboard, and I actually here onboard ASUS soundcards aren't bad at all.)

A soundcard is not going to affect your PC's overall performance when it comes to performing general computing tasks. It will, however impede your ability to process large amounts of audio with high throughput, which is exactly what you are doing when you make tracks with tons of software instruments and effects. This is mainly due to crappy ASIO drivers (for PC) or if you are using WDM drivers, which are mostly unsuited to high end audio production. Proper audio interfaces have drivers and hardware suited to the tasks you are trying to perform, so naturally, they are going to improve your experience when producing tracks and make your computer able to handle the workload much easier.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox It just seems like too hit or miss a solution really. And everytime I go to newegg and read reviews on "proper soundcards" I just don't see a single thing that really sticks out to me or sells me on one.

That's your first problem right there. You need to be looking for an "audio interface" not a "soundcard". Are they generally the same thing? Yes. However, the term audio interface generally refers to an audio device suited for processing large amounts of audio. You should not be looking at newegg for audio interfaces, you need to be looking at a proper pro audio dealer. Sweetwater and ZZounds are two reputable online dealers, and you can always go to your local Guitar Center if you prefer to buy locally.

If you are really broke, then you can go with M-Audio, which start in the $100-200 range and up. If you want my recommendation, go with a MOTU Ultralite. Its Firewire/USB with very stable drivers and decent enough build quality. At $549 it is, IMO, the minimum level of quality you need to be looking at if you are planning on getting serious. There may be other who have similar recommendations.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox I'd get one right now if I needed it, and especially if I had ample reason to believe it was causing this, but how often do you see processor issues due to a soundcard?

Again, see my previous comments about processing large amounts of audio. Crappy drivers strain the processor because they offload all their work to the computer CPU, leaving less for you to use for your software instruments and effects. Proper audio interfaces have processors inside which handle all the work of processing audio in and out of the interface, which frees up your CPU for other tasks. This, obviously, increases you computers overall performance when making music.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox The ONLY "guarantee" I've had is that if one day I pick up a high end pair of speakers, that my sound might just sound a tiny bit better. And that doesn't even seem like a "guarantee" sometimes. Forgive me if I sound naive, I realize you are another person on this forum who knows a lot, so just try to understand where I'm coming from.

It depends on your definition of "high end". If you pick up a pair of $300 monitors, then you probably wont notice a huge difference. However, I upgraded from Mackie HR824 (~$1200 a pair) to Focal Twin 6be (~$3000) a pair and the difference was massive. Like most things, your reward is going to be directly tied to the amount of money you spend. You dont NEED $3000 monitors, but obviously more expensive stuff is going to be better.

As for a "guarantee", there are none. Not in producing, not in buying equipment, and not in life. You are going to need to make your own judgments, but I think you'll find that there is a certain range of products that most of the reputable members on this forum will recommend for you depending on your budget. We recommend these things because we either have experience with them personally, or have spent enough time around other like-minded individuals to be able to weed out whats considered good and what is not. Ideally, you would want to upgrade both your monitors and audio interface all at once, but if you cannot do that, you'll have to make a choice.

Remember that your computer, audio interface, and monitors are the three most important pieces of your setup. Without those, nothing else matters, so put your money where you'll get the most value out of it. I "guarantee" you, if you invest in those three items first, the rest of your purchases down the line will be much more rewarding.

Ok see I think my real problem is I do most my learning by reading when rather I should be asking very specific questions.

I've learned more from Eric J, DigiNut, Richie V and DJ Rann in the last month then I have in my entire life, seriously, THANK YOU all for that I don't think you guys realize how appreciative I am of all of you.

I do have money for one good audio interface right now, perhaps the MOTU ultralite. Then down the road I can most likely put away a thousand for proper monitors come spring (I really really would rather not spend more then that).

I had not realized the specifics you mentioned about how the tasks are handled the was the "eye opener" in your post really. Thanks a lot I'm gonna read for a few more days just so I don't feel like I'm jumping into something too quick which I already did with my ti lol.

___________________
Sequencers: FL Studio 9XXL & Reason 3.
Main Synth Bass GTs - Pro-53, V-Station, Sytrus, Subtractor, Trilian, Blue, Sylenth & Z3ta.
Main Synth Lead/Pad GTs - Z3ta, Sytrus, Sylenth, Vangard, Albino & Nexus.
Main FXs GTs - Waves Plugins, Soundtoys, Volcano, FL Native FX.
Hardware - Truths, Echo Audiofire, Virus Snow, & Novation Xio Midi-Synth.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox I do have money for one good audio interface right now, perhaps the MOTU ultralite. Then down the road I can most likely put away a thousand for proper monitors come spring (I really really would rather not spend more then that).

Honestly, you can probably get away with spending not more than $1000 total on both the monitors and the audio interface. ~$500 for the audio interface, $500 for the monitors. You may want to ask some of the other regulars on here about what audio interfaces and/or monitors they recommend as well. I'm certainly not the highest authority on every audio interface, but I have used MOTU products for years and they are good for their price range. A good MOTU interface will last you for a long time. The next level up is a fairly significant jump in price, so that's why I recommend it as a good place to start.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the M-Audio interfaces, but even something cheap like a M-Audio Fast Track Pro or an M-Audio Audiophile 2496 is going to be better than using onboard sound, so if thats all you can afford, then go with that. I know that DJ RANN has experience with Echo interfaces, so you may want to ask him about those as I have never used one personally. Focusrite, Lexicon and a few others also have sub-$300 options but I have not heard good things about those either. Also, you can always buy used as well. Used prices are generally half the cost of the same items new, so thats a way to save money.

Be SURE you specify a budget for both monitors and the audio interface when asking. There are a TON of products out there and it makes it easier to recommend if we know how much you are willing to spend. It is possible to spend CRAZY amounts of money on just those two items, and there are plenty of people who do. Ask DJ RANN what they use at his workplace. I bet you they are using items that cost more than the average Mercedes. However, they are a business that charges clients and gets a return. Things in that price range, are usually way, way overkill for most EDM producers, so don't feel bad if you can't afford $6,000 for a pair of Barefoots, most can't, including the "pros".

Check out Sweetwater.com and ZZounds.com for prices of audio interfaces. Most have them listed in the Recording section of their site. The pro audio market has very little wiggle room on price, so generally if you see a price on one of those sites, its a good bet that you can pick the item up at a local GC for the same price, if they stock it.

Good Luck!

Last edited by Eric J on Jan-08-2010 at 07:57

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox Did you choose Ableton mainly because you knew it was easier then Cubase? If hypothetically speaking, Cubase was just as easy to use, which would you have went with then? I ask because people have their own reasons for choosing programs (ease of use for one) but if I'm going to go through all the effort of learning a new program, I'm more concerned on its features and capabilites rather then ease of use. And I know Ableton is very well capable like Cubase, and may do 95% the same as Cubase, but I'm more curious about that other 5% I suppose. It does seem even with as much people condone the use of both FL and Ableton, that in some weird way they have a sort of inherent stigma with certain musicians just not taking them serious for whatever reason. I'd hate to move to Ableton just to learn those reasons if you know what I mean.

\

Ive tried FL, Ableton, Cubase, Sonar, & Reason, and I used FL for 5 1/2 years before switching to Ableton. I can make music in either of the programs (cept Sonar kills me), but out of all of them Ableton just supports my workflow & creativity the best, I can get out my ideas in lickidy split time without having to slow down.

However I dont use hardware, I hear that programs like Sonar Cubase and Logic have a better handle for using hardware.

___________________

@Soundcloud

:::OUT NOW!:::
Garrido & Skehan ft. Erin - Waiting For You (Nightshift Remix)
Elvin Ong - Motion (Nightshift Remix)
Tidal Forces - Machine Blue (Nightshift Remix)

quote:

Originally posted by meriter Your primary focus should be making good music. That's all. No one gives a shit how you do it. And the people that do are fags.

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J Crappy drivers strain the processor because they offload all their work to the computer CPU, leaving less for you to use for your software instruments and effects. Proper audio interfaces have processors inside which handle all the work of processing audio in and out of the interface, which frees up your CPU for other tasks. This, obviously, increases you computers overall performance when making music.

I have to admit, this is news to me. Years back, when I was maxing out Reason on a laptop, I thought it might help if I got a better soundcard (yes, a soundcard, not an audio interface) rather than using the onboard sound. It didn't make one bit of difference to the processing performance.

Could you expand a bit more (or point to online resources which explain this) - it may be that it doesn't make as much difference in Reason, or that I didn't know what aspects of a soundcard will take some of the load off the computer's CPU, and bought a soundcard which wasn't going to help in that area. What sort of performance increase can be expected, between onboard sound and a high end audio interface?

if your CPU is spiking during playback yet extremely low when all the synths are loaded but stopped, it is most likely an audio buffer issue. There is alot of variance regarding what could possibly be the problem but having a decent soundcard with good drivers should be a pre requisite for anyone remotely serious about making music. Even the intro m audio cards are a big improvement over on board sound interfaces.

quote:

Originally posted by derail I have to admit, this is news to me. Years back, when I was maxing out Reason on a laptop, I thought it might help if I got a better soundcard (yes, a soundcard, not an audio interface) rather than using the onboard sound. It didn't make one bit of difference to the processing performance. Could you expand a bit more (or point to online resources which explain this) - it may be that it doesn't make as much difference in Reason, or that I didn't know what aspects of a soundcard will take some of the load off the computer's CPU, and bought a soundcard which wasn't going to help in that area. What sort of performance increase can be expected, between onboard sound and a high end audio interface?

Well the specifics of each interface is obviously going to be different, but as an example, here is an excerpt from the MOTU web site concerning the PCI-424 card (which is the base interface for several MOTU interfaces including the 24IO and 2408).

quote:

The PCI-424 card features CuemixDSP™, a powerful processor dedicated to creating a custom tailored monitor mix of up to 96 channels of 96kHz audio. Because the mixing takes place on the card itself, instead of making the round trip from the PCI bus to the host processor, the 2408mk3 system provides the same near-zero latency performance as today's latest digital mixers. CueMix DSP completely eliminates the buffer latency associated with monitoring on host-based systems. Because the DSP is mixing for you, your computer's CPU is free for other tasks.

Source: http://www.motu.com/products/pciaudio/2408/cuemix.html

You can find similar data on the manufacturer site of most of the decent audio interfaces. You'll need to check the technical specifications of any interface you may be interested in, but the all operate on the same principle for the most part. In most cases the performance increase can be directly attributed to either good drivers or good drivers in combination with hardware support. Processing audio in real-time is a CPU-intensive task, so any performance gain you can get, either through hardware acceleration or optimized, well-written high performance drivers is certainly desirable.

Last edited by Eric J on Jan-09-2010 at 02:16

quote:

Originally posted by derail I have to admit, this is news to me. Years back, when I was maxing out Reason on a laptop, I thought it might help if I got a better soundcard (yes, a soundcard, not an audio interface) rather than using the onboard sound. It didn't make one bit of difference to the processing performance. Could you expand a bit more (or point to online resources which explain this) - it may be that it doesn't make as much difference in Reason, or that I didn't know what aspects of a soundcard will take some of the load off the computer's CPU, and bought a soundcard which wasn't going to help in that area. What sort of performance increase can be expected, between onboard sound and a high end audio interface?

I was going to post the same thing as Eric but he beat me to it with a much more detailed explanation.

I can't point you to online artilces relating to this, but as a service tech for many years, dealing with tech support issues every day (and a lot of the soundcard enquiries) a can say firmly that Eric's assessment is correct.

When a cheap onboard integrated chip is used, the offload of processing is somewhat pushed on to the main CPU. This is often becuase the drivers are poorly written and very little strain is taken by the soundcard, more so the CPU. In many cases (especially the better interfaces) it's the implementation of how the software caters to the data which makes them more efficient, and in turn, put less relative strain on the CPU itself.

I had a look at the interface in the link that Eric posted.

It seems like definitely on the recording side it provides a massive boost. I couldn't imagine trying to record 96 channels simultaneously with my current setup. I'm guessing it reads the data into its own buffer rather than trying to write it directly to the computer's hard drive?

I'm a bit confused on the playback side though - currently I'm using Cubase 4, with a Presonus Firepod Pro (which has 8 audio inputs). It doesn't have a mixing interface as shown in the link - with a PCI-424 card, would I continue to do all my mixing/ level setting in Cubase, or would I use the faders/ mixing interface that comes with the PCI-424 card? Would I be able to hear software plugins that I have on the incoming audio channels as I'm auditioning/recording?

Would the card help with something like Reason (used on its own), which is self-contained and doesn't allow for recording of external instruments? How much of a performance boost would it have given me, back in the days when I was using just Reason and maxing it out?

quote:

Originally posted by derail It seems like definitely on the recording side it provides a massive boost. I couldn't imagine trying to record 96 channels simultaneously with my current setup. I'm guessing it reads the data into its own buffer rather than trying to write it directly to the computer's hard drive?

Well the boost comes in that all the channels can be processed on the card, rather than by your computer. Think of it as the same general concept as what a UAD card does for offloading plugin processing to that card.

quote:

Originally posted by derail I'm a bit confused on the playback side though - currently I'm using Cubase 4, with a Presonus Firepod Pro (which has 8 audio inputs). It doesn't have a mixing interface as shown in the link - with a PCI-424 card, would I continue to do all my mixing/ level setting in Cubase, or would I use the faders/ mixing interface that comes with the PCI-424 card? Would I be able to hear software plugins that I have on the incoming audio channels as I'm auditioning/recording?

The CueMix mixer software doesn't ever need to be used unless you want to. Everything can still be controlled by the Cubase mixer, the difference is that you now have X number of hardware outputs to which you can route tracks, busses, etc. Inputs are the same way, controlled by the Cubase mixer. The number of in/out is dependent on which interface you choose. In the case of MOTU, there are several interfaces that work with the PCI-424 card including the 2408, 24IO and HD896. In addition you can mix and match up to 4 different interfaces on one PCI-424 card.

quote:

Originally posted by derail Would the card help with something like Reason (used on its own), which is self-contained and doesn't allow for recording of external instruments? How much of a performance boost would it have given me, back in the days when I was using just Reason and maxing it out?

Its probably a little bit overkill on the in/out capacity for Reason since there is no audio recording capability or traditional mixer routing. However, you'll definitely get a overall performance boost in how your machine can handle audio processing since the host CPU no longer needs to handle processing audio, both incoming and outgoing. The driver on your machine, written by MOTU, simply tells the host machine to pass the audio processing on to the PCI card.