Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Advice for Adobe Audition PC configuration?
Hi, a total Mac-user here who needs to get, and set-up, a Windows
machine to run Adobe Audition. Application, radio/TV audio production, typically only up to 8-track projects. I am entirely out-of-the-loop on PCs vs. Macs. I could use some specific advice on a reasonable PC configuration... soundcard option(s), to accomodate running Audition in the latest version of Windows. Sorry for duplication of any previous posts on this, but I've decided Audition will best serve my needs as far as learning-curve and simplicity of its interface... I just don't "Do" Windows at all so I need to start with the right hardware and a decent card configuration that's as cost-efficient as possible. I realize the subjective nature of the question but it's mostly about the PC requirements in this scenario. Many THanks Mike E |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
ups.com I just don't "Do" Windows at all so I need to start with the right hardware and a decent card configuration that's as cost-efficient as possible. If you're into cost-effiency you can probabaly do quite well with an off-the-shelf lower end Dell PC, and an audio interface by M-Audio. The most popular better audio interface around is probably the M-Audio Audiophile 24/96. The recently upgraded M-Audio Audiophile 24/192 with balanced inputs and outputs looks very nice. One major performance boost for running Audition is adding a second hard drive for a work space drive. This allows you to split the I/Os for most I/O intensive operations across 2 drives for a major speed-up at minimal cost. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A total PC user here that has used every version of Cooledit through current
Audition in most every way it could be done. Have played with the others too. Audio is narrow. It is not video. You got room for 8 track with any newer machine. The biggest question is, "Do you want ot play back some multiple channels while recording new ones at the same time?". If not, then soundblaster generic is fine. If so, then look at the RME. Rich Hi, a total Mac-user here who needs to get, and set-up, a Windows machine to run Adobe Audition. Application, radio/TV audio production, typically only up to 8-track projects. [...] I realize the subjective nature of the question but it's mostly about the PC requirements in this scenario. It would be difficult to buy a current-day PC incapable of running Audition well. I suspect that may have influenced Adobe's decision to buy Syntrillium, the creator of the program (then called CoolEdit Pro). IMO, the larger consideration is the "sound card", as you need to get one that has good drivers *other* than ASIO. I'd recommend that you look over the RME product line, as their cards are top-notch and their support is second to none. I have been using one of their cards for over a year without a single problem. www.rme-audio.de Best regards, -- Neil Gould -------------------------------------- Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com Technical Graphics & Media |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Appreciate the input - If i go shopping for a local custom-configured
PC that meets the base criteria, any particular price advantage one way or the other over say a firewire or USB- external soundcard (say, a multichannel interface with breakout.... Otherwise, are most current PCs pretty much universally capable of installing a pro sound card (have an expansion slot to do that) or is that a special stipulation i have to make. Again, pardon my PC ignorance but i am totally in the realm of the PCI slot Mac era with everything i've used to date.. Guess i actually need to know what to specify if i want to go with an internal soundcard vs an external... mainly whatever's price-efficient and still pro level for broadcast quality D/A conversion Thanks again for any further elaboration, Mike |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Hi again,
Recently, posted: Appreciate the input - If i go shopping for a local custom-configured PC that meets the base criteria, any particular price advantage one way or the other over say a firewire or USB- external soundcard (say, a multichannel interface with breakout.... Otherwise, are most current PCs pretty much universally capable of installing a pro sound card (have an expansion slot to do that) or is that a special stipulation i have to make. You don't say what kind of configuration you are seeking; what kind of I/O, analog, digital...? The main recommendation that I would make here is not to "cheap out". If you are in an industrial setting (e.g. you'll be using the computer 8+ hours/day), get a computer that is designed for that kind of use. I also prefer to use specialized components that are designed to be quiet (a place to browse for ideas is quietpc.com). You can also get custom-built audio computers from several sources, and leave those details up to the builders. Again, pardon my PC ignorance but i am totally in the realm of the PCI slot Mac era with everything i've used to date.. Almost every desktop PC has at least one PCI slot, and most have at 3 or more available slots. The question is what else do you need to install? Even though you only need "8 tracks or so" of recording, how many interconnects do you need? I prefer to set up my systems so that I need minimal patching, with everything hard-wired. This makes routing software-controllable and simple. Guess i actually need to know what to specify if i want to go with an internal soundcard vs an external... mainly whatever's price-efficient and still pro level for broadcast quality D/A conversion The salient point, for me, is "pro level". That implies several things other than just specs. What happens when you need assistance, for example? Again, if you're in an industrial setting, don't cheap out. Regards, -- Neil Gould -------------------------------------- Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com Technical Graphics & Media |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On 14 Mar 2005 09:01:15 -0800, wrote:
Hi, a total Mac-user here who needs to get, and set-up, a Windows machine to run Adobe Audition. Application, radio/TV audio production, typically only up to 8-track projects. I am entirely out-of-the-loop on PCs vs. Macs. I could use some specific advice on a reasonable PC configuration... soundcard option(s), to accomodate running Audition in the latest version of Windows. Sorry for duplication of any previous posts on this, but I've decided Audition will best serve my needs as far as learning-curve and simplicity of its interface... I just don't "Do" Windows at all so I need to start with the right hardware and a decent card configuration that's as cost-efficient as possible. Any modern PC will do the job with ease. As a Mac user, you may find the choice available rather daunting! But you'll like the prices :-) You wouldn't choose one of Mac's "fashion" machines for this job. Equally, don't choose a PC with maximum "features" for minimum cost. PCs are so cheap nowadays, I don't know why anyone bothers to make cheap-and-nasty machines. But there are still some around. Dell are usually reliable. Or just get your local 14-year-old enthusiast to slot something together from standard parts. You'll be very pleasantly surprised how little it will cost. Your main choice concerns the sound card. How are you getting audio INTO the project? If you're recording live material, you'll need a quality soundcard. How are you getting audio OUT of the project? If you're playing analogue audio to an external device you'll need a quality soundcard. If you're importing wave (or other format) files and exporting a wav file of the result, the sound card is only needed for monitoring. You don't need to be so fussy. If you're recording live, how many channels will you want to record simultaneously? More than one stereo pair? Will you be synching to previously-recorded material? CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Two further thoughts.
This sounds like a professional project. Choose Adobe Audition if it is the best tool for the job. Not because you think it will be easy to learn And, for goodness sake, don't go into this with an anti-PC attitude! These machines can smell your fear, you know :-) CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Neil,
What i'm moving from is a legacy line-up of standalone DAW's... I'm still content with my Mackie 24 analog mixer. It's currently configured for a D/A conversion thru a Lynx L22 card into a dual 1.25M G4 with the 8-track outputs either a Fostex Foundation or, Audicy, routed into the board, and the board's stereo out entering the Mac via the Lynx analog ins, wherein I mixdown in Bias Peak. I would prefer the same "hardwired" sort of arrangement, i.e., 8-in channels, 'dedicated' to an 8 track audio computer app, to essentially 'replicate the function of what the standalone DAW was doing, i.e., 8 analog in from the mixer to the DAW.... Not really seeking 'cheap' per se, just cost-efficient and not more than i realistically need, and something that has good specs for bc.quality stuff of course. Thanx! Mike Neil Gould wrote: Hi again, Recently, posted: Appreciate the input - If i go shopping for a local custom-configured PC that meets the base criteria, any particular price advantage one way or the other over say a firewire or USB- external soundcard (say, a multichannel interface with breakout.... Otherwise, are most current PCs pretty much universally capable of installing a pro sound card (have an expansion slot to do that) or is that a special stipulation i have to make. You don't say what kind of configuration you are seeking; what kind of I/O, analog, digital...? The main recommendation that I would make here is not to "cheap out". If you are in an industrial setting (e.g. you'll be using the computer 8+ hours/day), get a computer that is designed for that kind of use. I also prefer to use specialized components that are designed to be quiet (a place to browse for ideas is quietpc.com). You can also get custom-built audio computers from several sources, and leave those details up to the builders. Again, pardon my PC ignorance but i am totally in the realm of the PCI slot Mac era with everything i've used to date.. Almost every desktop PC has at least one PCI slot, and most have at 3 or more available slots. The question is what else do you need to install? Even though you only need "8 tracks or so" of recording, how many interconnects do you need? I prefer to set up my systems so that I need minimal patching, with everything hard-wired. This makes routing software-controllable and simple. Guess i actually need to know what to specify if i want to go with an internal soundcard vs an external... mainly whatever's price-efficient and still pro level for broadcast quality D/A conversion The salient point, for me, is "pro level". That implies several things other than just specs. What happens when you need assistance, for example? Again, if you're in an industrial setting, don't cheap out. Regards, -- Neil Gould -------------------------------------- Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com Technical Graphics & Media |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
RD Jones wrote:
wrote: Any reason why you are moving away from the Mac ? or have to use Audition ? There's lot's of great software for Mac like ProTools, Logic, Nuendo, Digital Perfromer ... RD, i'll just say, it is with high reluctance that I am going to Audition over the simplicity and preference of Mac.... I find Audition a bit less daunting, and more preferential, from an interface and user-friendly design standpoint.. than other apps for broadcast production...(and they of course didn't do a Mac version since Apple went into 'competition' with Adobe on several products - or at least that's my perception...otherwise i'd definitely stay with Mac for this particular application.. Elsewise, I will certainly remain Mac-based for all other projects - and probably keep my standalone DAW's up and running as long as I can til i HAVE to move to Audition but need to get the wheels rolling on a back-up system in the meantime... I will happily run ProToolsLE/Free or whatever if i can simplify a template to the scaled down level that i can work with it without all the needless features for my purposes. I may still take that route if i can find time to work on it... but i find Audition to be more 'basic' in alot of Good ways for my purposes...hence the notion to just buy it and try it. Regards, Mike over say a firewire or USB- external soundcard (say, a multichannel interface with breakout.... Firewire. I am still leary of USB for anything audio, and certainly for more than stereo. Otherwise, are most current PCs pretty much universally capable of installing a pro sound card (have an expansion slot to do that) or is that a special stipulation i have to make. Again, pardon my PC ignorance but i am totally in the realm of the PCI slot Mac era with everything i've used to date.. Guess i actually need to know what to specify if i want to go with an internal soundcard vs an external... mainly whatever's price-efficient and still pro level for broadcast quality D/A conversion PCI is still the common standard for both PC and Mac. I normally like to have as many available slots as possible but having Firewire I/O reduces the demand for open slots somewhat. Thanks again for any further elaboration, Mike If you need to meet a spec for PC (rather than a Mac) or Audition (vs whatever on a Mac) go with the enrty level Dell SERVER with XP PRO, and they have the Plextor burner option, Firewire and add something like the RME firewire audio interface. good luck rd |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
Hi, a total Mac-user here who needs to get, and set-up, a Windows machine to run Adobe Audition. Application, radio/TV audio production, typically only up to 8-track projects. What are you going to be doing with this rig? i.e. How is audio getting into the machine? How many channels at a time? How will audio leave the machine? Analog? Digital? Files? Stereo or multiple channels? What's it connecting to (if anything)? What kind of projects will you be doing? I'm willing to help (I'm a TV sound guy) but there are too many variables to offer you anything useful or meaningful without knowing more about the application. -- "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!" - Lorin David Schultz in the control room making even bad news sound good (Remove spamblock to reply) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Recently, posted:
Neil, What i'm moving from is a legacy line-up of standalone DAW's... I'm still content with my Mackie 24 analog mixer. It's currently configured for a D/A conversion thru a Lynx L22 card into a dual 1.25M G4 with the 8-track outputs either a Fostex Foundation or, Audicy, routed into the board, and the board's stereo out entering the Mac via the Lynx analog ins, wherein I mixdown in Bias Peak. I would prefer the same "hardwired" sort of arrangement, i.e., 8-in channels, 'dedicated' to an 8 track audio computer app, to essentially 'replicate the function of what the standalone DAW was doing, i.e., 8 analog in from the mixer to the DAW.... Not really seeking 'cheap' per se, just cost-efficient and not more than i realistically need, and something that has good specs for bc.quality stuff of course. Thanx! You could pop that Lynx L22 card into the PC for use with Audition. Or, buy another one if you want to keep your existing DAW in service. Regards, -- Neil Gould -------------------------------------- Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com Technical Graphics & Media |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Lorin David Schultz wrote:
wrote: Hi, a total Mac-user here who needs to get, and set-up, a Windows machine to run Adobe Audition. Application, radio/TV audio production, typically only up to 8-track projects. What are you going to be doing with this rig? Maintaining my schedule of primarily V.O. but a fairly steady amount of fully mixed spots (radio, TV audio) and soundtracks for multimedia i.e. How is audio getting into the machine? How many channels at a time? Preferably would like to have 8 discrete channels...have been running a Mackie 24 mixer for years preceded by a big Ramsa... Mackie is quiet enough... haven't seen the need to go to a digital mixer...or the desire to learn the complexities of same... Currently as per additional notes elsewhere in this string, using a Lynx L22 analog in for D/A conversion (from a Finalizer for straight-in record of voice-only tracks) and otherwise, my mixer stereo outs are feeding the Lynx by way of a Waves L2 (hardware version) Ultramaximizer. How will audio leave the machine? Analog? Digital? Files? Stereo or multiple channels? Well, anymore it's often just created into .wav/aif or mp3 and transmitted via internet to clients... otherwise, CD burn. I have a monitor feed out of the Lynx now, just going back into the mixer for playback. Typically What's it connecting to (if anything)? What kind of projects will you be doing? I'm willing to help (I'm a TV sound guy) but there are too many variables to offer you anything useful or meaningful without knowing more about the application. That'd be great... If you have a chance to drop me a direct email for more specifics, i'd love to chat. I'm at -- Thanks! Mike -- "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!" - Lorin David Schultz in the control room making even bad news sound good (Remove spamblock to reply) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Mike.
I'd prefer to keep this discussion on the group, as it allows others to ingest it and add their own input and/or alternative viewpoints. Your requirements don't seem all that daunting. I'll tell you how *I* would handle it, but with this important disclaimer: Personal bias alert! Some of my preferences are based on having had success with something once or twice so I refuse to mess with a working formula. Some are based on something not working once or twice, and my refusing to delve into a solution when using something else solved the problem. Scientific method and defendable conclusions may present from time to time, but don't assume that's always how I made a choice. That said... I recommend building your own machine. It's stupidly simple to do and you'll get a system that offers the best of everything for the same price as a box that compromises many of your preferences. I prefer Intel processors with Intel chipsets. AMD processors work just fine, and both SiS and Via make fine chipsets. I've just found occasional conflicts with non-Intel chips so I don't use 'em. I do NOT recommend Intel motherboards though. I've twice found things they just won't do, and have had device conflicts with them. I've never had such a problem with an Asus board. Others may be great too, but I can vouch for Asus personally. I recently built a machine around an Asus P4P800-E Deluxe and have had no problems. ATI video cards seem to work reliably. Don't spend a pile of money on an exotic card -- you don't need it. Get something with a decent amount of RAM and a reasonably fast GPU. I used a 9200. I haven't found a lot of difference between hard-drive brands. You want an 8MB cache, 7200RPM rotation, and 8ms or better seek time. You need two: One for the OS and application(s), and another, separate drive for audio. The Asus motherboard mentioned above will let you use SATA drives so you won't run into problems with program access or optical drive activity bogging down your audio drive. Get as much RAM as you can, at least 1GB, 2GB would be better. Nothing will make more difference to perceived speed or do more to reduce crashes than lots of RAM. I've recently heard two stories of problems caused by defective RAM, so buy a name brand. Don't cheap out here. For a CPU choose any Intel P4. There's a point up to which performance increases equal or exceed price increases from model to model. After that point the price increases become disproportional to the performance increase. Try to buy right at that "line." 3.0GHz with a 800MHz front side bus (FSB) was the point of diminishing returns last time I checked, but see if that's still true. Plextor is a good choice for an optical drive. Antec makes good cases that are easy to work on, that include high-quality, reliable power supplies that also happen to be fairly quiet. Windows XP Home Edition is fine. The Pro Edition includes features that I don't think you need for audio (mostly networking stuff -- someone correct me if I've overlooked something). Buying an OEM version of the software when and where you buy your computer components will save you a c-note or two. Audio interfaces are much too broad a subject to cover here. Suffice to say that Firewire I/Os are plentiful. Check the archives on this group for loads of discussions. Consider M-Audio, Echo, MOTU, Metric-Halo, RME and Frontier Designs (the last being one of my all-time favourite companies). All make devices that are perfect for 8ch broadcast production. I'd avoid USB2 if you're going to do eight channels at once. Peak transfer rates are similar to Firewire, but Firewire has better *sustained* data transfer, and that's what matters to you. NOW... after saying all that, and being one with absolutely NO preference between XP and OSX (six of one, half-a-dozen of the other as far as I'm concerned), I gotta wonder why you're doing this to yourself? Your approach is correct: choose the software you want to use and let that dictate your choice of hardware. It's your "choice" I question! g It is now so cheap to get into a native Pro Tools system that I have to wonder why you wouldn't? It's the de facto "standard" for broadcast *and* music production, so you'll have complete compatibility with other facilities. You can open OMF files (a serious consideration when doing post or any kind of audio-for-video). You can take your sessions to any stage for surround work. As you get comfortable and want to do more, Pro Tools will be more capable and less restrictive. Pro Tools is much faster (built-in file management utilities and better file system that doesn't require lengthy "save" cycles). By learning to use it you'll be developing a marketable skill. Finally, you can run Pro Tools on a Mac. Or Windows XP. Or both. A Digi 002R system is what, a grand? Add another grand for the DV Toolkit software and you're good to go. I know simpler software looks less intimidating, but ultimately it's more restricting. Besides, Pro Tools really is simple to operate. It just *seems* daunting out of the gate. The beauty of it is that "basic" operation is available immediately without knowing very much. You don't have to understand what all the fancy features are or what they do. You can ignore them and get right to work. When I got started with it I just paid an instructor from one of the Pro Tools schools to spend a couple hours walking me through the basics, and that was enough. I took another newbie with me, so we split the cost of the instructor! I hope some of this helps. Let me know if I've missed anything or if you have any questions. -- "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!" - Lorin David Schultz in the control room making even bad news sound good (Remove spamblock to reply) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Recently, Lorin David Schultz posted:
Hi Mike. I'd prefer to keep this discussion on the group, as it allows others to ingest it and add their own input and/or alternative viewpoints. Good idea. ;-) So, for some alternative viewpoints...! ;-) I recommend building your own machine. It's stupidly simple to do and you'll get a system that offers the best of everything for the same price as a box that compromises many of your preferences. This is true only for a certain level of machine. If you want a system that is reliable and essentially silent, you need to know a bit more about the components, and that can get into some details that may be beyond the amatuer. I prefer Intel processors with Intel chipsets. AMD processors work just fine, and both SiS and Via make fine chipsets. I've just found occasional conflicts with non-Intel chips so I don't use 'em. I agree. I do NOT recommend Intel motherboards though. I've twice found things they just won't do, and have had device conflicts with them. I'm not sure which "things" you are referring to, but my current DAW is happily running on an Intel mobo with nary a glitch of any kind. I have had problems using ATI video cards with Intel chipsets, but those turned out to be with ATI's drivers. I much prefer Matrox for the quality of their drivers. So, I'd say that if one is set on using an ATI video card, it may be better to avoid certain motherboards/chipsets, but, I can't say which ones. More reading to do before jumping in! ATI video cards seem to work reliably. Don't spend a pile of money on an exotic card -- you don't need it. I agree that you don't need an exotic card. Also, many of the current motherboards have built-in video that would be more than adequate for a DAW. If silence is important, then it's important to avoid any video card with a fan on it. I haven't found a lot of difference between hard-drive brands. I have, as well as differences between different models of the same brand. Some drives require that you install their software to get their full rated disc space. Avoid those like the plague. These kinds of details can make the difference in stability and performance in a media production system. Get as much RAM as you can, at least 1GB, 2GB would be better. For Audition? 1GB would be *more* than enough. Plextor is a good choice for an optical drive. Agreed. Antec makes good cases that are easy to work on, that include high-quality, reliable power supplies that also happen to be fairly quiet. Somewhat agree. There are quieter power supplies available. I also don't care for plastic or aluminum cases, as it can be difficult to eliminate structural rattles and buzzes. Windows XP Home Edition is fine. And, be sure to read up on XP tweaks that improve performance for audio/media work. In short, I don't agree that it is "stupidly simple" to build a *good* DAW. One becomes responsible for making many decisions that, for example, Apple takes care of; one merely chooses a suitable model, and the details are worked out for them, even if not optimally compared to a well-designed Intel/AMD DAW. I think it's risky to suggest otherwise given the plethora of options available in the Intel world. [...] Your approach is correct: choose the software you want to use and let that dictate your choice of hardware. It's your "choice" I question! g It is now so cheap to get into a native Pro Tools system that I have to wonder why you wouldn't? Perhaps because one prefers the Audition/CoolEdit paradigm to the ProTools paradigm? I know *I* do. ;-) Also, if one is working with Premiere, the integration of using an Adobe solution is better than cobbling together two different systems. [...] As you get comfortable and want to do more, Pro Tools will be more capable and less restrictive. [...] I know simpler software looks less intimidating, but ultimately it's more restricting. I find the Audition tool set to be far more capable than those that ProTools employs. Audition is by no means restrictive, and only appears to be simple on its surface. Its more sophisticated filters and processing tools will take a bit of time to learn, and until then, the simpler tools can suffice. The point is, one needn't buy "add-ons" to be up and running or to go as far into audio processing as one wishes. These preferences are pretty subjective. I presumed that the decision of which application to use was legitimate, since this is not Mike's first DAW implementation, and a decision to jump from one platform to another is not something one does casually. If so, then IMO the "best help" is to help avoid the pitfalls in making the jump. Best regards, -- Neil Gould -------------------------------------- Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com Technical Graphics & Media |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:30:51 GMT, Neil Gould
wrote: ATI video cards seem to work reliably. Don't spend a pile of money on an exotic card -- you don't need it. I agree that you don't need an exotic card. Also, many of the current motherboards have built-in video that would be more than adequate for a DAW. If silence is important, then it's important to avoid any video card with a fan on it. One other thought - I'd suggest a dual monitor configuration, especially if you are using Audition's multitrack view. That way you can have the track display and the transport controls on one monitor with the mixer and effects windows on another. You don't need an expensive graphics card to do this - I'm using a cheap n-Vidia dual head card which works fine. Get as much RAM as you can, at least 1GB, 2GB would be better. For Audition? 1GB would be *more* than enough. Audition isn't memory hungry - it will work happily with 128MB although it will be smoother with more. Plextor is a good choice for an optical drive. Agreed. Yes - go for a Plextor Premium, PX712 or PX716 with Plextools software so that you can be sure that any discs you send out are checked for errors. Perhaps because one prefers the Audition/CoolEdit paradigm to the ProTools paradigm? I know *I* do. ;-) Also, if one is working with Premiere, the integration of using an Adobe solution is better than cobbling together two different systems. One hint - even if you aren't working with Premiere you should install the Premier demo because it adds some useful VST effects that can be used in Audition (but not in other manufacturer's software). I find the Audition tool set to be far more capable than those that ProTools employs. Audition is by no means restrictive, and only appears to be simple on its surface. Its more sophisticated filters and processing tools will take a bit of time to learn, and until then, the simpler tools can suffice. The point is, one needn't buy "add-ons" to be up and running or to go as far into audio processing as one wishes. Adobe aren't always good at showing off what Audition can do. For example, they've had convolution based reverbs for ages which can accept impulses from other software but it isn't obvious how to do this. I've been using Cool Edit Pro and Audition for years now and I'm still finding new ways of working. Cheers. James. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Lorin David Schultz wrote:
Hi Mike. (major edit) after saying all that, and being one with absolutely NO preference between XP and OSX (six of one, half-a-dozen of the other as far as I'm concerned), I gotta wonder why you're doing this to yourself? Your approach is correct: choose the software you want to use and let that dictate your choice of hardware. It's your "choice" I question! g Lorin, first thanks for a great primer on the PC setup, well reasoned and logical indeed. To address your question, my answer firstly is, it is a GREAT question, and my ultimate desire to remain in the Mac realm has not by any means been ruled out, only stifled by the industry's failure to give me a simple to work with interface which, in my experience (as expressed on other threads on here much to the disdain of Windows devotees) has never rivaled the simplicity of my Fostex FOundation standalone in terms of just straight-forward, just-like-analogue-but-on-a-computer, user-friendliness and ease of interaction. I have waited for years for something akin to, like, the 360 systems short-cut editor, only with 8 tracks... or for another analogy, Peak 2.6 with 8 channel I/O instead of two.... I simply do not want/need all of the extaneous, music-production-oriented features and additives that Pro Tools requires me to essentially scale back to simplify the layout and show me eight waveform-edit channel display, a simple record transport and mixer display. I would honestly prefer to pursue some earlier offers from users who said they would provide me with tutorial help and templates to accomplish this level of basic-ness in ProTools so I don't have to switch from my preferred platform, Mac - to the (IMHO) cumbersome and needlessly complex EMULATION-of same (Windows) to simply use what seems a simpler app like Audition (only because they will not provide a Mac version of course). I know Mr. Payne will summarily dismiss my dislike for WIndows by suggesting i'm approaching this OS with a predisposed 'bad attitude' and will get a bad experience as a result. I have used both and by far find MAC SUPERIOR...Particularly pre OSX. Call me a traditionalist. That's okay. It goes to each person's individual work style and i even have been exploring reverting to Session 8 to find the degree of unlayered b.s. that i prefer on my "palate" of tools. I pretty much won out a thread arguing against the over-featured digital mixers versus a simple version that didn't require tweezers and a magnifying glass to operate with all of the dual-function switchable faders et.al that go along with those, but that's another discussion, albeit related.. Hence i stick with my analog board and use a good A/D card. "But I digress" Thanks again for the input Mike It is now so cheap to get into a native Pro Tools system that I have to wonder why you wouldn't? It's the de facto "standard" for broadcast *and* music production, so you'll have complete compatibility with other facilities. You can open OMF files (a serious consideration when doing post or any kind of audio-for-video). You can take your sessions to any stage for surround work. As you get comfortable and want to do more, Pro Tools will be more capable and less restrictive. Pro Tools is much faster (built-in file management utilities and better file system that doesn't require lengthy "save" cycles). By learning to use it you'll be developing a marketable skill. Finally, you can run Pro Tools on a Mac. Or Windows XP. Or both. (edit) I know simpler software looks less intimidating, but ultimately it's more restricting. Besides, Pro Tools really is simple to operate. It just *seems* daunting out of the gate. The beauty of it is that "basic" operation is available immediately without knowing very much. You don't have to understand what all the fancy features are or what they do. You can ignore them and get right to work. When I got started with it I just paid an instructor from one of the Pro Tools schools to spend a couple hours walking me through the basics, and that was enough. I took another newbie with me, so we split the cost of the instructor! I hope some of this helps. Let me know if I've missed anything or if you have any questions. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
is there any benefit to using cubase over adobe audition in terms of sound quality? | Pro Audio | |||
A THANK TO THE KIND FOLKS WHO SHARED THEIR ADVICE ON SINGING | Pro Audio | |||
Audition / CoolEdit NR bug - Need advice | Pro Audio | |||
Advice apprecciated for a new recording I/O configuration | Pro Audio | |||
Audio Advice | Pro Audio |