PC recording software

[daveq]

I've been looking into some software for recording on a PC lately. Do any of you have opinions on what is good/bad/... ? I don't really even know what features to look for. Do any of them come with hardware (cards for the PC) or do you have to buy that separately?

I'm not looking for ultra-professional stuff but I don't want cheap crap either. Middle of the road to upper-end quality is what I'm after if that makes sense to anyone. I don't think you can actually demo any of this stuff so that's why I'm hoping some of you can help give opinions.

I've been told that Cakewalk is OK but I'm a bit confused about all of the different products that they sell. Is any of that stuff worth me looking into it further?

I'm not new at playing guitar but I am new at this recording stuff.

Thanks - sorry if I'm a bit vauge - I'm not really sure where to start.

[GEdwardJones]

Magix Music Studio is very good and costs $80.

Jehle uses Acid, which I like as a loop generator, it'll run you about $30

If you're still using Win95 or 98, ProTools Free is an option.

Cakewalk aso has "Guitar Studio" for like $50

You can get really good results from any of these packges.

[GregP]

I can't emphasize how intuitive Tracktion is. If/when that particular link dies (which it probably will eventually, but only because Tracktion's getting bigger, not smaller), the software is now distributated by Mackie and you'll find it on their website.

This is an AMAZING program, and besides that there's an extremely active user base who help each other on a Tracktion forum over at KVR. Users are loyal, knowledgable, and continually contribute new ideas (and plugins!) to the Tracktion cause. It's fully VST 2.0 and ReWire capable, with unlimited audio and MIDI tracks, and was the first program to implement a "Freeze" feature for saving CPU on lower-powered machines. It fits the bill of 'professional features' but with a more intuitive interface and at a lower cost.

For me, the best thing was how easily it was to just visualize it as a set of tracks with a 'pedalboard' on each track for your effects processing.

Another option if you want REALLY cheap is the free Kristal, which is new out so I haven't had a chance to check it out yet. When you get a program, get thee to the aforementioned KVR and find a universe of free or cheap plugins.

As for Acid, I could have sworn it was a multi-hundreds app...?

Greg

[syxxstring]

I used logic audio for our album. I think most of the software is pretty much the same. Depends on if you use a pc or that other kind.

I think the roland studio packs are very cool, you get the interface, a mixer and the card. The stripped down version of logic it includes is okay, but the real thing is much nicer.

I use guitar tracks as my scratchpad home solution, its easy and reliable but not very robust.

[GEdwardJones]

As for Acid, I could have sworn it was a multi-hundreds app...?

Greg

Acid Pro is, you can get the lower cost/featured Acid for around $30.

[GregP]

Aha! There's my confusion.

Another free program is Cakewalk's Plasma Express, though I haven't checked lately to see if it's still available. Good program, but it runs DirectX plugins, so you'll need a VST->DX wrapper to use VST plugins. Developers seemed to have dropped the DX standard for the most part.

Greg

[Guitarfrenzy]

For the absolute best recording software for PC, I'd have to say handsdown get Steinberg Nuendo. For the cheapest get the free version of Pro Tools. And for middle of the road, it's hard to beat Cakewalk Sonar. There are plenty more useful programs you can get though.

[Defiled]

I use CoolEdit Pro 2.1 (or whatever the latest version was before Adobe bought it out). It's the only recording software I've ever used and I must say, even with the $20 Sony mic and the extremely outdated laptop I use to record, it is a great program. Effects, filters, equalizers, noise/hiss reducers....... the list keeps going but like I said I can't compare it to any other recording programs, mostly because once I found it I havent bothered to look for anything else. I do belive it is now called Adobe Audition.

[Defiled]

err.... double post

Edited April 21, 2004 by Defiled

[tsl602000]

For the absolute best recording software for PC, I'd have to say handsdown get Steinberg Nuendo

I agree.

Nuendo

[PaulNeeds]

I use Cubase SX.

[Curtis P]

i use sound recorder that comes standard with windows XP lol

I recommend Cubasis, go to a high school, offer the music teacher 20 bucks and a blank CD and you can get it burned for you

its a very good program

Curtis

[GregP]

Nuendo...

Who needs it?

If you're a multimedia author, sure, but SX 2.x shares the same audio engine and will even do surround mixes (which most of us wouldn't bother with). It's already bloated with features and rings in at a hefty price. Why pay $1,000+ for Nuendo to get a program in which 95% of the features won't ever see any usage beyond 'curiousity fiddling'?

Unless you own a pro studio or are an absolute maniac home recording hobbyist, I don't believe you should have to pay anything more than $200 US (and that, to me, is a high-ball estimate) for your recording software.

I suppose if by "best" you mean 'most features' and 'industry standard', I couldn't argue with you too much... Logic has booted out Pro Tools from many studios, and the Steinberg family is close behind. However, if by "best" you mean "most appropriate for the task at hand", then Nuendo is not even close to being the best.

Greg

[Guitarfrenzy]

I meant best as in best program with most features, most intuitive, and best sound quality. Not the best for the price, just simply the best program I've ever used for PC recording and I've tried them all. But it's just my opinion.. Try them out for yourself and see which one you like.. What's your budget for recording software by the way? Cubase SX is a great program also, I agree and should be considered as one to buy.

[GregP]

I guess to each their own, but "intuitive" is never a word I would apply to a single one of the 'major players'. Nuendo and Cubase send you into window/menu HELL, and Logic is a bit esoteric.

It has the most features, though, sure. Can't argue with you there. I guess if somebody's going the route of the "P2P discount" or are REALLY fanatic about their recording software it's a good-- no, great!-- program, but there's no way in hell I'd shell out that kind of bread for such a piece of bloatware. It's the Windows XP of recording software. Great program, but bloated... oh, so bloated.

As for sound quality, that's mythology. They're all digital. They're all zeroes and ones. It comes down to your hardware for sound quality. I suppose the dithering algorhythm could play a factor, too, but Steinberg's isn't notoriously good. It's like all the others-- it does its job transparently. You'd only really notice sound quality dropping if a program has particularly BAD dithering.

Greg

[tsl602000]

well, the words logic and intuitive really don't go together in one sentence.

Anyway, have you actually used Nuendo, Greg? I agree it's overkill for a hobby home recording studio, but it's my choice as front end for my studio.

I recorded an entire CD in Nuendo and at this point I feel the zero latency group buss routing justifies it's price tag

[GregP]

I agree that intuitive and "Logic" don't belong in the same sentence.

I've mucked around with Nuendo using a... er... 'demo' copy, and I recorded fairly extensively with Cubase SX 1.06. I demoed both the latest Cubase and the latest Nuendo, but only very briefly-- I have to confess that I haven't tried either of them for any more than an hour; however part of that is due to the realization that I did not want to wander down that long and winding learning curve yet again. The whole pathway of 'major' sequencers lost its appeal for me when I discovered a few things:

1. All of my needs are met with much less power

2. It's -software- that tries its best to look like hardware, complete with shadowed, chromed, spiffy-looking knobs. Well that's all well and good, but the whole idea of software is that you can do things on it that simply can't be done (easily?) with hardware... so why does software continually try to BE hardware?

3. I wanted to go the path of legitimate software. Once I put myself in a consumer's shoes (rather than the P2P user's shoes I had worn), I realized how incredibly over-priced that stuff is. Unless I owned a studio and planned on charging a fee for others to record in it, I would never plunk down that much dosh for such an enormous piece of bloatware. In a way, it's quite exhilerating discovering that you can do just as well (or better) using cheap and free software.

There are other reasons, but those are the main ones. Frankly, I find it crazy how many different menus and windows you have to swim through in Steinberg's software. When a dual-monitor system (even triple) is a necessity rather than a convenience, somebody's done something wrong.

In the 2 hours that I 'demoed' Steinberg's software, I completely learned Tracktion. Tracktion's latest version also offers something that Steinberg can only dream of, which is a semi-modular system of routing effects. All of your busing, sending, and in-line effects needs are met, but you can also develop new ways to effect your signal and can easily create super-synths or multi-effectors with a few quick drag and drops. Multiple outputs are taken care of, and can be routed to other tracks, or back into themselves. Really, your imagination is the limit.

So, my question to you-- have you tried Tracktion? Or Energy XT?

Now, I realize that each of us are simply defending programs which we know and love. I'd hate it for some jackass to tell me that $1,000 was a "stupid" investment to make, and I understand that I may be coming off that way. But let me assure you that if you are using the features to their full extent, and are comfortable and happy with that working environment, and are comfortable with the price you paid, then I honestly and sincerely wish you nothing but good will. I'd just never recommend that path to a newcomer.

And no, I'm not a shill. <laff>

Greg