1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Can a PC record 16 simultaneous tracks

Discussion in 'Recording' started by dawman1234, Sep 8, 2002.

  1. dawman1234

    dawman1234 Guest

    I have an Intel based 1.8 Gig, 256 RAM PC. I was wondering how many audio tracks can possibly be recorded with it. I have yet to buy a sound card, so i desperately want to know this before I buy one.

    One more: Is it possible to record as many as 24 simultaneous audio tracks with a PC? Please suggest me a solution for this also.
     
  2. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Yes you can record 16 or even 24 tracks at one time with a 1.8 gig pee cee. You might need to upgrade the memory from 256 but other than that it's just a matter of your interface and soundcard set up. For my system I chose a Frontier Designs Dakota with 2 ADAT ai 3 interfaces ( no 96k). Cheap, about $1100 at G Cntr for 16 channels in and out plus spdif For software I'm running Cubase. Fats
     
  3. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    Absolutely...can be done with ease...
    two things to do...get 512MB ram minimum...get the Western Digital JB model drives...
    that's it...start recording.
    Enjoy!
    Opus :D
     
  4. dawman1234

    dawman1234 Guest

    Thanks! that was very heart warming to know that it is possible to record 16-24 (simultaneous)audio tracks directly to a PC with ease.

    Nevertheless, some of the people I wrote to strongly warned me against direct to PC option and advised me that standalone harddisk recorder is more reliable for the purpose and that I should use the computer for editing only. They also cited problems of perfomance and stability. Will someone clear the doubt?

    Very Confused.
     
  5. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    Sure...I can tell you I did a 16 channel 24/96 transfer with ease then proceded to do another 8 channels on top of that afterwards...another person on the Nuendo forums did 24 tracks of 24/96 with ease then proceded to do another 24 on top of those 24...
    that clear any doubts for ya?!!
    Also these were done on internal IDE drives! :D
     
  6. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Dawnman,
    This used to be true but with recent developments in computers, speed and processing capibilities have been greatly increased. It is now possible to record and or run well over 24 tracks reliably while only utilizing 50 to 60 percent of a systems resources. This is what is needed to have a computer run reliably. If you want to continue to work with a mixer and dedicated outboard, perhaps a stand alone system would be your best approach. But consider this, I'm sitting here looking at a stack of O.F. ADATS that would have cost $20,000 a few years ago that are now worthless. Computer systems, software and hardware interfaces are all upgrabeable in pieces making it easier to keep current. For what a cheap hard disk recorder and mixer costs you could get a monster computer, software, interfaces and maybe even a control surface. Dual AMD's are very affordable and 24 bit converters are way down in price. Add Cubase SX and you get automated mixing with total recall and a ton of efx and dynamics in the deal.............................Fats
     
  7. dawman1234

    dawman1234 Guest

    Thanks everybody for the enlightening response. But I can't follow what Fats is saying. He says PC is good enough, but adds again " If you want to continue to work with a mixer and dedicated outboard, perhaps a stand alone system would be your best approach."

    I am pretty sure I am going to need a Mixer. Does it mean that I should go for a standalone system.

    This newbie needs a little more clarification. Over to Mr. Fats
     
  8. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Dawnman ,
    What I was referring to was you don't need a mixer to work with a DAW. All DAW's have mixing facilities built in and they usually have more features than mixers costing tens of thousands of dollars. They offer almost unlimited aux / sends returns, automated mixing with total recall, less degradation of the audio (hopefully) and much more. You say you want to continue to work with a mixer. What kind of mixer do you plan to use? You will need some type of "front end" to your DAW and many recordists use mixers as a way to pre amp and route mics and inputs and provide headphone cue mix's. Some engineers still mix on a console out of a DAW but unless your using a Neve, API, SSL or somthing like that, there is no real benifit to using a dedicated mixer. In a few more years, (IMO) dedicated stand alone recorders are going to become a thing of the past. It may be sooner, it may be later, I don't know but you might as well get on the bandwagon and learn how to use a DAW or you too can become obsolete...... Fats
     
  9. dawman1234

    dawman1234 Guest

    I am planning to use a Behringer DDX3216 mixer with the 16 channel adat i/o option plus the Frontier Design Dakota soundcard. Will this be a strong set up. And I guess i am going to use as many as 20 or more mics at one time.

    Any suggestions? And thanks Fats
     

Share This Page