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

My final decision on studio setup after much research

Discussion in 'Recording' started by assemblethelight, Nov 16, 2011.

  1. assemblethelight

    assemblethelight Active Member

    Of course, i had the best interest for a nice Quad-Core computer, and the top of the line effects but...after much research i have found that with proper mic placement, good mics, good preamps/interface/AtoD converters and recording setup, i can make due what i have. With little more upgrade to my laptop.

    Yes, eventually i will upgrade to a beefy tower and also upgrade my laptop the the HP Envy. For now this will be my purchase for now to get a legit recording quality.

    I have decided on the Focusrite 18i6 because really i will only be using 4 tracks max at one time recording. If i need more tracks i would more than likely turn to our Presonus StudioLive at church. The Focusrite Scarletts seem to get a lot of positives in their preamps being the better ones in the price range.

    I already have a nicely modded MXL V67 so i think i have a good over all vocal mic. The rest of my mics are your typical Shure 58's, 57's, and other pencil condenser mics.

    The only thing i was really sketchy about my laptop the HP G71 with a Intel T6600 Core 2 Duo. Its max RAM goes to 8GB but...i only have 4GB in now. So, i will upgrade it to 8GB. At first i thought that my processor could not be upgraded but its seems that it can be. The highest they make for my Socket is a Intel T9500 with the same FSB at 800mhz, would like to get the T9900 3.06ghz/6mb cache but its at 1066mhz FBS and i do not know if that is a safe travel. Regardless, the T9500 2.6ghz/6mb cache is enough for my needs. Its will be a %40-%50 increase in power with either. I think that sometimes we can abuse to much effects to the point it sound less natural so i do not need a quad-core at this point. Its will also discipline me not to abuse the effects if i had a Quad-core. Besides, my T6600 seems to be handling 20 tracks with each track using EQ, compression, and maybe delay. All these running do about %50 on my CPU and %60 on my RAM. I really do not know if thats bad or good honestly?

    I will replace my internal 320gb 5400rpm with a 500GB-1tb 7200 RPM. I will also use a external hard-drive. I need wisdom on how to use this combination so input would be great from you guys.
  2. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Well-Known Member

    Most of us have utilized separate capture & storage drives with our DAW's since the mid-1990s. This is most obviously because the operating system and programs we are using needs to be constantly accessed. So trying to access the programs while trying to read and write data simultaneously generally over taxes a single hard drive with the operating system upon it. So your operating system drive should only handle the operating system, your programs, your plug-ins, room for a fixed paging file and some frequently unused storage.

    Most software allows you to choose the drive you want to capture to. I assume you know how to already " Save As" what you want i.e. ".wav", ".AIF/AIFF", " .MP3", etc..And so you direct that to your storage drive, i.e. " D:MartyParty.wav " (assuming you have a PC). You can even tell your multitrack software which drive to use for its " temp" folders such as your larger and perhaps faster storage drive such as " D:temp ". This is what we all have to do with our computers to make them viable A./V. production devices. That plus switching off all automatically scheduled events, virus scanners, etc. must be disabled along with any programs running in the background that don't need to be running. There's plenty more where that came from also. All of this is necessary to create a lean mean audio machine. Hey I'm still running Pentium 4's and early 32-bit CoreDuo's without problems. If one needs some super processing and you are bogging down your CPU with it, just render that particular effect out to a separate track. Then you bring that stereo track back in. That way, the processor doesn't have to do all sorts of gobbledygook. And since with most of our software, you have an unlimited amount of tracks you can create and play back, you aren't restricted to 24 analog tracks like we used to be. And back in the old analog days when everything cost an arm and a leg, we had to print some of our effects to yet still available open tracks. Then we also had to deal with the increased element of analog tape noise. You've got it easy now. Just think out of the box when thinking inside the box.

    No boxed sets for me
    Mx. Remy Ann David
  3. aj113

    aj113 Active Member

    Ah. so it's not just me then. :) If you're going to do this guys, render the full 100% wet signal, none of the dry - you already have the dry signal in the original track. Then you can just turn up or drop down the rendered track to get the desired level of effect - just like having the effect itself, but without the cpu loading. Until you want to change your effects parameters of course. That's a bit tricky......
  4. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Well-Known Member

    All this is really based upon how powerful a computer you have and how much memory is installed. Since most multitrack software allows for nearly unlimited track counts, your effects are just another stereo track.

    It's simpler when you know what your computer can't do
    Mx. Remy Ann David

Share This Page