Article:		The Ultimate Portable Studio
Subject:		Not a hugely impressive article.
Date:		2005-07-04 09:15:49
From:		Lovemoose
Response to: Not a hugely impressive article.
"a disgruntled PC user" eh? Disgruntled? yes, but only about your assumption. I can "tell you from experience". PC user? yes. Mac User? guess what? yes! I work on both platforms, both professionally and privately. I have used and installed pro tools on both mac and pc. I have configured numerous flavours of mac and pc over the years. Back in 1991 I used Performer on a Classic. In 1993, I bought my first PC and Turtle Beach soundcard. "Know what hyperthreading is?" Of course I do, (and by the way, it's eminently feasible to disable/enable it without resorting to the nuclear option of a reinstall), but my argument in my comment was that if you're in possession of the level of technological understanding required to run any DAW, then you're comfortably in possession of the level of knowledge to install a pc or a mac music system. In the past it was true that it was tricky to get things to work on PC, however, I would surmise it was roughly the same level of knowledge you needed to get OMS working on a mac at the time. In truth, not that much tweaking needs to be done on either platform these days, as many happy owners of both will tell you. "If Pro Tools users are using Audio tracks, why would they need to control their volume via MIDI?" Fair comment. But that wasn't what you stated in the article: "...use these sliders to control MIDI events, (which most musicians don’t really do)". Musicians who are playing at the keyboard will find always find it useful to control volume from that keyboard, instead of reaching for the mouse. Of course there's a other ways of doing it, as you said, but not one that doesn't disrupt a composition/playing workflow. Perhaps if you'd presented a range of software from Non-Mac, Non-Avid sources, then the article could have been taken a little more seriously; Why wasn't Performer mentioned? Why no Ableton Live or Adobe Audition? or Cubase or Sonar? Pyramix or even Rosegarden on linux? It was the arbitary way you discounted so many possible ways of doing this that made me write my first comment; the simple assumption that Mac is best/else is worst paints an inaccurate picture of the DAW world as it exists today, and perpetuates the myth that Apple is for Creatives while the PC is for accountants. It's nonsense, and it's a shame such a talented person as yourself (both from a musical and a writing perspective) helps to perpetuate it. Chris

Showing messages 1 through 9 of 9.

• Not a hugely impressive article.
  2005-07-10 00:24:19  halesgarcia [View]
  
  
  As someone researching portable systems, I found your article incisive, well written and helpful. Thank you very much Gina.
  
  I'm a Mac systems administrator and programmer and I have dealings with opinionated and ignorant Windows users from time to time. They typically have no experience with Mac OS X and tend to project their own experiences (of fragile and insecure systems) onto the Mac platform. They also fail to see that the PC market is so disparate that one Windows user's experience can not be generalized as the common experience for all Windows users. We Mac users have a different experience. When I read that the Mac is "more creative and less technical", I know exactly what you mean. That's my experience too. In my opinion the user interface may be a large part it but this may be debated. After all we've seen poor interfaces become accepted and their limitations overcome with practice (take the QWERTY keyboard as an example). I think more compelling reasons for Mac's superiority in creative fields are its platform integration and reliability. Apple integrates the hardware and software to work together as a single platform. This gives us the common Mac experience. Add to this the Mac's lack of vulnerabilities that commonly plague Windows and its robust UNIX subsystem and you have an extremely reliable and rock-solid computer. These are the things that ultimately give credence to your statement. I also like to think that Apple's GUI guidelines and Aqua, by contributing intuitive and joyful interfaces, contribute to one's productivity as well.
  

• Not a hugely impressive article.
  2005-07-04 14:57:22  gfantsaez [View]
  
  
  I wrote you a long response and then my nephew quit Safari. ^%^%#*^@# Sorry for the delay in responding...
  
  Ok let me start over again... First of all, I apologize if I ruffled any feathers calling you disgruntled. Obviously, you know your stuff and I respect everything you had to say. That doesn't mean that I agree with it.
  
  I too started doing music on a PC in 84 using an old program called Texture. Then I moved to Sequencer Plus until I discovered the Mac Plus and Performer in 89. I switched to Opcode's Studio Vision in 91 and then Pro Tools in 95 after they implemented MIDI.
  
  I have to speak from my own experience and say that installation on a PC is still quite a few more steps than a Mac, even in 2005. Just the simple fact that the Mac has a functional desktop (not just for shortcuts) rather than having to go to My Computer to see a hard drive, open a simple window or open a CD that was just inserted is a bit stupid in my opinion.
  
  As I said previously, last week I went to a drummer's studio in NYC and installed the new M-Powered Pro Tools on a Laptop PC running Windows XP. We had to install two sets of drivers, disable hyperthreading and then install Pro Tools. When we booted Pro Tools, it would not recognize the hardware. We called M-Audio and had to remove and re-install the drivers twice before Pro Tools would see the hardware. The drummer would never have been able to do this installation on his own. (And you mention OMS, most people 5 years ago couldn't configure that either.) I have spent a great portion of the last ten years doing support, installation and training around the country and I can tell you that when I convert a PC user to a Mac user, they are relieved and thrilled and always say, "this is so easy, why can't PC's be this easy?" Maybe it's become 2nd nature for you, but for most professional musicians, who have spent their careers playing an instrument or working with tape machines, computers are overwhelming. The mac is less overwhelming. If you do use both, you would have to agree that there is truth to that statement.
  
  Your 2nd paragraph talking about MIDI controllers - I agree with you that having a volume knob is convenient - but the audience to whom I was writing this artcle for, is most likely a bit intimidated by MIDI as well. Maybe not, but the Keystation 49e does have a Volume slider, just not the vast amount of sliders that the Oxygen or Radium has. I still think for "most" musicians (new to recording), the sliders are not that neccessary and not really used.
  
  Lets talk sofware.
  
  Digital Performer: Love the Midi - hate the Audio.
  Ableton Live: Love it but don't agree that ALL music is loop based. I like thinking of music linearly, not as a series of loops. Live is great for tracking drums and playing with loop based arrangements.
  Cubase: Hate it.
  Nuendo: Love it. Great for post. Way too deep for most people.
  Logic: Love it!! Use it for writing, especially techno/pop. Still not crazy about the audio. I feel Logic is again too deep fo most people.
  Adobe Audition: Never really liked Cool Edit but haven't seen it since Adobe bought it. Would love to play with it.
  Sonar: Never played with it.
  Pyramix or Rosegarden: Never played with it.
  
  As I stated in an earlier response, Pro Tools is the standard in professional music. For me, the ability to communicate musically with as many people as possible is invaluable. But, I would switch software in a heartbeat if I saw something better. I just haven't when it comes to dealing with audio. Pro Tools is the most like a visual tape machine to me. For Midi, I agree PT is not the big cheese but Pro Tools 6.9 made some major MIDI improvements. For songs consisting of mosly acoustic instruments but also have a pad or piano, I'll use Pro Tools for MIDI. For songs written primarily with MIDI instruments, I use Logic. Then I export my Audio instruments in Logic and do all the drums, vocals and guitars in Pro Tools.
  
  I never said that PC's were for accountants. I said that the Mac was made for creativity and it is. It ships with software to do music, photos, video, etc and the Apple software is simple, brilliantly designed and easy to use. It all works together. Your iTunes shows up in iPhoto and your iPhoto shows up in iDVD and etc etc etc... There's a reason that Apple Computer is doing so well. They deserve their success. They appeal to a market that wants to spend less time figuring out how to use their computers and more time being creative. This might peave you a litttle bit (and I don't mean to) but I feel that the Mac also appeals to people who are willing to spend more to get more. So, what is your oninion, if PC's are so easy to use and great for music, why don't more pro's use them? Why does most every major studio in the country have Macs in the studio and PC's in the office?
  
  Again, I'm just debating with you. I really appreciate your comments and wish you and your PC a long, happy life together.
  
  Gina
• Response reloaded
  2005-07-06 11:39:13  notheruz [View]
  
  
  "...my nephew quit Safari. ^%^%#*^@#"
  
  Use Firefox and SessionSaver extension. Creative PC users do so.
  
  
  "... I went to a drummer's studio in NYC and installed the new M-Powered Pro Tools on a Laptop PC running Windows XP. We had to..."
  
  
  So, your point is that PC sucks, because Avid coders can't write software drivers for Windows? OK, I can't give b*jobs either, because I'm a straight guy. Is that a serious argument? Office for Mac sucks too. Why is that? Because M$ can't code properly for Mac. Period. End of discussion.
  
  
  "
  Article:
  The Ultimate Portable Studio
  Subject: Not a hugely impressive article.
  Date: 2005-07-04 14:57:22
  From: gfantsaez
  Response to: Not a hugely impressive article.
  
  I wrote you a long response and then my nephew quit Safari. ^%^%#*^@# Sorry for the delay in responding...
  
  
  Ok let me start over again... First of all, I apologize if I ruffled any feathers calling you disgruntled. Obviously, you know your stuff and I respect everything you had to say. That doesn't mean that I agree with it.
  
  
  I too started doing music on a PC in 84 using an old program called Texture. Then I moved to Sequencer Plus until I discovered the Mac Plus and Performer in 89. I switched to Opcode's Studio Vision in 91 and then Pro Tools in 95 after they implemented MIDI.
  
  
  I have to speak from my own experience and say that installation on a PC is still quite a few more steps than a Mac, even in 2005. Just the simple fact that the Mac has a functional desktop (not just for shortcuts) rather than having to go to My Computer to see a hard drive, open a simple window or open a CD that was just inserted is a bit stupid in my opinion.
  
  
  As I said previously, last week I went to a drummer's studio in NYC and installed the new M-Powered Pro Tools on a Laptop PC running Windows XP. We had to install two sets of drivers, disable hyperthreading and then install Pro Tools. When we booted Pro Tools, it would not recognize the hardware. We called M-Audio and had to remove and re-install the drivers twice before Pro Tools would see the hardware. The drummer would never have been able to do this installation on his own. (And you mention OMS, most people 5 years ago couldn't configure that either.) I have spent a great portion of the last ten years doing support, installation and training around the country and I can tell you that when I convert a PC user to a Mac user, they are relieved and thrilled and always say, "this is so easy, why can't PC's be this easy?" Maybe it's become 2nd nature for you, but for most professional musicians, who have spent their careers playing an instrument or working with tape machines, computers are overwhelming. The mac is less overwhelming. If you do use both, you would have to agree that there is truth to that statement.
  
  
  Your 2nd paragraph talking about MIDI controllers - I agree with you that having a volume knob is convenient - but the audience to whom I was writing this artcle for, is most likely a bit intimidated by MIDI as well. Maybe not, but the Keystation 49e does have a Volume slider, just not the vast amount of sliders that the Oxygen or Radium has. I still think for "most" musicians (new to recording), the sliders are not that neccessary and not really used.
  
  
  "Lets talk sofware."
  
  
  "Cubase: Hate it.
  Nuendo: Love it."
  
  
  See? You *obviously* have *no idea* about what you're talking. We're talking about two *identical* applications, although Nuendo has more "post" features. But we're talking about music making. They are the SAME applications. Identical. Oh, wait, they come with a different default colour scheme!
  
  
  "Pro Tools is the standard in professional music"
  
  
  I'm already bored hearing that same old argument. Hey, a century passed :)
  
  If you want to talk using examples, I will do it. Let's take Hans Zimmer. A Cubase/GigaStudio user, with tons of rigs and tons of awards. How's that for creativity and professionalism?
  
  
  
  "...the Mac was made for creativity and it is. It ships with software to do music, photos, video, etc and the Apple software is simple, brilliantly designed and easy to use. It all works together."
  
  
  You pay DOUBLE. If you pay the same amount for a PC with Software , you'll get *at least* the same, with more power to boot. I don't want to pay for pretty icons and transitions effects. I won't pay for iPhoto, I'll use Gimp (excellent). I will use OpenOffice. I will use Lilypond (the best notation output, period).
  
  
  Creative guys/girls should have figured it out by now.
• Response reloaded
  2005-08-18 21:53:26  SoJaded [View]
  
  
  One thing you seem to overlook is that this is a portable studio which Gina stated was optimum for engineering a live performance. Using band players, vocalists and maybe some electronic musicians who are performing on stage and require a live mix to be done. What she has presented is a fantastic application of both hardware and software for this purpose. It's not designed to be a production suite. But everything she has put forward here replaces a 16 channel (or more) mixing desk, an FX control rack, a synthesiser rack, DAT or other tape recording device.
  
  In response your argument about assigning a midi controller to change volume, I have to say that this is just stupid. Firstly, if I'm on a keyboard with only 16 assignable controllers, I am not going to waste one of them on a volume control. I'd use it for something more valuable (like cutoff or resonance or some synth control). I don't know any musician who would waste one on volume. In fact, I don't know any musician who would want to change the volume of their channels while they are playing. If they want to change the intensity of their notes, they will play them softer or harder on the keys... That's velocity mate... use it. Secondly, Gina made it pretty clear that this application was for engineering a live performance, either solo or with a band. If I was doing such a thing, I wouldn't use a fader to change the level of one of my parts. I'd just use the mouse because it saves my controllers (as stated) and also because it's not like I am going to be majorly changing the volume during performance. I would have set my levels during sound check and to do this, mouse would be sufficient anyway. After the sound check, I would only make minor changes throughout the performance as required.
  
  It's a great article because it pretty much agrees with any producer or engineer I have discussed this with has recommended for a laptop system. Though there are some softwares and hardwares that she hasn't mentioned, I can still see how they would relate to and function in a setup like this. Gina made quite clear from the outset that this wasn't an article telling you what you should use. She was sharing her own application with us to give us an idea. The message I got from her article was "Take what you want from this setup and incorporate it with your own rig".
  
  And you are a disgruntled PC user that obviously has a serious issue with Macs. You've provided no constructive feedback or arguments to support your opinion. All you've done is nitpick the author's comments and even down to her internet browsing methods.
  
  Gina is not asking you to conform to her application. You're talking about something creative here. If you were really involved in this artform you wouldn't be debating her points so much. Artists collaborate and support each other. They give each other advice and guidance when required and they work together. Sorry mate, but no matter what arguments you present, you will not prove your point of view is right. The application this article discusses is brilliant for collaboration, both with technical and non-technical users...
  
  Oh, and thanks for the article, it's been very helpful.
• Response reloaded
  2005-08-19 13:59:59  gfantsaez [View]
  
  
  If only you had been around to defend me in grade school...
  
  I love you!!! Thank you for your support. It is so much appreciated.
  
  Gina
• Response reloaded
  2005-08-25 20:44:04  SoJaded [View]
  
  
  No, thankyou for the article. It's got some good tips in it and it's really been a help for me over the last few weeks. I'm in the process of compiling a checklist of everything I need to get a home studio that makes the cut for higher end productions.
  
  I've also given it to a few of my newbie friends that are having troubles getting their heads around all of the electro-jargon you have to cop when you first get into this field, and they are now much more comfortable with their base knowledge.
  
  See, I don't agree with all of your opinions on hardware/software either. But then, I am using my gear for different purposes, so I wouldn't expect that we would agree. But the kind of arguments against your article that I've read from other readers just shows that they are not really involved in this creative industry because I've never heard a real artist or producer speak like this to their peers. So I thought I should stick up for you.
  
  Once again, thanks for the article Gina, I really enjoyed it.
• What's the commotion?
  2005-07-07 06:57:33  dscotson [View]
  
  
  Your Mac knowledge seems a bit outdated, maybe that's why you can't understand that recommending a Mac for someone building a portable studio is hardly the shocking outrage that you seem to think it is. Some examples:
  
  * All the Open Source software you mention (Gimp, OpenOffice, Lilypond) runs on Mac OS X
  * iPhoto and the Gimp do entirely different things (maybe you meant Photoshop (elements?) for the Mac or F-Spot for Gnome?) Not that it really matters given point one above and the fact that iPhoto is bundled with new Macs.
  * Macs do not cost double the price of brand name PCs.
  * Mac Office is generally considered to be better than the PC version (and so was Mac Internet Explorer before it was abandoned). Period. End of discussion :-)
  
  Hopefully your comments about audio software have more substance.
• What's the commotion?
  2005-07-07 11:08:04  gfantsaez [View]
  
  
  You tell him!! Thank you so much. Well said.
  
  Gina
• Response reloaded
  2005-07-06 12:51:44  gfantsaez [View]
  
  
  I'd sure hate to see you on a bad day... Ever hear of anger management??
  
  Nuendo and Cubase are NOT the same app at all. You obviously are not a professional...
  
  You stick with your Gimpy software and I will happily stick with my mac and Pro Tools along with all the other "professionals" in the music industry....
  
  Lighten up.
  
  Gina