AN ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT PC MULTI-TRACKING SCENE
(or would you rather make music or spend your time debugging computer problems?)
UPDATE: December 2000 - PC RECORDING FINALLY COMES OF AGE (well almost).
Below you'll find the results of years of research into trying to achieve a stable and powerful PC recording system that would really not force me to compromise on what I was used to from decades of working in pro studios. As you'll see, in early 1999 I very strongly advocated not using a PC as the main system to try and make pro records and instead to do the multitracking on the great-sounding and very stable Roland VS-1680 as PCs back then were simply not powerful by themselves or stable enough to do real uncompromised work once you started adding effects.
By November of 1999 I had put together a PC system that did work for me but it relied on adding extra hardware (a DSP-Factory) to the PC in order to work well enough and not clog down the PC when trying to add decent quality effects and it still used the VS-1680 as the main recorder.
Well now, one year later (my, how quickly technology is finally accelerating!), I have a system that uses the PC as the multitrack recorder and mixer and effects generator and - with one small exception - I can do everything (24-bit) in the PC finally and get the quality and capabilities I was used to and without compromise. The details are here. The info below is still valid (for back in 1999) and explains a lot about why I chose the system that I now use.
BACKGROUND
March 1999 - I'm writing this after many recent months of extensive research into the current existing state of PC multitrack recording as it may be of use to others who are trying to decide which way to go in the search for the Holy Grail of a complete studio in a PC.
UPDATE: November 1999 - Since writing this page, there have been changes and improvements in the PC recording scene and I now have a system that I am happy with as it provides all the tracks and simultaneous effects that I need plus it is rock-solid stable and crash-free. The details are here.
(Below is from March 1999)
My research included a lot of hands-on with both hardware and software as well as observing and participating in numerous discussions in PARIS, DSP-Factory, Pulsar, Samplitude, Roland and other newsgroups (Cakewalk, Cubase etc.), mailing lists and forums. The hands-on also involved a lot of research into PC optimization for audio recording. Not everyone will agree with my findings and decisions and my recommendations certainly won't be best for everyone but they should be quite useful to some.
A quick word on my own background so that you know the viewpoint that I am looking at all this from. My background includes about three decades of recording in studios as a producer, engineer, composer and artist and I have owned a number of commercial studios and have been using computers in them since the early eighties. I've had a lot of record deals, made a lot of records and had some hits etc. I had one of the first commercial studios that featured a full MIDI rig sync'd to a 24 track analog recorder (this was in the days when syncing was done manually using digital delay lines). Since I started using computers in recording, like many others I have longed for the ability to do it all in the computer and every year I have watched and participated in trying to make it so. Because of my studio experience I want a system - preferably 24-bit - that is not only extremely flexible and sounds great but is also rock-solid stable and reliable and that can truly give me what I'm used to in studios (32-48 simultaneous audio tracks with a full complement of real-time effects and automation etc.) as well as enable me to go a lot further. I also want it to enable me to use some plug-ins because some of them - notably some of the DSP-FX (especially version 5.5), Waves and Timeworks ones - are very good indeed. I also don't want it to cost me a small fortune.
THE HOLY GRAIL
After all my research and experiences it is my personal belief that, while every available system has numerous good points, there is currently no one PC-based system (either platform) that is stable enough nor bug-free enough - either in software or hardware - to give me everything that I want in one standalone product to enable me to record and mix full-blown masters in my project studio and that current PCs do not have the processing power to handle everything that I want to do simultaneously and those systems based on external DSPs still do not have fully reliable software implementations yet. I believe we're probably at least a year away from truly powerful and stable fully-integrated PC-based recording studios (which I do believe will come). And as many others have mentioned, there are just way too many potential incompatibility problems from the numerous different creators of system parts. Not only hardware but DAW software and especially Directx plug-ins. I want to create and record music, not spend all my time and all sorts of extra expense trying to debug PC problems. And there is a way to do this - but it takes using more than one kind of system or product together at this time in my experience.
One of the things I've observed is that many people find out about a particular piece of software or hardware that claims to deliver the complete studio in a PC and get justifiably excited, plunk down their money and then spend the next many months going from exhilaration to frustration. Many of these, having made their choice without sufficient research into all the alternatives, will then vehemently defend their choice while attacking the alternatives. I've also been guilty of this in the past.
This is partly why I decided to make my own research as thorough as possible and to resist the temptation to go out and buy my "dream system" now. I'm very glad that I did. My research has led me to the strong belief that my ideal system is still a year or so away (but truly is coming) but that there are interim solutions using hybrid systems that do the job very well indeed and without being expensive. This is not to say that current systems are not sufficient for everybody - there are some people who are very happy with what they can do with their current systems - and for them, they've found their Holy Grail. And while some of the systems that I've mentioned below have proven buggy for me and others, there are some who have found them more stable. But the fact that they are not stable for the majority tells me that they're not yet quite ready for use by everyone. I'm not interested in attacking any hardware or software manufacturers as I have a great deal of respect for what they are doing and the fact that they are doing it. I'm more interested in passing on what I've found in order to help those who are interested to understand some of their options and perhaps save them some time and frustration.
OBSERVATIONS
Much as I might wish it weren't so,
1) No matter how powerful the current PC processors (I'm using an audio-optimized PII 400 with 128MB and fast drives), when recording and playing back multiple tracks with enough plug-ins (especially reverbs) to duplicate a studio mix (one done in a studio with dedicated hardware mixing boards, recorders and effects racks), most PCs will eventually give up and either grind to a snail's pace or crash. It's just too much calculating to ask a current generation PC to do simultaneously. Something has to give and it usually does. Having said that, I have observed that those using the Celeron A overclocked to 450mhz and using UW2 SCSI or RAID systems or some of the new multi-platter UDMA disks are having the most consistent success with this so far - at least in terms of numbers of multiple tracks. But even these systems will bottleneck when trying to do a professional mix with a full complement of real-time effects. A lot of people will tell you, "Oh, I can do 60 simultaneous tracks." But when you ask them how many simultaneous tracks they can get once they add the effects plug-ins that they need -- especially reverbs, it's a whole different story!
2) Most PC music recording systems (both platforms) are still quite buggy and are thus unstable and crash - usually at the worst possible times. Part of this is due to the current operating systems and how they handle simultaneous audio and is also due to the numerous different components and systems by different manufacturers that have to work together compatibly as well as being rock-solid stable in themselves.
3) There are no MIDI soundcards or software synths that truly sound as good or as rich as external dedicated synths (my opinion). I'm not talking about audio quality, of course, as many sound cards beat the pants off synths in this area; I'm talking about the richness of musical sounds you get when you can layer 4 different sounds - especially sounds involving motion in the parts. This includes the excellent XG soundcards - although the 4-layer QS-300 sounds in the Yamaha DB50XG, that are only accessible via software such as XG-Gold, are probably the best yet. Perhaps Pulsar will live up to its claims of truly emulating analog synths. But I've yet to hear a soundcard that can match the richness of musical sounds of a Roland JV or XP series synth or even a Korg N1. Also software synths and samplers consume extra CPU power or system RAM that adds to the drain in 1) above.
4) There are in my opinion no real-time low-CPU consumption plug-in reverbs that can truly match the quality of a dedicated hardware reverb such as a Lexicon.
INITIAL CONCLUSIONS
I came very close indeed to buying PARIS but found out that while the system was "relatively" stable at version 1.56, when version 1.8 came out and added Directx support, it became a great deal less stable. I noticed that there were many people who very very happy indeed with PARIS and there were also a lot who were tearing their hair out. It also lacks real MIDI support and has major MTC syncing problems. I personally like the PARIS system very much indeed - both sonically and in its mixer implementation in both hardware (the external hardware controller) and software (the design and implementation of the software mixing console). The EQ and effects are also very good indeed. I have no doubt that all these issues will be resolved but it's not at the point where I could reliably use it in a studio environment. A great source of PARIS info is the Ensoniq PARIS Discussion Group.
Pulsar looks promising but it's not there yet and still has to go through all the bug-finding and fixing stages that the other systems are still going through. Plus it ships without a reverb initially. In a recent demo that I saw, it ran out of processing power very quickly indeed.
Both of the above systems have an inherent problem and that is that they still rely on plug-ins - albeit they provide extra processing power for those plug-ins - but they too eventually say "enough, I can't process any more plug-ins right now." Fortunately they do allow you to use external hardware effects as well.
I've found the DSP-Factory's approach of putting the effects processors in dedicated hardware chips on a PC card, instead of tying up the CPU, to be an excellent solution to this problem in actual usage but here the problem is that one is stuck with the quality of those effects and while some of the effects are quite good, once again the reverbs are no Lexicons. Fortunately you can send signals to external effects processors and back into the DSP-Factory. Also, you're limited to 16 tracks. Another nice thing about the DSP-Factory is that all actions such as fader moves and mutes are instantaneous and the solo is in-place with effects.
SOFTWARE DAWS
Btw, an amazing value in MIDI/Audio sequencers is PG Music's Power Tracks Pro at only $29. I've found it to be an excellent MIDI sequencer - that unfortunately is lacking a Piano Roll View at this time - and a very fast and easy and stable multitrack audio recorder (that seemingly lets you record and play more tracks than Cakewalk) and features some quite nice audio effects (not realtime). Canam's Quartz Studio Portastudio-style 8 track recorder at only $99 is also a great value for fast multitrack demos.
MY WAY OF GETTING MY CAKE NOW
The Roland VS-1680 is a dedicated 24 bit, 10/12 IO (including digital IO), 26 channel automated (everything) digital mixer, digital patchbay, 16/256 track recorder, editor and multi-effects processing hard disk recording system. It records up to 8 tracks simultaneously (plays back 16) and it has a very large, very bright display and it can also be controlled from the PC via various VS-dedicated software. It has 4 dedicated hardware stereo multi-effects units with hundreds of excellent patches and no cable issues as they're internal and they also stay within the 24-bit digital domain. It has a direct guitar in and the effects include Roland's COSM techmology that simulates numerous classic guitar and amp and mic placement combinations. The effects also include their COSM mic simulations (that "make simple mics sound more like expensive classic condensers" - not really). You can also route tracks externally to and from external effects units such as a Lexicon. The 256 virtual tracks enable you to record numerous takes and comp the best ones or mix down a bunch of tracks but still keep the originals in case you change your mind later or record versions with and without effects etc. etc. The editing and part re-sequencing capablities rival those in many DAWs. Because every component in the system is designed from the ground up to work together, it is a beautifully rock-solid stable system.The VS-1680 syncs to MIDI gear and comes with a 2.1GB (6.4GB for a couple of hundred dollars more) hard drive that enables many hours of recording due to Roland's file access system. It's also portable (if you want to record a band live, for instance). I can dump tracks from the VS into Samplitude, add Directx effects and dump them back. I can record with or without the effects. It's software-upgradeable and it basically enables me to do everything I want without having to worry about processor load, crashes, incompatibilities etc.. And I can run it in perfect sync with my hardware or software MIDI sequencers and/or with Samplitude Studio or Logic Audio Platinum. By using the DSP-Factory as my main PC sound card, I get another 16 24-bit audio tracks (if used with one of the specialized DSP-Factory mixers such as C-Console etc.) and another 2 stereo hardware multi-effects units. By using it with Samplitude Studio 5.12, I can have as many tracks as my computer will support (30-40) - all in addition to the VS-1680's 16 tracks and 256 subtracks. The way I have things set up I have access to 11 stereo hardware multi-effects units (plus another 11 in my 4 external MIDI modules) plus numerous plug-ins. Plus I can move my faders and knobs in hardware as well as software.
One of the things that initially made me dismiss the VS-1680 was that, while it does have a non-compressed mastering mode, its main 24-bit mode is compressed. In looking into this I discovered that the compression is only 2:1 and is lossless (very easy to do without degrading audio quality since all you're doing is abbreviating any digital data that is identical and then restoring it fully on playback) and that in listening tests people just couldn't tell the difference between the compressed and uncompressed modes - even after several track bounces - except that sometimes people would express a preference for the sound of the compressed tracks. Either way, it sounded much nicer than standard CD-quality 16-bit. Here is some data from Roland on this: "In MT-Pro mode, the 1680 is able to maintain the benefits of 24-bit audio through an enhanced version of our Roland Digital Audio Coding (RDAC) technology. Audio captured by the 20-bit Analog to Digital Converters is bumped to a 24-bit word length as soon as any processing is done (mixing, DSP etc.). The S/P-DIF inputs on the 1680 can capture audio directly in 24-bits, and maintain this word length. Before audio is written to disc, it is processed by the RDAC algorithm, and saved in a special format which when read back from the disc, allows for restoration back to 24-bit. Though one of the obvious benefits to this system is reduced storage requirements, it is important not to think of this simply as data compression. RDAC uses a method of writing audio data to disc which differs from linear encoding, offering comparable (and in the case of MT-Pro, improved) sound quality, with one of the many benefits being the use of less disc space." More detailed information on RDAC is available here. Many people listening to my VS-1680 are very impressed by how "big" the sounds are - it's actually a *great* recorder.
There's a press release about the VS-1680 at Harmony Central There's also a review of it in SOUND ON SOUND UK Magazine.
The best part is the price. Fully loaded (with the 2 effects cards) it lists at about $4,300 including tax but it can be gotten for about $3,200 including tax from the usual discounters (see update at the bottom for great news on this). I also found a fully loaded used one for $2,600 BUT where those in the know are buying them from (usually with credit cards) is Ishibashi Music or Sound On Sound or AnalogJapan all in Japan. Fully-loaded and with English manual and delivered to your door in 4-5 days and after all customs and delivery costs, it's between $1,950 and $2,500!!! (the difference is depending on the price of the yen at the time you order. A typical Japanese price for a fully loaded VS-1680 with 2 effects cards, English manual and all shipping costs is around 289,000 yen). A page that shows the current price of the yen is here. This is a very small investment for a fabulously workable system while I wait for PCs to get there. At this price you can get 2 of them and they sync together perfectly to become one unit. So for about $4,000 you get a 56 channel, 24-bit 32 track recorder with 512 virtual tracks, 20-bit AD/DA 20/24 IO, 8 stereo effects units, 27 track-hours of recording, 2 SCSI ports, inbuilt CD mastering (for another $500) etc. etc. Pretty awesome. And the new software update from Roland adds 2 more tracks and mastering effects and COSM speaker simulations.
SUMMARY
For me this approach - a dedicated external hardware hard disk recorder with hardware effects coupled with a computer with a good software DAW and the DSP-Factory and a bunch of good plug-ins (that I mostly use when I'm printing a specific plug-in effect to a track) - gives me eveything that I need - and at a very low price. I can record lots of tracks both on the VS and the computer, use numerous simultaneous real-time hardware effects as well as my favorite plug-ins, edit either in the VS or in the PC (much more detailed) and master on either - again the PC offers more options in the mastering process. But I have the choice, and whatever I do I don't have to be concerned about overloading the PC to the point of collapse. As I mentioned before, this approach may not work for everybody but it sure works for me! Also I can control all of the VS-1680's functions from the PC and soon E-magic (who make Logic) is releasing a special version of Logic specifically for the VS series recorders. All my synths go through a dedicated mixer (Yamaha 01V) with its own built-in effects and external Lexicons and other effects prior to going into the VS or the DSP-Factory. So basically I've got about 16 MIDI tracks sync'd with 32 audio tracks with lots of real-time effects running in rock-solid sync and with complete stability. Using either LUI (available from Cakewalk's site) or DSPMix (2 shareware DSP-Factory interfaces) I can also run a bunch of other tracks with Directx plug-ins at the same time if I want to but I usually don't need to. This has proven to be more than enough for every project that I've done with the system.
But, as an interesting aside, where do I go when I've got a hot idea and I want to start recording it straight away? The VS-1680. Because I can pretty much guarantee that if I go to the PC I'll have to spend the first 30 minutes figuring out why something that worked fine yesterday suddenly now isn't working. And by the time I've spent debugging it and getting it to work again, I've kind of lost the excitement. The VS-1680 just works and works great and every time. I've recently been considering dumping all the PC stuff and getting a second VS-1680 - would be a *lot* less hassle and with the new PC programs coming out for editing the VS audio in the PC, I don't really have any reason to multitrack in the PC anymore. Maybe I'll bounce an occasional track to use a plug-in like Autotune but my hardware effects (Lexicon's, 01Vs, Rolands etc.) are all better than any of my software plug-ins, so more and more I'm seriously considering the 2 VS-1680 approach.
Update: Just seen on a forum: "the best price I've found in the US so far is at Grandma's Music in NM. The phone number is 1-800-444-5252. The quote I got was $2150 for the vs1680, $550 for the cdr, and $280 each for the effects cards. Plus, if UPS ground is ok, they pay for the shipping. I talked to two different guys and they each gave me a slightly different quote. Glen gave the best quote."And this: "I found a place that will sell the new VS-1680 for $2100. It is the Music Center in Kenosha Wisconsin. You need to speak with Rob there and tell him Paul gave you the number - which is 888-697-9393. If whoever answers tells you he is busy or with a customer, ask them to page him because you are calling long distance. Good luck with it. He's a good guy who has given me and some of my friends best prices and service along the way."
Tony Rockliff
And this on November 10th: "Thank you for getting in touch with www.analogjapan.com. Roland VS-1680 with 2 VSF-2 cards 2.1 gb HD mint $2098. Roland VS-1680 with 2 VSF-2 cards, 2.1 gb HD new $2198. Shipping EMS 3 days $110 Tokyo to USA door to door per unit. Tax: 0.80 % of invoice price, to be paid on delivery."
And this on November 17th: "I just purchased my VS-1680 from Gilmore Bros. Music (gilmour@vbe.com) for $2085 plus two VS8F-2s for $259.00 each."
There some comments from others here.