skibob

I played with a band who carpeted their entire practice space, floor, walls and ceiling. I think it might have been more than one layer, but I'm not sure what was behind it. They did it in an effort to "soundproof" the room. It was only about a 12'X12'X7' room. It was a really weird room to play in. Aside from not really being big enough and the problems that caused, it was like a black hole for any high and high-mid frequencies and very dead. It resulted in everybody doing the volume war thing, turning up so you could hear yourself, then the other guy turning up so he could hear himself, repeat, repeat... Based on that experience, I would look at some kind of sound treatment (even DIY) before I would just hang big chunks of carpet. You don't want things too dead.

Like I said, I am willing to do he work, just cant spend alot on materials. Sheetrock isn't that expensive. What about two layers of that? How effective would that be? 2 layers of Sheetrock is a good start. And like Scarecrowbob said, seal everything. Outlets, switches, windows, doors, etc.. The rule of thumb I've always heard is imagine you are trying to make the room hold water. Anywhere that water would leak out, so will sound.

Vista only sucks for recording because third-party programmers (the people who write the music programs) haven't written their code to support it yet. Give it time. Within a year it will be just fine. ...And why haven't they written their code yet? It's been over a year and people still can't find stable drivers for Vista. Could it be that programmers are also having a hard time with Vista? Or maybe companies don't really want to sink resources into an OS that most (audio) people don't seem too thrilled with. And now MS has pushed up the release of their next OS so why bother? Businesses don't use it, I know quite a few IT people and none of them use it. Come to think of it I don't know a single person who actually uses it. I know one IT guy who had it so he could learn it for his job, but the last time I talked to him he said he wiped it off his computer because it was a POS. Meanwhile, XP and it's drivers are pretty much rock solid and there's tons of hardware available that works great but you don't need a high end PC to run it anymore so how else are they going to sell people new machines and hardware? Now you can buy Vista with a dual core with 2 gig of RAM and get the same performance as XP with a P4 and 512 of RAM? Yay.... IMHO I would rather have a solid OS with a small footprint and minimal bells and whistles and save the extra horsepower for my apps. Done venting...

I have the 66 with the Omni I/O. I wish they still made the Omni because it gives the 66 a lot more options. I've used my 66 with Cubase SX 3 for years and now Cubase 4 and it's been rock solid.

Originally posted by The Audacity Works "ProTools" (as in the ProTools mentioned by famous artists/producers in interviews) is a series of hardware DSP cards installed *inside* a computer which does all mixing, routing, effects, dynamics, etc. The computer is basically left to redraw the screen and if necessary, run host-based plugins (which, since it's doing nothing else, can run way more and run them more efficiently). Because hardware is doing all the work (like a RADAR, Akai DR-series, Roland VS-series, Alesis HD24, etc.), latency and buffers are a non-issue. The right PT|HD rig can play back 192 tracks of audio and mix them along with 96 simultaneous inputs... with a ton of world-class effects... with unnoticable latency. It acts, responds, and feels like hardware because it is hardware. Conversely, host-based solutions such as Cubase, Nuendo, Sonar, Logic, and even PTLE feel like you're using a computer. There is no comparison, power-wise, unless you want to compare it to something like Ensoniq's long-dead PARIS system (also DSP-based), which was fantastic. Note that since ProTools is hardware, you don't have to use ProTools software (tho' it's included). For example, I use Logic Pro as a front end. Same TDM plugins, same track and input count, same negligible latency, same stability, same routing flexibility... Only with Logic painted on top. Digital Performer also can act as a software front end for ProTools, as could BIAS Peak on OS9. That said, the ProTools software is excellent, but it is NOT what makes "ProTools" ProTools. I'll have to copy this as a text file because this question seems to pop up every few days. And a PT|HD setup like this will run you tens of thousands of dollars. Probably not an option for most hobbiests. There should be a sticky on the difference between PT|HD and PTLE. A big part of the reason Pro Tools is the "industry standard" is because everyone (even people who know nothing about recording) knows the name Pro Tools. One day my wife even asked me why I don't use Pro Tools. If your talking software based recording, the major players are all good. It's mostly personal preference and a lot of people just stick to whatever they happened to start out on.

+1 for St Anger for a band that had unlimited money and time to produce a record that one is a complete waste of both.

Originally posted by VockViel If you can, take it back and eBay a Delta 66 w/ Omni I/O setup. That'll get you a ton more routing options, S/PDIF i/o, 8 (total including S/PDIF) in, 6 out, 2 headphone jacks, 2 neutrik mic pre's, fx send/return, monitor outs, etc etc. That's exactly what I've got, combined with Sonar 2005 it works great! How do you get 8 ins? I have that set up and I can only get 6. 2 XLR, 2 line level and and S/PDIF which is stereo. I agree though, it's a great setup. I wish they still sold it. I use it with Cubase SX.

Originally posted by UstadKhanAli It's pretty clear that you're either a troll or dense. In either case, there's not a whole lot that anyone can do about that besides ignore you. You've gotten far better advice than you deserve, and if you choose to ignore it and continue prattling on, have at it. At least Walters was amusing. +100,000,000,000:thu:

Originally posted by chugheshc seems like shangrila was trolling in prep for a marketing pitch, eh? oh well, takes all kinds I suppose. C. If it's a marketing pitch, he should hire someone else to write his press releases. He dont spel to good no how and grammar not good neither.

Or you could find a buddy who has a clue about computers and have him (or her) assemble it for you.

Building a "music" computer isn't really as hard as some people make it sound. Just buy a barebones system and add the components and software you want. Most stuff now-a-days is pretty simple to put together. I bought a "Building A PC For Dummies" book and built my own. Saved LOTS of money doing it that way. There's no way your going to get the hardware, software, assembly, OS, install software, tweak software, warranty, tech support and shipping for Newegg component prices. Anyone who sells complete systems adds LOTS of markup. Dell, Gateway, HP, you name it. For any decent system from them it's at least $1000 without any music stuff. If Newegg did it they would too. So if you just want to make music you could buy a standalone recorder setup or find someone else to do your recording for you. But either way, in the long run it would probably be cheaper to pay for a "music" computer if you're not comfortable building your own. That's why people either pay the piper or learn to build their own.