Re: Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Mike Su 
Yeah, I should've just stuck with 8.04.

@Jason - I found this USB interface, which is $150 new:
http://reviews.harmony-central.com/reviews/Computer+Recording+Interfaces/product/Lexicon/Lambda/10/1

I got mine for $80 off ebay.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:49 AM,  wrote:

> On Oct 8, 2009 9:50am, Andrew Oikle  wrote:
> > Stick to 32 bit for audio.  64 bit has absolutely zero benefit for
> recording.  Benchmarks show that in some cases 64 bit can underperform 32
> bit and it's only beneficial to extreme number crunching scientists that
> need that level of precision, and also for gigantic databases.  Selling 64
> bit processors to consumers was a scam to trick people into upgrading their
> computers... again.  I repeat, 64 bit has practically no use for consumer
> use or audio recording.  Does anyone here disagree?
> >
> > Andrew
> > Austin, TX
> >
>
> I'm not too familiar with some of the technical details, but I believe you
> are correct in saying that, at this point, 64-bit seems largely useless to
> the average user, particularly as far as audio goes.
>
> When it comes to versions of Ubuntu, I have personally found that Hardy is
> far and away the most stable and efficient OS of the current Ubuntu
> releases. This applies to my computer, though, and your mileage may vary. I
> am looking forward to Karmic, and hope that it solves some of the many
> problems I've been having with the Jaunty RT kernel (and, no, I do not know
> how to compile my own kernels. Maybe one day).
>
> Jason, as for a good set-up that gives you no noise, if you're going to
> need to buy some kind of pre-amp/DI or audio-interface as well as a mic, you
> will have a hard time keeping it under $200. But it is possible. When I
> first started recording, I used a very cheap $60 Behringer mixer (which came
> with two channels that could be used as pre-amps, and phantom power which I
> did not need at the time.) and a used $50 EV dynamic mic. I ran the mic into
> the mixer, and then ran the mixer's RCA tape-out direclty into my computer's
> on-board soundcard, using an RCA to 1/8" cable. Whenever I listen back to
> those recordings, I am actually surprised that they sound fairly decent. I
> guess the moral of this story is that $200 won't get you anything 'nice',
> but it should get you something that will work, and probably fairly well.
>
> By the way, what equipment do you have right now? That will help in coming
> up with recommendations for what to get.
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>
>
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Christopher Stamper 
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Gustin Johnson  wrote:

>  > On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Gustin Johnson  > > wrote:
> >
> > I completely disagree.  I for one do notice a difference between 3
> GiB
> > of RAM and 8 GiB of RAM, especially on my DAW.
> >
> >
> > That's the *only* advantage. If you can do without that much RAM, than
> > by all means use 32bit. 64bit is a mess.
> >
> That is a pretty big advantage.  I could do without that RAM, but I
> would not want to.  I *could* use a 386 with 4MiB of RAM and still get a
> lot of work done, it just does not make sense to do so.


A lot of people don't have more than 4gb. And even more do *not* have any
use for more than 2gb.


  Change is uncomfortable, but it will always occur, it
> is a good idea to get used to it.
>

Exactly. And, as always, early adopters suffer.

-- 
Christopher Stamper

Email: christopherstam...@gmail.com
Web: http://tinyurl.com/2ooncg
gTalk: http://tinyurl.com/6e359r
Skype: cdstamper
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Gustin Johnson 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Christopher Stamper wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Gustin Johnson  > wrote:
> 
> I completely disagree.  I for one do notice a difference between 3 GiB
> of RAM and 8 GiB of RAM, especially on my DAW. 
> 
> 
> That's the *only* advantage. If you can do without that much RAM, than
> by all means use 32bit. 64bit is a mess.
> 
That is a pretty big advantage.  I could do without that RAM, but I
would not want to.  I *could* use a 386 with 4MiB of RAM and still get a
lot of work done, it just does not make sense to do so.

I am no expert but my perception was this transition was less painful
than the 16 bit to 32 bit transition.  We knew the switch to 64bit would
happen in our lifetime back then, so I don't see this perceived scam.
It was always going to happen.  Technology advances, and not always
without pain.  This was true 20 years ago and I expect it to be true 20
years from now.  Change is uncomfortable, but it will always occur, it
is a good idea to get used to it.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrOffQACgkQwRXgH3rKGfP6IQCgoqDFufSWgjR9Ge+YAiAe8fda
LMUAn3VfFfxZ3+ZwP+62OI695nExWCNd
=HbGK
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Christopher Stamper 
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Gustin Johnson  wrote:

> I completely disagree.  I for one do notice a difference between 3 GiB
> of RAM and 8 GiB of RAM, especially on my DAW.
>

That's the *only* advantage. If you can do without that much RAM, than by
all means use 32bit. 64bit is a mess.

My 2cents.

-- 
Christopher Stamper

Email: christopherstam...@gmail.com
Web: http://tinyurl.com/2ooncg
gTalk: http://tinyurl.com/6e359r
Skype: cdstamper
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Gustin Johnson 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Andrew Oikle wrote:
> Stick to 32 bit for audio.  64 bit has absolutely zero benefit for
> recording.  Benchmarks show that in some cases 64 bit can underperform
> 32 bit and it's only beneficial to extreme number crunching scientists
> that need that level of precision, and also for gigantic databases. 
> Selling 64 bit processors to consumers was a scam to trick people into
> upgrading their computers... again.  I repeat, 64 bit has practically no
> use for consumer use or audio recording.  Does anyone here disagree?
> 
I completely disagree.  I for one do notice a difference between 3 GiB
of RAM and 8 GiB of RAM, especially on my DAW.  Also the 64bit CPU
designs are superior to the 32 bit ones, this is not necessarily a
result of being 64bit but it does not change the results.

Jamin runs much better on my core i7 than my dual core laptop (T9550 @
2.66GHz) which in turn outperformed my old 1.6 Ghz Centrino.  The
fastest two machines have 8 GiB and 4 GiB respectively, which required a
64 bit architecture and OS.

Just my 2c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrOWu4ACgkQwRXgH3rKGfOydQCghn064vgfUdLmVlh1KmzEyWEO
GpQAniYwX4J+WytpIlRqYEeCbf8HAiUw
=wCkv
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Mac McIlvaine 
I absolutely agree with recent comments about 64bit.

While Hardy 8.04 was a good release, I have installed or upgraded 
several machines running to 9.04 32bit with excellent results.

My current recording machine has 9.04, rt kernel and I use both Firepods 
and Audiofire12's.



At Thursday, 08 October 2009, beej...@gmail.com wrote:

>On Oct 8, 2009 9:50am, Andrew Oikle  wrote:> Stick 
to 32 bit for audio.  64 bit has absolutely zero benefit for recording.
  Benchmarks show that in some cases 64 bit can underperform 32 bit 
and it's only beneficial to extreme number crunching scientists that 
need that level of precision, and also for gigantic databases.  Selling 
64 bit processors to consumers was a scam to trick people into upgrading 
their computers... again.  I repeat, 64 bit has practically no use 
for consumer use or audio recording.  Does anyone here disagree?> 
> Andrew> Austin, TX> I'm not too familiar with some of the technical 
details, but I believe you are correct in saying that, at this point,
64-bit seems largely useless to the average user, particularly as 
far as audio goes.When it comes to versions of Ubuntu, I have personally 
found that Hardy is far and away the most stable and efficient OS 
of the current Ubuntu releases.  This applies to my computer, though,
and your mileage may vary.  I am looking forward to Karmic, and 
hope that it solves some of the many problems I've been having with 
the Jaunty RT kernel (and, no, I do not know how to compile my own 
kernels.  Maybe  one day).Jason, as for a good set-up that gives 
you no noise, if you're going to need to buy some kind of pre-amp/DI 
or audio-interface as well as a mic, you will have a hard time keeping 
it under $200..  But it is possible.  When I first started recording,
I used a very cheap $60 Behringer mixer (which came with two channels 
that could be used as pre-amps, and phantom power which I did not 
need at the time.) and a used $50 EV dynamic mic.  I ran the mic 
into the mixer, and then ran the mixer's RCA tape-out direclty into 
my computer's on-board soundcard, using an RCA to 1/8" cable.  Whenever 
I listen back to those recordings, I am actually surprised that they 
sound fairly decent.  I guess the moral of this story is that $200 
won't get you anything 'nice',  but it should get you something that 
will work, and probably fairly well.By the way, what equipment do 
you have right now?  That will help in coming up with recommendations 
for what to get.
>
>-- 
>Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
>Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
>Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-

>studio-users
>




===
EASY and FREE access to your email anywhere: http://Mailreader.com/
===



-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread beejunk 

On Oct 8, 2009 9:50am, Andrew Oikle  wrote:
Stick to 32 bit for audio. 64 bit has absolutely zero benefit for  
recording. Benchmarks show that in some cases 64 bit can underperform 32  
bit and it's only beneficial to extreme number crunching scientists that  
need that level of precision, and also for gigantic databases. Selling 64  
bit processors to consumers was a scam to trick people into upgrading  
their computers... again. I repeat, 64 bit has practically no use for  
consumer use or audio recording. Does anyone here disagree?



Andrew
Austin, TX



I'm not too familiar with some of the technical details, but I believe you  
are correct in saying that, at this point, 64-bit seems largely useless to  
the average user, particularly as far as audio goes.


When it comes to versions of Ubuntu, I have personally found that Hardy is  
far and away the most stable and efficient OS of the current Ubuntu  
releases. This applies to my computer, though, and your mileage may vary. I  
am looking forward to Karmic, and hope that it solves some of the many  
problems I've been having with the Jaunty RT kernel (and, no, I do not know  
how to compile my own kernels. Maybe one day).


Jason, as for a good set-up that gives you no noise, if you're going to  
need to buy some kind of pre-amp/DI or audio-interface as well as a mic,  
you will have a hard time keeping it under $200. But it is possible. When I  
first started recording, I used a very cheap $60 Behringer mixer (which  
came with two channels that could be used as pre-amps, and phantom power  
which I did not need at the time.) and a used $50 EV dynamic mic. I ran the  
mic into the mixer, and then ran the mixer's RCA tape-out direclty into my  
computer's on-board soundcard, using an RCA to 1/8" cable. Whenever I  
listen back to those recordings, I am actually surprised that they sound  
fairly decent. I guess the moral of this story is that $200 won't get you  
anything 'nice', but it should get you something that will work, and  
probably fairly well.


By the way, what equipment do you have right now? That will help in coming  
up with recommendations for what to get.
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: recording vocals

2009-10-08 Thread Andrew Oikle 
Stick to 32 bit for audio.  64 bit has absolutely zero benefit for
recording.  Benchmarks show that in some cases 64 bit can underperform 32
bit and it's only beneficial to extreme number crunching scientists that
need that level of precision, and also for gigantic databases.  Selling 64
bit processors to consumers was a scam to trick people into upgrading their
computers... again.  I repeat, 64 bit has practically no use for consumer
use or audio recording.  Does anyone here disagree?

Andrew
Austin, TX


On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:40 AM, Jason M. Christos  wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Mike Su  wrote:
>
>> would you say 32 bit 8.04 is more stable than 64 bit 9.04 studio?
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM,  wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 5, 2009 12:51am, "Jason M. Christos" 
>>> wrote:
>>> > what is good microphone in the $200 range to record vocals that is
>>> compatible with ubuntu studio? I would prefer to hear from someone who has
>>> actually used the combination to record vocals, thanks in advance
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > - Jason M. Christos
>>> > http://www.google.com/profiles/Jason.Christos
>>> >
>>>
>>> I highly recommend the Studio Projects B3 microphone. For its price
>>> (around $150 on-line) it is easily one of the best sounding large-diaphragm
>>> condenser microphones out there.
>>>
>>> My set-up for this is:
>>>
>>> Mic > Audio Interface w/ built-in preamps (Presonus Firepod) > Computer
>>> (Currently running Hardy)
>>>
>>> As others have mentioned, you will need to have phantom power in order to
>>> use condenser microphones. Which means either your soundcard or interface
>>> needs to supply the power, or you'll want to have a dedicated pre-amp.
>>>
>>> Finally, once again, it seems we have all forgotten that we are supposed
>>> to be writing at the BOTTOM of posts when replying, not at the top. Thanks!
>>> --
>>> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
>>> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
>> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>>
>>
>
> thanks guys, well i don't want to buy $200 worth of equipment to get
> noise.  which setup records crisp clear vocals?
>
> --
> - Jason M. Christos
> http://www.google.com/profiles/Jason.Christos
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>
>
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users