c-ba55 said:
There is so much wrong with this statement I don't even know where to begin. Do what you want, but you're not fooling anybody: stealing is stealing. And somebody always pays for that lunch that you claim is free.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
which laptop is best for recording?
- Thread starter discoboo
- Start date
There is so much wrong with this statement I don't even know where to begin. Do what you want, but you're not fooling anybody: stealing is stealing. And somebody always pays for that lunch that you claim is free.
Hers my laptop recording setup...
Its an old Compaq P3 600 which i put a 40 gig hard drive in and use only for music. The blue thing is Tascam US428 which connects to the laptop via USB. Off to the right is my old portastudio 424 which i use as a pre mixer into the 428. the QSC is run from the portastudio into my EV's as monitors.
what ill typically do is record the first 4 tracks onto the portastudio, then dump them into the laptop via the 428, then do all the additional tracks and mixdown using Cubase and the 428. (the 428 is a midi controller for cubase)
Its an old Compaq P3 600 which i put a 40 gig hard drive in and use only for music. The blue thing is Tascam US428 which connects to the laptop via USB. Off to the right is my old portastudio 424 which i use as a pre mixer into the 428. the QSC is run from the portastudio into my EV's as monitors.
what ill typically do is record the first 4 tracks onto the portastudio, then dump them into the laptop via the 428, then do all the additional tracks and mixdown using Cubase and the 428. (the 428 is a midi controller for cubase)
Apeishigh, I forgot to add that with a laptop add on, be it M-audio or any other you frequently get a basic version of cubase or cakewalk. Also, those freebies usually offer you the chance to upgrade.
cba55, you can software to record on for less than 100$. For a few hundred you can get Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar, which I bet will more than cover you. No thousands involved.
cba55, you can software to record on for less than 100$. For a few hundred you can get Cubase or Cakewalk Sonar, which I bet will more than cover you. No thousands involved.
ApeIsHigh81 said:
Sony Vaio + Sonar
if you already have a copy of Windows 2000 then wipe XP off the hard drive and put W2K in it's place, then get service pack 4. I have a copy of Cakewalk Pro Audio 8 complete with manual and lisence code for sale; once it's registered then the user can get an upgrade to Sonar 4 for $150 [email protected]
For any PC/Mac based recording system, the more RAM and processor power you have, the better. Hard disk speed and bus type is another big factor. You'll want a 7200+RPM USB 2.0, firewire, or SCSI if you're using an external drive for recording; which is pretty much necessary on a laptop because most only have one physical hard drive in them. You do not want to be recording to the same drive your OS and/or pagefile is on.
Figure out what hardware you want to buy and what software you want to record with. Check with those respective companies for any compatibility issues they may or may not have with certain hardware.
It would be wise of you to not admit to stealing software in a public forum.
Figure out what hardware you want to buy and what software you want to record with. Check with those respective companies for any compatibility issues they may or may not have with certain hardware.
c-ba55 said:
It would be wise of you to not admit to stealing software in a public forum.
I'm not saying I "steal" software. I'm just saying that moral considerations aside, every piece of windows software ever is available for free, while for Mac this is not the case. The morals are then up to each individual.
c-ba55 said:
Still, the idea that one system is better than another just because you can easily steal software isn't much of a recommendation now is it?
I guess maybe more Mac users realize the value of paying for software? Maybe giving programmers incentive to better their product is a good thing?
Personally, I feel that no amount of backpedaling will blunt the amount of stupidity displayed in your initial post.
I run cubase sx on a laptop with windows XP home edition. Just finished a 15 song project, 24 tracks each, full of automation, pitch correction and effects, and had it mastered at a very good studio. I transfered to the studio's mac based pro tools by way of a CD burn for the mastering process and everything went without a hitch. I image mac is better but I would have to search for a problem to solve to change what I am doing right now. I did buy a usb drive to back up projects but, to-date, no problems running cubase on an out-of the box HP laptop.
if you don't mind me asking, what HP do you have? i just got a zv5000 (5220), 512mb ram (need to max it out).....Eldermike said:
WillPlay4Food said:Still, the idea that one system is better than another just because you can easily steal software isn't much of a recommendation now is it?
If your particular moral view allowed you to replace the word steal with copy, then it in fact is a great recommendation for a system.
c-ba55 said:
Morals are overated. This man has a point. At the end of the day, he may not have access to customer support, but he does still have his 300/600/2,000 dollars. And if he never had 300 dollars, well then whatever.
and I quote:
Morals are overated.
How "this century" of you!
"Yeah, Whatever!"
. . .right then, next!
Morals are overated.
How "this century" of you!
"Yeah, Whatever!"
. . .right then, next!
PROFAVABEANCOOK said:
May you be sentenced to spend your next life as a software programmer in payment for this sentiment. D00d, teh m4cr0v4v3 g3n3r4t10n r0x0rs1111!11!!11!!1 OMG *** LOL!1!!!!!!1!
You'd also "copy" the laptop if you could, right? I don't think you would. How is that for a double standard? Just because a product isn't physical doesn't mean it hasn't taken time and money to produce it. But you knew that too, eh?c-ba55 said:If your particular moral view allowed you to replace the word steal with copy, then it in fact is a great recommendation for a system.
I can't help but think that if everyone had paid for their software, it would most likely have been cheaper.
On the other hand, I've heard stories of the Swedish public service radio HQ and the SAW Studio software package. One license, 50 computers... ?
I am more or less a software programmer. At least, I am programming software at my job. The variable cost of software is zero. The variable cost of laptops is non-zero.
Distributing the fixed cost of software development does not seem to be a major problem with good software.
I am going to play music for free Friday, too!
Anybody in San Francisco, come to the Dogpatch Saloon. No cover! And if you're a laid off software engineer, I'll buy you a drink. Hell, I'll give you a job.
Distributing the fixed cost of software development does not seem to be a major problem with good software.
I am going to play music for free Friday, too!
Anybody in San Francisco, come to the Dogpatch Saloon. No cover! And if you're a laid off software engineer, I'll buy you a drink. Hell, I'll give you a job.
