Laptop for live recording--Mac or PC (Sorry!)

[Telepc]

First, let me try to assure you I'm not a troll. I just discovered this forum a month ago, and I've been lurking daily and learning a lot--thanks for that! I know this post will seem trollish because of the question, and it isn't my intent to get people on both sides of the Mac/PC thing upset--I just want advice, and I appreciate your help despite this being my very first post.

Second, I'm sorry the post will be so long, but I'm just trying to be specific in my help request.

What I want: a laptop computer that can handle the simultaneous recording of at least 8 tracks at a time, with hopefully closer to 16 at some later point. I'd use it to record my band live, then take it home to mix the same with a normal amount of plugins effects, etc. I have a set budget and time frame with which to purchase this, because a few of my band's upcoming shows will be perfect for live recording, so I need to get this laptop in about 6 days, in order to give myself enough time to get the other gear together and learn new software.

Where I'm coming from: Mac user (Studio Vision & Cubase) from '94-'99. Loved the interface and the whole Mac vibe. PC user (Cubase) from '99-present. The leader of my last band wore me down over a period of time about PCs having more options for software, more flexibility, etc. He built me a desktop machine (P2 450, removable HDs, 192 meg Ram) which I still use for audio, and I got a Compaq laptop to use for Internet/Word Pro/finances, etc. I use a 4-input Midiman audio interface. Both computers use Win98.

Why I need a change: My Compaq laptop can't handle audio--too slow and not enough RAM, and too difficult now to upgrade it. Yet, as stated, I want a MOBILE recording solution. My desktop machine can still be upgraded I suppose, but I'd rather leave it be and let my wife use it for the digital photography she does (not Photoshop quality here--just image trimming and emailing to friends). Thus, my new laptop will have to cover the 'Net/word pro/Quicken areas for me too, although audio will be its main reason for being.

I will do some song-writing and home-recording on it, so I'm sure I'll want to use the occasional soft-synth/sampler, but the main system-intensive work will be tracking. I'll never need it to simultaneously record more than 16 tracks at a time, but as close to that number as I can get will be important.

What follows are the two options I've come to, based on my budget and research thus far. I just can't get straight enough info about my particular audio needs from these two platforms. ***Assume for both that I'll add RAM enough to equal 1 Gig and an external FW hard drive. Assume also a MOTU 828 mk2 to start (i.e., only recording up to 8 or 10 tracks at first), and then either another of those or an 896 later on to increase the number of recorded tracks.*** Finally, since I'm stuck back in Win98, I'll still have to buy a new version of Quicken and word pro software for either system (as well as a new DAW, albeit as a crossgrade or upgrade), so my software outlay for either will be about the same.

1) Mac Powerbook 12" (the new version)--1 Ghz processor running Logic Gold (or maybe Platinum). The small screen doesn't bother me, as I'd be able to plug in my 21" monitor at home as a second screen for mixing. I downloaded a PC-version demo of Logic a year ago and got to be quite familiar with it, so the learning curve won't be terribly steep. $1800 (w/superdrive) Obviously a 15" or 17" would be cooler, but I can't afford that within this time frame.

2) PC laptop (probably Toshiba, Winbook or Gateway) with a 2.8 Ghz Mobile P4 running Cubase SX. At this point I think I'll avoid hyper-threading processors. Each of the three mentioned (and especially the Gateway M500) have larger screens than the Mac, but again--no big deal to me. I'm also game to move to Sonar instead, but as stated, I know Cubase really well. $1500-ish.

My personal thing, FWIW: My favorite vibe b/w the two systems is Mac. I was most happy when I was working in Mac OS, and OSX looks even cooler for my own tastes. However, I LOVE the fact that I can go to a computer store and see aisle after aisle of software and hardware options (at accordingly competitive prices) for PC. Honestly though, I don't buy a lot of software, so I'm not sure that all really matters to me, but admittedly, it is nice to know it's there. OTOH, since I'll now have to use my audio computer to check my email, the Mac platform has greater appeal since it's so much less a virus magnet.

In your opinion(s), can one or the other do what I want? Both? Neither? Thank you all very much for suffering through this long post and any offers of advice!

[smoothmoniker]

tele

I've run live recording setups on both PC and MAC, and prefer the MAC. A few things to think about ...

First, the wealth of software available generally for PC doesn't come into play much, since you're building an audio rig. You don't want anything other than audio software on it, and for pro level software there are as many titles available on MAC as on PC.

Second, there is still a marked difference in stability between the mac and the pc. Windows XP has come a long way in making PCs more stable, but they still suffer under a bad chip architecture. It does some things really quickly, but bogs down under a constant flow of heavy data streams.

Finally, a note on LOGIC. If you can get past the learning curve, it's a very robust program for recording. It's very stable on MAC (its native environment), and it has several features (like project manager) that will make your life easier if you're doing multiple sessions, multiple clients, etc. They also have a very well written transition guide, that explains LOGIC in Cubase terms, to help you get up to speed quickly.

Hope this helps.
-sm

[Telepc]

Thanks SM--all good to know.

As I said, necessity will force me to have Quicken and word processor on the audio computer, but other than that you're right on--I won't be putting anything else on there.

Provided my Compaq laptop lives a little longer (display is starting to go), I'll continue to use it for keeping my band's website up to date and a couple other miscellaneous tasks.

Any thoughts on if I'll be able to reach my desired track count for simultaneous record? What was your rig for the live recording stuff you've done, and how many tracks at a time are we talking?

Thanks again!

[sc1767]

I am not sure if it makes a difference on the new 12" Powerbooks, but on the older ones the lack of L3 cache is a drawback for audio. If the new ones still have a Motorola cpu chip I'd look for some test reports before buying one. I am still on a TiBook 500mhz/original 828/Digimax and have no problem getting 16 tracks of 24/44.1 using Digital Performer. I occasionally go out and track bands live so the files are pretty big (1 set) still no trouble. I know of a guy who says he's done 24 tracks like that and he's reliable (not blowing smoke). I haven't tried it myself. The TiBooks can be had fairly cheap nowadays (1k or less if you shop a little).

[Telepc]

Thanks sc1767.

I was concerned a bit about the lack of L3 too, although I've been told several times now that the now-larger sized L2 cache makes up for it.

In fact, it looks like I'm going to get the computer tomorrow, and it appears it's going to be the AlBook Mac. We have an Apple Store here in Columbus OH, and it's hard to pass up since I can get it for $200 less and no tax, thanks to my wife being a teacher.

I won't be getting the 828 & Logic until next month, but when I get it all up and running, I'll post my results.

[PlugHead]

FWIW,

I believe it's possible to record 16 tracks @44.1 with almost any current laptop, but to try mixing on these underpowered native systems a bit of a challenge, esp. if you are tied to plugins/no outboard... mobility is a great thing ( currently using Ti 550 for remote), but even with current processing, there is not enough juice to mix 24+ tracks, unless you bounce FX/ freeze function (in Logic) - but as a tracking box, I know it'll work on a small powerbook...

YMMV,

[Telepc]

I hope I can do a bit of both.

It's funny PlugHead, because I've gotten responses at other forums just the opposite.

"Well, you'll definitely be able to playback and mix a bunch of tracks with plugins, but I don't know about recording..."

Either way, what you say makes sense, and I'm okay with that.

If I can record 16 tracks of 44.1 and mix those same 16 with a few channel insert effects and a few aux effects (plugins) I'll be completely happy. If that goes well, I know at some point down the road I'll invest in a larger system for my home studio for mixing.

[sc1767]

In my experience, tracking is the easier part unless the buffers are set for real low latency. Then, I doubt I could get anywhere near 16 24/44.1 tracks. The mixing is when I take the hit. It gets tough on a Ti 500 once there's a bunch of edits and plugs thrown in. If you have an 828 mkII the cue mix dsp ought to keep things smooth while tracking.

[Nathanael]

I can vouch for the stability of Logic on OSX in remote situations. I do a lot of high bit rate LONG recordings - think classical concerts and festivals, and I've never had it hang up.

Before taking the Powerbook and a MOTU 896 out, I did some LONG test recordings in the studio just setting up some mics and recording the cd changer for a few hours.

If you end up using logic, you will want to make some changes to the defaults. One of my favorites is turning OFF the option that generates the pretty waveforms immediately after you press the stop button. I think the option is called "Automatically create Overviews after recording". If you've been recording for 45-90 minutes, those overviews take 5-7 minutes to create. This is bad if you want to jump right back into record mode. I turn it off and then create the overviews later.

The other nice thing about Logic is the included POW-R dither. I prefer to edit 2 track in Spark, but that's probably as much not bothering to learn that part of Logic as it is any real superiority.

If you want to get really fancy, you could create a custom, smaller environment with just the things you need to reduce the system load, but I've never bothered.