|
|
|
|
|
|
#4413 - 09/09/02 07:39 PM
What a waste of money!
|
Member
Registered: 02/12/01
Posts: 525
Loc: Scotland
|
Over the years I've spent a fair few bob on music gear. Most of my purchases have been made after lots of research and generally speaking I've been left happy with what I've bought.
To date my worst ever purchase was a Les Paul Classic which cost a whopping £1,200 (over $1600!)- although it looked great, the frets buzzed and it didn't sound as good as my friend's guitar which was about one sixth of the price.
BUT the was in a past life. Since getting into synths I have to tell you, the biggest waste of money I feel I ever spent, was on an expensive pro audio sound card. I'll not give the name cos I'm not out to have a go at any particular company or card.
The point is... I was getting along quite happily with my mega cheap SB value card and I was making some good sounds with it. Since getting this new card, the recording process has become much more complicated PLUS I've been forced into buying expensive additional extras that I didn't need with my cheaper soundcard (eg- a mixer with a built in pre amp). Not only that, but I now need to buy monitors cos the (large and pefectly functional) speakers I've been using happily for years are no longer any good with the new card (cos when I plug the speaker jack into the output of my new card, the sound only comes out of one speaker instead of two, so I need to suddenly invest in a stereo speaker system with 2 jacks instead of one. If all of this wasn't enough, my hard drive has became cluttered loads of unwanted wav files since getting the new card (the reasons are slightly difficult to explain, but it centres around the fact that my new card can't play Cubase AND record from Sound Forge at the same time, whereas my old (cheap) card could. This means that when I record I have to do it from Cubase only, and as you know, in Cubase every single take you do is saved whether you like it or not)
FINALLY, to top it all off... I can't even notice any great difference in sound quality with the two cards. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure statically my expensive card is much better in terms of bit rate and all that stuff, but when it comes to listening to a song I've made on a CD player... there's not any noticable difference at all! Please don't slag my ears- I know they work fine.
Incidentally, when I was burning songs on my old card, nobody EVER complained about the sound quality.
Anyway, that's it. I'm through. Sorry for dragging on with this, but I just had to get it off my chest.
PS- Elvis and the Beatles never used fancy sound cards, and nobody seems to be complaining about that, do they?
_________________________
David
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4414 - 09/09/02 07:50 PM
Re: What a waste of money!
|
Member
Registered: 04/20/00
Posts: 1287
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4425 - 09/15/02 01:23 PM
Re: What a waste of money!
|
Member
Registered: 02/12/01
Posts: 525
Loc: Scotland
|
Look guys, I'm very flattered that you all think this topic that I started is amazing, but there comes a point when you've got to blow the whistle and let go.
Tek- I know all about latency- when I was at uni raised my rent money by teaching people Cubase. If I never knew about latency I would've been found out years ago. Since leaving Uni I now earn a living making up jingles for companies using synths and computers. It's hardly world fame, but at least it involves doing something I feel passionate about- making music. For the past 4 years I've averaged at 8-14 hours per day working with synths (usually soft synths at that). I appologise for this slightly childish macho tone, but I'm getting a bit pissed off at people assuming that I know nothing, just because I don't think pro audio cards are worth the hype.
As far as latency goes... I can live with it, cos I have no intentions of dragging my computer on stage and playing a soft synth in a live situation. Well, not at this point in time anyway.
Tek- literally millions of dollars have been spent getting people like you to think and respond the way you have. The power of advertising and hype never ceases to amaze me!
I mean, just think about it!- a guy comes on the forum saying that in his opinion he doesn't think expensive sound cards are worth the hype and all of a sudden you and your hen-house cronies start acting like a bunch of poncy hairdressers and talking to me as if I must be either clueless or crazy.
It sickens me to scroll through this thread and see responses like,
"Sounds like you have too much money and not enough of a clue as to what you're doing."
followed by some shitkicking, lowlife sheep saying,
"ouch.....Low Blow Cloakboy!! ...but funny...."
Gimme a break!
_________________________
David
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4431 - 09/30/02 08:47 PM
Re: What a waste of money!
|
Member
Registered: 09/23/02
Posts: 109
Loc: NRH, TX, USA
|
If you've ever had to record a guitar lead over some MIDI tracks using an SB16 - you definitely understand the term latency. IMHO - there's a lot to be said for some of the higher end sound cards, soft synths, DXi, Recycle, samples and other computer based music products on the market. However.... one has to evaluate ones needs and follow the 80/20 rule.. you can get 80% of the results for 20% of the cost !!! And I don't recall if it was Tekminus or Equlaizer that said it, but 99.99998% of the time I have taken something I have done [studio or live] and asked for a sound quality opinion from someone other than a sound engineer or other audiophile - they simply can't tell the difference between average, good or great !! They are conditioned to look for the hook. Other than something mastered to cassette tape using a cheap portable, battery operated device, they simply can't tell..... Instrument definition, separation, phasing, effects and so on, generaly get lost on the average listener.... My point being that if you are happy with it and your sound guy/mentor is happy with it - there's little point in trying for that extra 20%....... no one other than you will be able to tell the difference !! That's not to say one shouldn't strive for perfection, but at some point - be that based on budget, temperament or boredom - enuf is enuf. Marketing folks make a living out of making hte perfect demo and making you go out and but that upgrade. It works.. just ask Microsoft !!! Regards, Steve
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4435 - 10/04/02 12:01 AM
Re: What a waste of money!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi TIME FOR A COMMERCIAL BREAK...Have a napkin with those fish & chips...wups, better hurry or the grease that's running down your arm will drip off your elbow, yeah? so you say you didn't even feel it? OK, that's better now...
Dammit guys*, -tek's right again. Gotta give credit where credit is due. Mixing realtime live, aiff, wav, raw, or whatever audio signal with MIDI sound is N.G.(period!).
Really the best way to work a controlled sequence into a piece is to take the part and FIRST CREATE AN AUDIO FILE WITH IT BEFORE working it into your material. Even all the grease of XG plus the fish & chips will not allow a truly smooth and natural blending of the two. MIDI sound is not final show sound, however it is used more and more at intermissions for instance... a commercial break. People are more concerned about the napkins for the grease running down their arm rather than the backround loop that is playing while the curtain is closed. The only time I believe a MIDI file is a finished product is if that is the end format that is desired. eg. a PC game like Kingpin or the likeness of which uses MIDI for sound. mid files are an alternative to wav files yet they come with their own bucket of problems too!
*& ladies when applicable COMMENT TO ORIGINAL POSTING: Push the reset button, throw everything away and begin with a Fisher Price Close & Play, do not allow pet to chew on line cord.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4444 - 10/18/02 02:23 AM
Re: What a waste of money!
|
Member
Registered: 01/23/99
Posts: 523
Loc: Racine, Wisconsin USA
|
Originally posted by Jiddu: heh man I'd like to see a flaming hard drive ( not my own of course ).. I caught something about seagate being behind WD and Maxtor for HDD recording because of a smaller writeback buffer than their competitors.. [This message has been edited by Jiddu (edited 10-17-2002).] Yes, Seagate drives are slower than equivalent Maxtor and WD drives, that is to say if Maxtor's and WD's 7200RPM drives have an 8.4ms read/write time, Seagate's 7200RPM drives have an 8.9ms read/write time. However, they have a reputation for being quieter and more reliable. At the time I bought my hard drives, first an IBM 60GXP (came out after the 75GXP, a bit more reliable, but still known to crash and burn *not literally burn*) then my Seagate Barracuda IV, they were both considered "the best" by techies at the time. Within 2 months of buying the IBM drives, all the nerds were complaining about how unreliable they were, though statistically they weren't as bad as the 75GXP series. Within 2 months of buying the Barracuda IV, WD's Special Edition series came out and those seem to be the cat's jammies lately. So in other words, **** it. Let the tech nerds argue over which computer peripherals are best. I spent a few months following "the buzz" and all it got me was a sub-par mobo and an IBM drive that may crash on me one day. *knocks on wood* But the reason I posted was to say avoid IBM hard drives. They once were the best, but lately (past two years) things have gotten sketchy.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|