How many tracks can I record simultaneously?

[kongwee]

I still do 16 bit 44.1 khz, cos it is a format you can't go wrong. When I need to pass my arrangement to old recording studio(that don't update their system), there is no format or conversion problem.

 

[blueprintstudios]

i was more guessing it's because most of your samples are in 16/44 as an arranger. but yep like you said, arrangement.
topic = recording.

 

[Cheez]

Most samples are in 24/96 nowadays. The problem with going more than 16 bit is the size of storage, not to mention the resources (CPU/RAM/HD) it takes up. Would seriously reduce the number of simultaneous tracks one can record. The difference to one's ears is not huge anyway.

 

[kongwee]

Well, I record in 16 bit 44.1 cos I know I'm going to process quite a lot. 24 bit does not matter a lot to me.

 

[blueprintstudios]

definitely not recording 20+ tracks drums i guess.

anyway what cheez said is true, because at this stage you'd wanna save all your resources for mixing/vstis. more "feel" than "hear".

 

[ankursamtaney]

Wow - this thread really took off after I left it on Friday huh!

Thanks for all your inputs. Reading through all your posts has thrown up more questions.. some silly ones maybe.

But before that, here's the update: have ordered the Focusrite Saffire Pro 40. Should get it by (or before) the year-end hopefully. Will consider additional pres later, once I'm done experimenting with the unit by itself. In all probability, may just go with the ADA8000, unless I get a great deal for something else / better, but am in no hurry for that.

Blueprint: This is really odd about the R16 and R24.. annoying how ambiguously they describe the specs. In features at a glance it says "8-in / 2-out via USB" at the bottom of the page. But in the description it says you can record 8 tracks at a time using it as an interface. If i was sure about it, I may just have considered the R16/24 then.. but don't want to look back now. And in all honesty, have never used ADAT in the past, so am quite excited about that (although i'm sure its not half as exciting as it seems in my head! )

Cheez: About hard disks, I understand 2 (or 3) is better than one.. but unfortunately I don't have a desktop, and cant have 2 HDDs stuffed into a laptop (unless you get laptops that allow that now and I'm not aware of it). The only option I'm left with is to record on an External HDD (but can only use USB HDDs as the only firewire port on the comp will be taken up by the Interface). Think the USB HDD will handle 10+ tracks better than the onboard internal HDD that houses the OS? Obviously, if push comes to shove and I'm really unable to get by with what I have, I may just get myself a super-powered desktop a few months down the line.. since my laptop's kindda old (and in any case, i use it like a desktop, connected to a bigger monitor, with a zillion cables running out of it, making it completely immobile to function as a laptop!)

Kongwee: Appreciate the inputs and encouragement about easily being able to work with an external HDD. Unfortunately won't be able to go the firewire route for the HD, so may be stuck with USBs. Guess there's only 1 way to find out how much I can do with the internal or the USB HDD .. of course, i'll be sure to back everything up before I try with the internal HD, just in case the comp crashes and I need to format / reinstall windows.

Which makes me wonder, as much as I personally dislike Apple (won't get into that here!), could get a solid mac to use only for recording and multimedia, which may make my laptop more free and portable than it has been for the past year or two .. but more on that another time, in another thread.

Now the only silly question that remains on my mind! What on earth do you mean by Sample Streaming? I can relate that term to a hundred things (ok, definitely 10 different things!), but not sure what it actually stands for, and none of the 10 things I can think of seem like they'd need a whole HD dedicated to the task.

Thanks again you guys!

PS: Guess the bit rate wars are just like the mac / pc wars! many schools of thought there. unfortunately i've never really worked with anything beyond 16 / 44.1; i've never needed to, since i dont do any commercial stuff. just a die-hard sound / recording hobbyist. however, for whatever it's worth, I do believe that, while many do say that the difference may not be heard to many human ears or on many common hi-fi audio systems, there does exist a difference which would be audible to a trained ear. while very high frequencies do normally pass above our audible range, their lower harmonics tend to fall within the audible range adding a notable amount of whole-ness and character to the sound. But as I said, i've never experimented with it, so don't quite have my own opinion on it (yet).

 

[ankursamtaney]

lastly before I end this post, I'm not sure if this point will be valid but based on my experience, if you record 16 tracks at once vs if you PLAY 16 tracks at once, I do believe it's somewhat different. because one is writing and one is reading. and ontop of that when you do "punch in drums 16 tracks recording" , you're half way PLAYING + RECORDING 16 x 2 tracks.
and I know one thing for sure, if you try over do the recording tracks limit, the recording will fail/daw crash or just simply stop. if you try over do the playback limit, the daw will go draggy or the audio will go choppy but it will still try to play.
so does this mean that recording is more intensive than playback?

I'm pretty sure that recording / writing is more intensive than playback. And yea, it would obviously depend on what you're recording over, and what you're playing back. Towards the start of a session, I'm guessing recording 10 or 12 tracks MAY not add that much of a strain, partly because you're recording dry (or atleast that's how I do it). And then, so far, I've just kept adding on inserts onto each track rather than putting FX onto busses, even if I'm using the exact same FX chain on multiple tracks). This obviously, massively drains the available resources when playing back. So if I were playing back with these gazillion plugins / inserts AND recording another 10+ tracks in this fashion, I'm sure I'd be digging a grave for my old faithful Dell! But working intelligently with busses may make a huge difference in such a scenario I feel; but only one way to find out

I know that my comp easily handles playback of about 25 to 28 heavily loaded (with inserts, FX, plugins, etc) tracks, before starting to drag and tire out. But of course, not all 25 tracks contain audio simultanously.. for instance, the guitar lead won't play while the verses are on, the seconds / harmony vocals will only play where needed, etc. if you know what i mean.

 

[kongwee]

There is no harm to know what your old comp can do.
Only you start to play around then you will know what you want.
If you succeeded, it is good.
When you fail, you start to find solution to your problem.

In audio world, there is a lot of debate(for whatever reason), listen and judge by yourself.

 

[blueprintstudios]

ankursamtaney : keep us updated with your saffire hehe. I'm in the middle of an experiment now. I will get back to your posts with some interesting stuff to share if it works.

 

[kongwee]

Saffire? I just got the Pro 14.
Anyway, off topic.

 

[blueprintstudios]

lol who cares.

 

[Cheez]

ankursamtaney, to your question whether an external USB HD will be give better results than the internal HD, the answer is a resounding "yes". Tested and proven (by yours truly!). The bottleneck is NOT in the transfer speed. Hence firewire or USB 2 don't matter. The bottleneck is in the read/write time. The read/write timing will be affected in your internal HD because of the OS and other things going on in the background. On a dedicated HD (external as it may be), you don't have that factor messing up your recording.

I know it because I'm doing sample streaming of gigantic samples - something that takes a heavier toll on HD than multiple track recording. Sample streaming is the ultimate in taxing the HD to the max. Just completed a project entirely on my notebook. I'm using 10 tracks of huge samples (all streamed) and maxing out at more than 300 notes polyphony. And it's all streamed via an external USB 2.0 HD. I'm sure I can push it further. I've done more than 30+ tracks streaming from one dedicated HD before (on an old P3 PC). Although the transfer speed of the USB 2.0 is theoretically faster than the firewire 400, firewire is still faster as it's a more efficient protocol. But USB 2.0 transfer speed is affected only if you have multiple USB 2.0 devices going on at the same time. As it is, my midi interface (M-audio) is also USB - and I noticed no decrease in performance running huge midi transfer data with HD data streaming. Reason - transfer speed is NOT the bottleneck but the read/write time.

You seemed to be concerned about external HD. What exactly are your worried about? Perhaps we can help you allay your fears. I'm performing live in a few days time - playing off my notebook using Kontakt and sample playback live (multiple tracks) using an external USB 2.0 HD. External HD will site beside the notebook. I've done that many times (in live situation) - no issues but definite performance increase. Very stable. And of course, the fact that my external HD is a Lacie HD (cool silver with heat vents at the side - Porsche designed) make it looks...cooler (no pun intended).

Also, adding plugins and effects is not dependent on your HD. That's dependent on your CPU and RAM.

I've seen a notebook (or rather a desktop replacement) that sits 2 internal HD. Can't remember the make. But it's a notebook replacement - which means huge, bulky and heavy. You probably don't want to go that path if portability is an issue.

Anyhow, I would say just go ahead and try. If your internal HD serves you well without problems, go ahead with it. When you hit a ceiling in performance, do consider adding an external HD. As I said, the last thing you want is a glitch in the middle of a recording session. That will really spoil your day!

 

[blueprintstudios]

ankur : from what cheez has said, since he has experienced, it's very credible. but on my end I did not have such a pleasant one when it comes to attempting to do mixing (I didn't try the recording one though) on my usb ext hdd, maybe what happened was, I had an internal HDD + an external housing. the external housing was the 3rd party sort and the "board" on it got fried and unstable. and I would have that horrific yellow exclaimation mark in my systemtray saying delayed write error etc. so it should work well if cheez was using a proprietary external hdd (by seagate/western D) etc. so it would be that maybe back then my transfer speed was okay, but the stability of it was no go. in any case he's safe but I wouldn't risk it on my own again as so far I'm doing well doing light mixing on my laptop's hdd, then transferring out to my main studio desktop when I get home after recording.

 

[kongwee]

Dun think sample streaming should be a good example. On multitrack recording, when you arm and record all track, your HDD start to write even recording nothing. Normally, you tried to lower buffer size and that tax whole computer resource further. While sample streaming, you can increase buffer size bit by bit and allow sample drop so that you could play more sound, of cos you can tweek a few more parameters. So if you play more sample, the resource demand is high, while play nothing the resource is low. While recording, after you hit the record button, the resource demand is the same until you hit the stop button.

Just off topic, if your laptop have PCMICA slot, you could use Protool TDM like solution to increase the tracks count for your laptop. Of cos, that kind of system can buy dozens of your laptop.

 

[blueprintstudios]

Keep to the topic thx

 

[ankursamtaney]

Cheez - about the external USB 2.0 HDD, not exactly sure what I was worried about, but I was just of the opinion that recording on an internal hard disk would be more efficient than recording on an external one. thats because the signal needs to travel longer, into the computer AND out of it to the external HDD to be written. don't know where I got that from, but obviously it was flawed logic (of the lack of it!). but am clear now -- transfer speed is NOT the bottleneck but the read/write time is! Thanks.

Blueprintstudios - even my external HD is the same. i.e. an internal drive in a 3rd party USB housing. will avoid using it. actually, once i get the interface, may just pick up an external HD only for recording.. and maybe another one as backup.

Kongwee - good to know that you have the Pro 14. Do you like it? I was very close to buying the Pro 24, but didn't coz it had only 1 ADAT in, and thought it'd be a waste spending 500 bucks for 2 preamps + 1 ADAT in if i could get 8 preamps + 1 ADAT in for just a 150 bucks more. In fact, I was tempted to get the Profire Lightbridge -- just has 4 ADAT i/o ports, and a firewire connection to the comp. But will try and be content with the Pro 40 for as long as I can. Has more tracks (8 + 8 via ADAT) than I may ever need!

I still dont know what you guys mean by Sample Streaming. Are you referring to Samples that you trigger via MIDI in a Live performance setting? i.e. instead of using a standard keybaord w/ onboard sounds, you use sounds (Samples) off your computer? The only other thing I understand by Samples are drum sounds and synth patches, which are also used for drum triggering and MIDI respectively.

 

[kongwee]

For a quick summary. I change from M-audio firesolo to this Pro 14. First of all, the transparency, easier to hear the soundstage. Lively overall. Open sounding. I have not used the mic pre yet so can't comment, but the line in are good. I record by line in and spdif with workstation keyboard. The line in is better as you capture the electronic character of the keyboard. While in the firesolo, the result is not so much different. So far a lot better than firesolo. To me, it is a lot easier to do modulation/delay and reverb so that I can fit in the soundstage easier. I'm a soundstage freak so Pro 14 is to my liking.

Whether you should go for ADAT option depend whether you wanna try other stuff and not stick to a single brand. Well it is very common to mix and ADAT is one of option to consider. Also must see are you in need for multi tracking.

 

[Cheez]

Yes, ankursamtaney. Sample streaming is playing samples off HDs, not necessary in a live situation, but in sequencing in general. Samples are gigantic nowadays. My piano sample alone is multiple GBs. If I load a full orchestra, I go into gigantic GB size. There's no way we can load that in - considering most PCs/notebooks are have only 4-8GB of RAM! So what softsamplers do to go around the way is to load the first 25% or so of the samples into the RAM, then stream the rest directly from the HD. The HD then works full time, streaming huge GB samples continuously. The read time is the bottleneck in this case (not write time). The faster the read time, the more samples you can stream without going into pops and clicks. Hence why in sample streaming, the HD speed is key. Even before going into problems with transfer speed, the HD speed will first hit the bottleneck and clicks and pops will occur.

 

[kongwee]

My off topic again *applause*,

HDD write/read time is important. But also how the DAW handle sample and recording material. In Logic, you can set the settings toward more playback on sample and recorded material, and sacrifice recording performance. And vice verse. I don't to go further as it is alway off topic.

That is why I feel sample playing and recording is different.

 

[unsane]

i do 16 track drum recordings at 44.1/24bit quite regularly, previously with a core2duo 2.4ghz system much like yours and currently with an i7 rig. never really had a problem, even with fairly low buffer sizes (128/256 - i actually run my new system at 96 samples )

7200rpm drives are a must, and probably the biggest factor for simultaneous track counts IMHO. that said, i've accidentally recorded 16track projects to my backup drives before - external western digital HDs with USB connections and somehow that's all worked out fine even. i'm not sure if those are 5400/7200... lucky perhaps?

for your second question - probably not, though if you stopped and saved every 15 minutes you wouldn't lose as much in the event of a crash. You could be kiasee and do that though i'd just save the project and continue instead of doing a new session. should be adequate.

third question - nah it shouldn't. the computer doesnt care where the signal originates (ADAT/pre's/MADI/whatever) - once it goes through that USB/firewire cable to the computer its all just 1's and 0's ...