Best Daw For Audio Only, Digital Performer vs Logic? Options

[checht]

I've read the many discussions in this forum, but didn't find my exact situation. I'm trying to choose software for live multi-track recording using a MOTU firewire interface. I have a 1.2GB iBook w 1GB ram, 10.3.9.

I doubt I'll ever go near midi. Just want to location record multi-tracks, then mix them down.

Pro Tools file compatibility a must.

CPU usage light enough to allow for recording 24 tracks of 24/96 at once on my iBook.

Seems like it comes down to Digital Performer vs Logic.

Opinions, thoughts, tirades?

Thanks

[andru]

Hi there... IMHO... I'd recommend Digital Performer... its got all the bells and whistles and should run sweetly... enough for your purpose.

[ali macdonald]

Digital performer is over the top for live recording and logic is easy when you get used to it.Logic is basically the best of Pro tools and Cubase rapped up in one.I am also going the slightly cheaper route of live recording using the Prosonus firepod(any views?) it has 8 pre amps etc i use logic in my studio and am quite happy with it , Runs really well on my ibook 1.42 Ghz. the best recording and sequencer package i have come across

This post has been edited by ali macdonald: Thu 1 Dec 2005, 14:23

[Schmeckitup]

DP and Logic are both excellent. Audio editing functions are a little more Pro-Toolsish in DP. I'd go with whichever program someone else you know has already. It never hurts to be compatable with your neighbors.
Onr more thought: You probably don't need to spend the extra $500 on Logid for all the softsynths you won't be using...
I don't think either program gan do 24 at 96k on a laptop, though. But don't quote me.
One cheap last idea - Tracktion is a little underfeatured for the studio, but it might just work for you live. You'd just have to drag the WAV files into a Protools session.

[rickenbacker]

I doubt there's a single laptop on the planet capable of running 24 tracks of 24/96 audio simultaneously.

Maybe 24/48, but even then you're asking a lot of the little fella.

I don't know if you have an audio interface lined up yet, but it sounds to me like buying one of the MOTU interfaces (828, Traveller, etc) would suit you because then you'd also get the AudioDesk software, which is pretty much DP without the MIDI.

As for file compatibility, everything opens or imports AIFF files.

[deaconblue]

For live audio, especially with no need for MIDI you could just stick with the Audio Desk 2 software that ships with the 828/Traveller interfaces. Rickenbacker has it nailed. It also supports OMF import/export - AudioDesk supports complete multitrack session interchange with Pro Tools, including track layout, frame-accurate audio region placement and volume and pan automation data.

For more info, check MOTU's AudioDesk 2 feature list.

Plus it'd give you the chance to tweak a lot of the audio settings, get used to the MOTU interface (especially useful if you are already used to ProTools set ups) and let you decide if you really need to upgrade to DP. There is an upgrade price from Audio Desk to DP should you decide to do that.

DP is much more feature rich for mixing options, power, nuances and includes MIDI support, but if you are strictly looking to do live mixes and board level quality compositions, then AudioDesk may be all you need.

peace,
deacon

[checht]

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful replies. It's fun venturing into new territory, but helps to have the voice of experience guiding you. Not much of that happening on the rock in the middle of the ocean that I live on.

Seems like I should start with AudioDesk, as it'll come with the MOTU interface. Then perhaps upgrade to DP if I need to for post production.

A second question, right before I buy. I'm trying to pick between the MOTU 828 and 896, using number of mic pre's as the main criteria. While I'll always want a couple of preamps for an ambient pair, I've thought about using the 828 and running most of my inputs from the FOH console channel inserts.

If I assemble a system to record mic ins, I'll need to run isolation transormers off the stage feeds, then route signal into mic pre's on the 896. I'd love to avoid dragging the transformers and extra cables.

I'm wondering whether it's reasonable to rely on being able to grab the send half of an insert loop. I'm fine building whatever cables I need to, including one that would retain insert loop functionality for the board. Also, This strategy would leave me at the mercy of whatever quality mic pre's are in the console.

So, rely on the FOH console, or go the independent route?

Thanks again for all the really useful help, Mahalo plenty.

[rickenbacker]

Well, you COULD go the indepenent route (if I'm honest, you lost me when you started talking about grabbing the send half of an insert loop and building your own cables), or you could look more closely at the spec for the MOTU Traveller and see if that fits the bill. It was expressly designed to tackle the kind of situation you anticipate recording in, so it looks like a solid contender. You get four mic preamps (over the 828's 2, I think) and four line ins, so you can capture the most crucial channels via the Traveller's preamps and leave the rest to the FOH board. It's also bus-powered. The 896 has 8 preamps, of course, which might be even more suitable. No bus power option, though.

[newrigel]

DP and Logic are both excellent. Audio editing functions are a little more Pro-Toolsish in DP. I'd go with whichever program someone else you know has already. It never hurts to be compatable with your neighbors.
Onr more thought: You probably don't need to spend the extra $500 on Logid for all the softsynths you won't be using...
I don't think either program gan do 24 at 96k on a laptop, though. But don't quote me.
One cheap last idea - Tracktion is a little underfeatured for the studio, but it might just work for you live. You'd just have to drag the WAV files into a Protools session.

Audio editing functions are a little more Pro-Toolsish in DP.
WHAT? There is NO comparison to editing audio in PT to DP...
In PT you have to make WAY more moves acrossed the screen to do the same thing that DP does easily... DP is WAY more intuitive IMO.

[andru]

Yes I would agree with newrigel in that regard. I have always found DP to be easier to do more things than PT... also back in the old days DP did not lock you in to using only their audio interfaces... which PT did. Which is why I swapped to DP...plus the fantastic midi/audio control options. Which I love.