Audio Recording Computers: How Much Power Do You Need?

So, How Powerful Should My Recording ComputerSuperior, but in general samples like to chew through
Be?the RAM without a conscience. So if you are
Well, this depends greatly on your needs. I started outproducing songs for other people using s multitrack
in 2001 with a Pentium 3 550Mhz computer runningrecorder / midi sequencer like Cubase SX3 or Sonar,
Windows 98. Compared to my modern computeryou should get the most powerful computer you can
(which is still fairly modest) that computer was likeafford. It will save you time, effort, and a few
something from the Flinstone's with a little bird runningheadaches. This means get the fastest processor you
on a treadmill to power it.can afford and the most RAM your machine will hold.
What Are Your Needs?(Note: There is a point of diminishing return in Windows
The power of your computer requirements for yourXP where adding more RAM doesn't seam to do
recording computer are directly dependent on whatmuch good. Generally, 2 GB is considered about right
you intend to do with it. Are you recording mostly liveby today's standards). You will also want to check out
rock bands? Are you planning producing solo artiststhe dual core processors that are out there now.
using samples to replace the entire band? How muchPowerful Computers Don't Always Mean Better
of your work revolves around using VST Instruments?Recordings
For well over four years I recorded using SonicThere are many factors that make a recording great.
Foundry Vegas 3.0. I used it like a tape machine with aA talented artist who happens to deliver a tremendous
little better editing features. I didn't have much reasonperformance of a great song is what makes a
to switch. I was recording mostly rock and metalrecording great. There is no direct correlation between
bands all in house. I was really quite pleased withGhz and goosebumps. (I consider goosebumps to be
Vegas. I could do pretty much everything I wanted tothe ultimate musical accomplishment. If I get
do. It turned out that Vegas was very efficient andgoosebumps, the song is amazing!) Having a more
never really maxed my computer out. Playing backpowerful computer means you can render a mixdown
high track counts in Vegas put most of the load on thea little quicker. A faster computer means you can use
hard drive and not so much on the CPU or RAM. I hadmore effects or effects that put higher CPU load.
several mixes that had well over 60 tracks. VegasHowever, just keep in mind that it's much more
had no trouble with those.important to work with better artists and better songs.
I decided that I wanted to get back into midi again. IThe computer is just a tool. Just because a carpenter
wanted to take advantage of the powers of samples,uses a drill that operates at a higher voltage doesn't
VST instruments, and the tremendous editing powersmean his construction is going to be any better than
of midi sequencing. I switched to Cubase SX3. Nowthe next guy. It just means his drill have operates at a
that I realize just how powerful Cubase SX3 is for ahigher voltage. It's important to realize that the
producer (I'm not just engineering anymore), I'mcomputer is just a tool that you use to make
completely blown away. There is no going back torecordings. It, in and of itself, has no direect artistic
Vegas for me anymore. (Of course, I hear now thatvalue.
the latest version of Vegas has a sequencer, but I'veI was attending a funeral a few months ago. One of
never used it).the very first songs I had ever recorded in my life
Cubase SX3 uses WAY MORE CPU power. WAYhappened to be played. The power of that song was
MORE! Every track I add, uses a little more CPUmind blowing! The entire crowd burst into tears with
power. Most of this has to do with the tremendousthat one. This song was done on my Pentium 3
direct monitoring capabilities that Steinberg's Cubase550Mhz computer years ago. I wish I could capture
SX3 utilizes. It's very common for Cubase SX3 to runthat kind of emotion and energy now with my Athlon
out of power and essentially lock up if I'm expecting64 2800!!!
too much from Cubase with a latency set super low.Latency, Monitoring, and CPU Power.
Cranking up the latency pulls the CPU load downI've noticed in Cubase that it's CPU load is directly
drastically and then I find Cubase SX3 to be veryrelated to the latency I've set in my M-Audio control
reliable..panel. With latency on the fastest setting, Cubase SX3
Sonic Foundry Vegas was extremely RAM friendly. Iwill get tired pretty quickly. However, when I pump the
could open up 5 finished mixes at the same time and Ilatency up to 384ms, I find that I have much, much
probably wouldn't even use 300 MB of RAM. Cubasemore CPU power left.
SX3 is the exact opposite. It uses RAM like I goThe only reason I would keep the latency turned down
through coffee on a late night session. When I startsuper low would be due to direct monitoring within
firing up samples such as Toontrack's DFH SuperiorCubase. If I was to use an external mixer and split the
(amazing drum samples), it's clear that I need as muchrecorded signal off before it even ran into my
RAM as I can cram into my recording computer. Onesoundcard, I would be able to keep the latency set
instance of DFH can provide you with the most naturalmuch higher, and therefor reduce my CPU load
sounding drums on the planet, but it can also use uptremendously.
2GB of RAM without thinking about it. OUCH!! LuckilyConclusion
they have a "light" mode which I use when trackingMost of the top home recording programs with the
and arranging. When the track is done, I convert themost intense features typically use the most CPU
drums to wav files and they become much morepower and RAM. If you recording methods require less
computer friendly.features than a program such as Sony Vegas will
So if you are using samples, you had better have 2GBperform extremely well with a moderate amount of
of RAM. Not all applications are as taxing as DFHCPU power.