So how powerful does my recording computer need to be?
Well, this largely depends on your needs. I started in 2001 with a Pentium 3 550Mhz computer running Windows 98. Compared to my modern computer (which is still pretty modest), that computer was like something out of the Flintstones with a little bird running on a treadmill to turn it on.
What are your needs?
Your computer power requirements for your recording computer directly depend on what you intend to do with it. Are you mainly recording live rock bands? Are you planning to produce solo artists using samples to replace the whole band? How much of you revolves around the use of VST instruments?
For more than four years I recorded with Sonic Foundry Vegas 3.0. I used it as a tape machine with slightly better editing features. He didn’t have much reason to change. I was recording mostly rock and metal bands at home. I was really very satisfied with Las Vegas. He could do almost anything he wanted to do. It turned out that Vegas was very efficient and never maxed out my computer. Playing a large number of tracks in Vegas puts most of the load on the hard drive and not so much on the CPU or RAM. He had several mixes that had over 60 tracks. Vegas had no problem with that.
I decided I wanted to go back to the midi again. I wanted to harness the powers of samples, VST instruments, and the tremendous editing powers of midi sequencing. I switched to Cubase SX3. Now that I realize how powerful Cubase SX3 is for a producer (I’m not just an engineer anymore), I’m completely blown away. There is no going back to Vegas for me. (Of course now I hear that the latest version of Vegas has a sequencer, but I’ve never used it.)
Cubase SX3 uses MUCH MORE CPU power. MUCH MORE! Every track I add uses a little more CPU power. Most of this has to do with the tremendous direct monitoring capabilities that Steinberg’s Cubase SX3 uses. It is very common for Cubase SX3 to run out of power and crash if I expect too much from Cubase with very low latency. Increasing the latency drastically reduces the load on the CPU and then I find Cubase SX3 to be very reliable.
Sonic Foundry Vegas was extremely compatible with RAM. I could open 5 finished mixes at the same time and it probably wouldn’t even use 300 MB of RAM. Cubase SX3 is exactly the opposite. Use RAM as if you had a coffee in a late night session. When I start shooting samples like Toontrack’s DFH Superior (amazing drum samples), it’s clear that I need as much RAM as I can fit into my recording computer. An instance of DFH can give you the most natural-sounding drums on the planet, but it can also eat up to 2GB of RAM without a thought. OH!! Luckily, they have a “light” mode that I use for tracking and organizing. When the track is done I convert the drums to wav files and they become much more computer compatible.
So if you are using samples, you better have 2GB of RAM. Not all applications are as demanding as DFH Superior, but in general the samples like to chew on RAM mindlessly. So if you’re producing songs for other people using a multitrack recorder/midi sequencer like Cubase SX3 or Sonar, you should get the most powerful computer you can afford. It will save you time, effort and some headaches. This means getting the fastest processor you can afford and the most RAM your machine can hold. (Note: There is a point of diminishing performance in Windows XP where adding more RAM doesn’t seem to do much good. Generally, 2 GB is considered about right by today’s standards.) You’ll also want to check out the dual-core processors that are available now.
Powerful computers don’t always mean better recordings
There are many factors that make a great recording. A talented artist who just so happens to give a great performance of a great song is what makes a recording great. There is no direct correlation between Ghz and goosebumps. (I consider goosebumps the ultimate musical achievement. If I get goosebumps, the song is awesome!) Having a more powerful computer means you can mix a little faster. A faster computer means you can use more effects or effects that impose a higher CPU load. However, keep in mind that it is much more important to work with better artists and better songs.
The computer is just a tool. Just because one carpenter uses a drill that runs at a higher voltage doesn’t mean his build is going to be any better than the next guy’s. It just means that his drill runs at a higher voltage. It is important to realize that the computer is just a tool that he uses to make recordings. In itself, it has no direct artistic value.
I attended a funeral a few months ago. One of the first songs I had ever recorded was playing. The power of that song was mind blowing! The entire crowd burst into tears at that. This song was made on my Pentium 3 550Mhz computer years ago. I wish I could capture that kind of excitement and energy now with my Athlon 64 2800!
Latency, monitoring and CPU power.
I have noticed in Cubase that the CPU load is directly related to the latency that I set in my M-Audio control panel. With the latency on the fastest setting, Cubase SX3 will tire quite quickly. However, when I increase the latency up to 384 ms, I find that I have much, much more CPU power left.
The only reason it would keep the latency very low would be for direct monitoring within Cubase. If I were to use an external mixer and split the recorded signal before it got to my sound card, I could keep the latency set much higher and thus greatly reduce the load on my CPU.
conclusion
Most of the top home recording software with the most intense features typically use the most CPU power and RAM. If your recording methods require fewer features, a program like Sony Vegas will work extremely well with a moderate amount of CPU power.
