SlipLive

I'm looking to get some recording software and equipment but I really don't know anything about recording. I would want to spend a maximum of about 500 bucks, hopefully less.

I have checked out some software from Cakewalk and looked at some equipment from M-Audio.

I have a Yamaha digital piano with a "host select" switch with options of PC, Mac, and MIDI. What equipment would be required to hook it up to the computer?

Any help would be appreciated. I'm just lookin for a relatively inexpensive way to record that is good enough quality to make it worthwhile.

Thanks!

Hey Bob,

First, you need to answer a few questions yourself:

Are you in fact looking to record onto a computer? I couldn't be sure from your post.

If so, why? (The question is not meant to be confrontational. Just trying to get a feel for your thought processes so far.)

If you are looking to record on a computer, which platform? (Win, Mac, which version?)

Are you open to options that are not based on your computer?

What, besides the piano do you intend to record? By yourself or do you want to record yourself playing with some friends? Are you gonna sing?

When you say "good enough quality to make it worthwhile," you need to explain: good enough for what? What do you want to do with these recordings?

That's enough homework for now.

hoby

Are you in fact looking to record onto a computer? I couldn't be sure from your post.

Yup, planning to record onto a computer. Right now I have windows, but whenever my computer finally craps out I will probably get a mac. Is most or all recording software compatable with only one or the other?

Are you open to options that are not based on your computer?

Most certainly, but I figured that recording onto a computer would be a good way to store and organize the recordings.

What, besides the piano do you intend to record? By yourself or do you want to record yourself playing with some friends? Are you gonna sing?

The only electronic instrument that I own (and what I mostly use) is a piano, but I would like to be able to record with friends on various instruments. I also have an acoustic guitar. I would consider getting a mic for singing, but I am more interested in recording instrumentals at this point.

When you say "good enough quality to make it worthwhile," you need to explain: good enough for what? What do you want to do with these recordings?

I am not looking to do anything particularly formal. It would be nice to be able to use it for demo CD's or such things, and just to get a hang of recording in general.

That's enough homework for now.

I anxiously await the next assignment

You might be surprised to find that you already have much of what you need to record on your current PC. Since all your looking to do is record a few layered tracks, and your not worried about it being ultra high quality, then the sound card on your PC will probrably be proficient.

Most sound cards have a mic and line input on them. They will likely be 1/8th inch jacks that are either mono or stereo. A $2 adapter from radio shack will convert a 1/4 inch cable (from your piano's output) to the 1/8th inch jack on your sound card.

There are several multitrack audio programs available for free on the PC. I personally haven't used them in a long time, but Cool Edit used to be a pretty decent one (though I think they're now charging). Anyway, look around and you'll find something.

With that kind of setup, it's likely you'll only be able to record one stereo track at a time; but that should be fine for your needs. You'll probrably be able to layer dozens of tracks easily without too much worry, as todays hard drives and computers are more than fast enough for that. I'd give this a try before spending any money, as you might find it's more than good enough for your needs.

OK, then. Let's start with a disclaimer. I feel that when reading advice or reviews in this field, it's valuable to know your reviewer's prejudices, etc.

I have engineered lots lots of recordings on analog tape, PC-based DAW (Digital Audio Workstations) systems, and standalone digital recorders. I have also worked in (but not engineered) many Pro Tools sessions on Macs. I have helped several friends and relatives get into recording as a hobby and last year I created curricula and syllabi for a program in Digital Audio Production for an area trade school. Currently, I'm running a standalone system (the Akai DPS24 - http://www.akaipro.com/prodDPS24.php) in my own studio. (Finally, if you've read other threads, you know my music theory is a bit - *ahem* - weak. ) I don't relate this info to brag on myself. I offer it so that you can be aware of my biases and take my advice with the appropriate grain of salt.

Big Bob wrote:Yup, planning to record onto a computer. Right now I have windows, but whenever my computer finally craps out I will probably get a mac. Is most or all recording software compatable with only one or the other?

You can find most programs available for one or the other, but some are platform specific. Someone who is currently using a computer rig, like Cleantone, can speak to this point.

I figured that recording onto a computer would be a good way to store and organize the recordings.

You are correct, to a certain extent. You can take advantage of the computer's storage and organizational capabilities without using it as a recording platform by tranferring files to the computer after recording.

The only electronic instrument that I own (and what I mostly use) is a piano, but I would like to be able to record with friends on various instruments. I also have an acoustic guitar. I would consider getting a mic for singing, but I am more interested in recording instrumentals at this point.

If the electronic keyboard has a Left and Right out, you might want to be able to record 2 tracks at once so that you can get a stereo signal (from the piano) into your recorder. If you want to record that guitar you will need either a mic or a pickup. A soundhole pickup would be more than fine for your purposes.)

To record yourself and your friends playing, the easiest thing to do is throw up a mic or two in the room and record everyone together onto 1 or 2 tracks. Otherwise, you're into something WAAAY more complicated than you should take on at the start. (You can get there quickly enough, but not first thing.)

I am not looking to do anything particularly formal. It would be nice to be able to use it for demo CD's or such things, and just to get a hang of recording in general.

That last sentence fragment is the key here, I think. Jason's advice has some merit in terms of saving money, but my feeling about computer recording is that you need to learn as much, if not more, about recording to computers as you do about the art and science of recording sound.

(BTW, Cool Edit was a good program but it's now known as Audition and it's a standard tool in the radio industry.)

Even recording just one track at a time, you'll have issues to deal with such as monitoring latency that require a certain amount of poking around in your software menus and understading things like buffers, etc. Not because you have to be a pro, but because even these little things can get in the way of making music and result in frustration rather than recording. Many a book can be, and has been, written about the creative process grinding to a halt in a session while technical computer issues are resolved, or not.

When my brother wanted to record himself playing guitar, he insisted that he didn't want another "box" to deal with so he got one of the Pro Tools intro packages (with the MBox) for his mac. He spent so much time trying to get the computer configured and figuring out PT that it was weeks before he could actually record any music.

I'm not saying that's what always happens, but I will point out that there are a number of devices on the market that are specifically designed for ease of use in getting music recorded quickly and with as transparent an interface as possible. These are the digital grandchildren of the venerable 4-track cassette recorders that revolutionized the home recording world.

Boxes by Boss such as the Micro-BR or the BR-600 are both in your stated price range. The latter has 2 built in mics for capturing you and your friends playing together in a room. Zoom offers the H4 and PS04. M-Audio has the Microtrack 24/96 and Eiderol has the R-09. Any of these would let you learn about recording and their price is such that you could still pick up a single inexpensive mic so that you could explore the magic of capturing sound with a transducer. (Not all of these boxes accept exterior mic inputs.)

My purpose is not to say that you HAVE to spend money on this or to specifically recommend any of these devices. As I said, there is merit to Jason's approach of starting out with what you have and seeing where it gets you. But it's important to understand that with that approach you are going to have to learn as much about the specialized field of computer-based recording as you are about capturing sound (which, it seemed to me, was your original goal.)

Having said that, if you can download a free demo of some recording software and spend a couple of bucks at Radio Shack to get the connectors to hook your piano up to you computer, that's a pretty low-risk way to see if computer-based recording is for you. But I must say again that your experience could be colored by issues of computer compatibility and configuration.

Anyway, it might be that the next step is to poke around on the web and look at some of the boxes I mentioned. Read about what they do and see where else that leads you. Also check out home recording fora. A quick search will turn up a bunch. Maybe Cleantone or other computer-based recordists will chime in with software suggestions and speak knowlegeably to some of the issues I raise. (Audition is a good option. Ableton Live is quite popular these days but may be a bit more complicated. Garage Band is Apple-centric but is quite easy to use.)

All of this research will generate a long list of questions. (Inexpensive mic selection is a LARGE topic itself). We can tackle those here, via email, or even on the phone. Just remember that everyone who offers advice has their own "agenda" in terms of the experiences they've had and the system that works best for them. All points of view are valid in that they can add to an overall picture that can point you to what will work best for your needs.

Have fun and let me/us know what you find.

hoby

Thought I'd weigh in here. I'm certainly no expert and have a lot to learn about recording and music. But for the last few years, I've used Cool Edit Pro (first v.1 and now v.2) which is a great program. Until recently, I followed J Booth's approach.

I ran a mike to my sound card's mic input on the back of the computer. To convert XLR to 1/8" stereo for this purpose, I used an impedance matching transformer (XLR-->transformer-->1/4"-to-1/8" stereo adapter). With a keyboard you could simply use an RCA Y-adapter to take your keyboard'stwo RCA outputs and convert them to an 1/8" stereo jack to plug into your soundcard.

Maybe this is obvious, but: Track by track I would lay down single tracks of guitar, bass, and live drums (and occasionally vocals). Cool Edit's multitracker (as with Cakewalk, ProTools, whatever) lets you stack the tracks up and you just listen to previously recorded tracks on your headphones as you record new ones.

More recently, I've made use of an M-Audio breakout box and soundcard with 4 1/4" inputs and 4 1/4" outputs. I only use two inputs, though. With an M-Audio Audio Buddy (which is essentially a cheap microphone preamp that lets me get my mike inputs up to a high enough level for decent recording (line level)), I can record two separate instruments simultaneously, or I can record the same instrument to two separate channels (L/R) (which can be fun for tweaking out the sound, and is very useful when recording live drums).

Even though I've moved up a tiny bit in sound quality and recording sophistication recently, I was very happy for a long time with my original set-up, which is basically what JBooth is recommending. I'd go with that to start since it's cheap and serves as an intro to figure out if you want more. You'll find out pretty quickly whether you can handle a little hiss, etc. (you probably won't get too much hiss from hooking up your keyboard directly to the PC, but you'll definitely get some when you use a mike to record guitar or vocals).

Once you get a track recorded into Cool Edit (or other software), you'll be amazed at what you can do with layering tracks, using delay/reverb effects (among others), and more. Plus the interface of PC based recording is really handy since you can cut and paste sections of music the same way you would in a word processor -- you can easily zoom in to the thousandth of a second and then zoom out to your whole track. Everything is very easy to manipulate and edit.

Have fun recording!!

Hoby -- that's quite the rig you've got there -- can we hear a recording or two?

G

Has it been a while since you tried digital audio on a PC hoby? Because things changed a few years back. I was living with Marc at the time and he decided to get a multitrack system. I had spent many a night setting up and debuging Brad and Andrews system over the years, so I set aside several hours to work on it with Marc. I plugged in his USB based Motu, and the thing just worked the first time - flawlessly. I wasn't expecting that. I set up a few other systems since, and had the same thing happen. Stuff just works now, for the most part.

Even on the $14 sound cards that ship in many pc's, a lot of this stuff just works. So while I understand your point about possibly having a bad experience, running out and buying a fixed hardware system seems like quite a gamble. Hell, I've got several DA38's and a fully automated mixing board in the basement that I haven't used in years, simply because PC recording is so much easier, cheaper, and more powerful. A lot of people seem to get caught up in the hype of needing expensive recording rigs, but quite frankly even a simple system is far more powerful than the systems used to produce some of the greatest albums ever made. I personally find it best to use what you have and upgrade only when it's really preventing you from creating.

Additionally, I bet the DA converter in that $14 sound card won't even be the weakest link in the signal chain (and you only sound as good as your weakest link).

Jason Booth wrote:Has it been a while since you tried digital audio on a PC hoby?

Multi-track recording? Yes. I use a PC in the studio, but just for 2-track pre-mastering and editing (using Sound Forge.) I import tracks from my multitrack on CDRW or via S/PDIF or ADAT optical. I guess you could call that recording, but I don't have to deal with any of the issues that come up around multitrack: overdubs, monitoring, etc..

Because things changed a few years back. I was living with Marc at the time and he decided to get a multitrack system.

Huh. Last time I talked to Marc about it (admittedly a couple of years ago), he mentioned that he had one of the Roland (or Boss) standalone boxes. I wonder which way he switched, PC > standalone or standalone > PC. The latter would make more sense if everyone else was on PC, since the Roland boxes didn't import/export WAVs until the later versions came out.

I had spent many a night setting up and debuging Brad and Andrews system over the years, so I set aside several hours to work on it with Marc. I plugged in his USB based Motu, and the thing just worked the first time - flawlessly. I wasn't expecting that. I set up a few other systems since, and had the same thing happen. Stuff just works now, for the most part.

Well, this is good to hear.

Even on the $14 sound cards that ship in many pc's, a lot of this stuff just works. So while I understand your point about possibly having a bad experience, running out and buying a fixed hardware system seems like quite a gamble.

To be fair, I wasn't counseling "running out and buying" a standalone. I was suggesting research.

But your point is a good one.

In retrospect, a question I should have posed is "how comfortable are you poking around in menus, etc., if your machine needs some tweaking?" In the event that there needed to be some under-the-hood work, it's probably well within the abilities of most computer-literate folks these days.

Hell, I've got several DA38's and a fully automated mixing board in the basement that I haven't used in years, simply because PC recording is so much easier, cheaper, and more powerful.

Well, yeah, taped-based digital systems have certainly seen their day given the editing capabilites of HD-based systems. What mixing board do you have there gathering dust?

A lot of people seem to get caught up in the hype of needing expensive recording rigs,

Well, I guess I wasn't thinking in terms of $200-300 being expensive for a mulktitrack digital recorder with 2 built-in condenser mics (relating to your next sentence below), especially given the added functionality of these boxes being more easily portable than a desktop PC. (Yes, I recognize that latops are a very viable recording platform now, but for some reason I assumed that Bob was working from a desktop.)

but quite frankly even a simple system is far more powerful than the systems used to produce some of the greatest albums ever made.

Isn't that incredible? It just proves that it's talent and creativity, rather than gear, that makes great art. In fact, the limitations of gear can increase creativity.

But I do feel compelled to point out that while the current machines are far more powerful in terms of editing or storage, you can't compare your computer soundcard and plug-ins to the mics and outboard gear used in those classic recordings. There's a reason that there's a BOOMING market in plug-ins that emulate classic devices.

I personally find it best to use what you have and upgrade only when it's really preventing you from creating.

A sound (heh) strategy. Avoids the trap of "gear lust."

Anyway, Bob, (Remember Bob? He's the one who started this whole thing ) I think that Jason and G's advice is solid. If you're comfortable poking around a little in your PC, a free recording software package and some adapters from Le Chaque would be a low-risk way to get your feet wet. There are plenty of forums dedicated to PC recording, so there's no dearth of advice and help out there. (If PC-DAW Digest is still in existence, you should check that out. There are some high-powered guys there, but everyone was always very helpful and I learned a lot from that list.)

I'd be more than happy to help with any questions you might have, regardless of the platform you choose to start out with, or should you decide to explore other options later on.

Hoby -- that's quite the rig you've got there -- can we hear a recording or two?

Yeah, G, I'm really happy with the DPS. It's a hard-disc based system with a fully automated mixer. The design team included guys who previously worked on very high-end mixing consoles (SSL and, I believe, Neve) so it sounds very open and natural. Any shortcomings in my recordings with this gear can't be blamed on that box.

You can check out samples of my shortcomings, err, recordings (my own music, collaborations, and that of clients) at http://www.moondogeast.org. Only the most recent client work (Cav and Kav) was recorded on the DPS. Prior to that was a Roland VS-1680 and a Tascam 4-track cassette deck (GOD, I loved recording on that box. I still have it.)

Speaking of boxes, my son just got a second controller for his new XBox 360 and he wants me to check it out.

Peace,

hoby

What mixing board do you have there gathering dust?

It's a yamaha ramsa. Not bad, not great - but does the job well enough for it's time.

Isn't that incredible? It just proves that it's talent and creativity, rather than gear, that makes great art. In fact, the limitations of gear can increase creativity.

I've often found that the case as well. Thats why I like game development so much, actually, it's full of all these impossibly hard problems that can't actually be solved, so you have to figure out the most creative way of working the problem based on your constraints (which are constantly changing as well).

One of the reasons I hired Geoff Scott (ex-Miracle Orchestra guitarist) into the industry years ago was because I watched him create incredible stuff with the sounds sitting around on his computer - the ones installed with windows. I had introduced him to fruity loops and he didn't have any other samples. To me thats when talent seperates itself from the pack, and Geoff has never ceased to amaze me in that department..

But I do feel compelled to point out that while the current machines are far more powerful in terms of editing or storage, you can't compare your computer soundcard and plug-ins to the mics and outboard gear used in those classic recordings. There's a reason that there's a BOOMING market in plug-ins that emulate classic devices.

Those are physical devices, and like rooms, each has a certain sound that's extremly hard to replicate, because we don't understand all those little nuonces and imperfections that give them thier unique sound. While there's great flexibility in todays systems, I wonder if newer engineers miss out on the simple pleasures of experimenting with things in the non-digital environment. For instance, I once put a guitar amp into a metal trash can and miked it to get the distortion/reverb sound I wanted. It worked out wonderfully well, but I don't think I would have come across that sound by playing with parameters on some plugin. I love reading about the Beatles recording sessions for this very reason.

i'm having a little trouble getting started. I downloaded the new Cool Edit beta program called Adobe Soundbooth, but when I try to install it it says that my computer doesn't have enough RAM. So then I downloaded a program called KRISTAL and also AUDACITY. They seem to be ready to go, but when I hit record and try to play, it doesn't seem to register anything coming in.

I went to radioshack and got an adapter to convert my 1/4 inch jack to a 1/8 inch jack. I plugged it into my computer directly from my keyboard's output (rather than plugging it into my amp). Do I need to use the TO HOST output on my keyboard? It looks like a MIDI type connection, and I don't have that kind of cord. Do I need a preamp?

also, I am confused as to what the slots and symbols are for on my console.
They are:

light blue: -(-(-
light green: -)-)-
black: -(-(-)-)-
yellow: ((|))
pink: a microphone symbol

There are also unlabeled pink, blue, yellow, and black slots next to the green slot that I plug my computer speakers into. All 1/8 inch slots.

I tried the light blue slot because I saw on wikipedia that it was line-in for the soundcard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_card

I apologize for my infantile questions regarding recording and really appreciate the help you guys have given so far. Thanks!

So, this is the kind of stuff I was thinking of when I was talking about computer audio having a lot more "gotchya's" involved, but I'm not bitter.

I just have this obnoxious habit of needing to say I told ya so. Just ask my wife.

I should let Jason answer these, but until he gets here I'll try to add in my 2 cents without mucking up the works. So let's see what we got...

Big Bob wrote:i'm having a little trouble getting started. I downloaded the new Cool Edit beta program called Adobe Soundbooth, but when I try to install it it says that my computer doesn't have enough RAM. So then I downloaded a program called KRISTAL and also AUDACITY. They seem to be ready to go, but when I hit record and try to play, it doesn't seem to register anything coming in.

My own personal philosophy is to NEVER use a Beta when I'm trying to get my own system set up/worked out. You can't be sure if a problem is something you're doing wrong or a bug in the program. I don't remember ever having heard of Krystal. Heard of Audacity but have no experience with it.

How much RAM do you have? This could come back to bite you, but let's press on for now.

I went to radioshack and got an adapter to convert my 1/4 inch jack to a 1/8 inch jack. I plugged it into my computer directly from my keyboard's output (rather than plugging it into my amp).

Good. That's correct.

Do I need to use the TO HOST output on my keyboard? It looks like a MIDI type connection, and I don't have that kind of cord.

That should be for passing MIDI data to the computer. Don't worry about MIDI for now. Let's just concentrate on getting audio into your machine.

Do I need a preamp?

No, you shouldn't need a preamp.

also, I am confused as to what the slots and symbols are for on my console.

I tried the light blue slot because I saw on wikipedia that it was line-in for the soundcard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_card

If by console you mean the soundcard connections, I believe light blue is what you're looking for. If you look real closely, that symbol is a tiny arrow pointing INTO the circle. That's your line in. I'm guessing it's a mono (single channel) but without knowing the specific Soundcard model info, it's impossible to be sure (for me, anyway.)

BTW, assuming it is mono, you want to make sure that the output from the keyboard is also mono. If the keyboard has 2 outputs (L & R) one of them should be labeled something like "Left/Mono." That's the one you want. If the output on the keyboard is a stereo jack or headphone jack and you try to use a mono patch cord/adapter, that could result in no signal since the jack on the keyboard and the plug on your cable aren't exactly matching in terms of their "live" parts.

Solving that problem is just a matter of another trip to Radio Shack, but we'll talk about exactly what you need if you do find a mismatch.

Moving "downstream", there are a couple of places in the virtual audio chain inside your computer where the bottleneck could be occuring.

Exact instructions are difficult without knowing which OS you're running, but in general terms, here's a place to look (assuming you're still on a windows machine):

-In the system tray (bottom right hand corner of your screen) right click on the speaker icon and open your volume control panel.
-Choose Options and then Properties.
-Now click the circle next to Recording and make sure that Line In is checked.
-Click OK and the Recording Control Panel will open.
-Make sure that Line In is selected here (check box at the bottom?) as well and that the virtual volume fader is partway up.
-You can close that window now.

So now the signal from your keyboard should be getting into the computer. The next question is, is your recording software seeing it? For most apps, there should be a record button that opens a "recording" window or panel that gives you a facsimile of "volume" meters; something that will respond to incoming audio. If you press on keyboard keys and those meters respond, you know the recording app is seeing audio.

If the meters don't respond, your issue is in getting the recording app set up correctly and the steps for this depend on the specific app.

Start by seeing if the above steps help and then we'll take it from there.

I apologize for my infantile questions regarding recording and really appreciate the help you guys have given so far. Thanks!

Bob, your questions are not infantile. They deal with very basic bits of knowledge that those of us in audio take for granted and forget to mention to people just starting out. The concern I orginally voiced regarding computer recording had to do with the fact that there are a lot more of those basic bits of info involved (like sub-sub-sub menus of the volume control panel) when you delve into recording on the computer.

If the software you downloaded offers a download of a user's manual, check that out. It might include a troubleshooting section that deals with stuff like this.

Don't get discouraged. You're entering a new world of specialized knowledge; a world that blends science, magic, and art. Assume it'll be a somewhat steep learning curve at first; but rest assured that the first time you record something (anything), play it back, and hear yourself making music it will be so totally cool that you'll forget all the headaches.

Onward!!

hoby

Jason Booth wrote:Thats why I like game development so much, actually, it's full of all these impossibly hard problems that can't actually be solved, so you have to figure out the most creative way of working the problem based on your constraints (which are constantly changing as well).

My 15-yr old son is dabbling in game design: level design, graphics in Maya, etc.. Lately he's messing with scenario design in some real-time strategy PC game. I love it when he describes how to get an effect that the engine isn't equipped to do directly (Moses parting the red sea; deer drinking from a pond when the game is only designed to have them eat grass; stuff like that.)

One of the reasons I hired Geoff Scott (ex-Miracle Orchestra guitarist) into the industry years ago was because I watched him create incredible stuff with the sounds sitting around on his computer - the ones installed with windows. I had introduced him to fruity loops and he didn't have any other samples. To me thats when talent seperates itself from the pack, and Geoff has never ceased to amaze me in that department..

Brian Eno (patron saint of MoonDogEast studios) often preaches "intimacy over options." Take the one tool or small set of tools at hand and learn them intimately and completely. This will be more effective and lead to more creativity than having tons of options to weed through.

Those are physical devices, and like rooms, each has a certain sound that's extremly hard to replicate, because we don't understand all those little nuonces and imperfections that give them thier unique sound.

Absolutely. That's why they call them "emulators" rather than "duplicators."

There's some mojo tied up in the gases and electrons and aging components of old gear. The human being BUILDING the thing imparts something to physical gear that I don't think happens when someone sits in front of a screen writing code.

While there's great flexibility in todays systems, I wonder if newer engineers miss out on the simple pleasures of experimenting with things in the non-digital environment.

The smiley doesn't exist to indicate how much I agree with you.

For instance, I once put a guitar amp into a metal trash can and miked it to get the distortion/reverb sound I wanted. It worked out wonderfully well, but I don't think I would have come across that sound by playing with parameters on some plugin.

Nice!! If you don't already get it, you should check out Tape Op magazine (http://www.tapeop.com). Subscriptions are free and the sub-title is "The Creative Music Recording Magazine."

Your story reminds me: I've got an unfinished track somewhere around here that uses TV remotes as a rhythm bed component. Turns out different remotes generate different noises when pointed at your guitar pickups. Had my guitar laying on a chair with felt strips deadening the strings and I'm standing over it clicking away with all these different remotes...<sigh>...what a great session.

I love reading about the Beatles recording sessions for this very reason.

Have you red Emerick's book? Great fun! Here's the next big item on my wish list:

http://www.recordingthebeatles.com

Jason, I'm thinking that we could pass a very pleasant evening just shootin' the sh*t. Lot's to talk about.

peace,

hoby

I think hoby covered the areas to check quite well, actually. It's probrably something simple like the input not turned up on the line in channel of the sound card. Windows includes a little test app called sound recorder - you might want to try it first, since it's the simplest thing out there. Programs like Audacity are designed to work with much more complex systems than your using, and often add thier own complexities into the mix - better to avoid them until you're sure basic audio is coming into the computer.

Brian Eno (patron saint of MoonDogEast studios) often preaches "intimacy over options." Take the one tool or small set of tools at hand and learn them intimately and completely. This will be more effective and lead to more creativity than having tons of options to weed through.

The paradox of choice is brutal. I actually came to this realization when I was recording at Berklee - my 8 track recordings were coming out better than my 24 track ones simply because I was forced to make decisions early when I had to bounce things down.

There's some mojo tied up in the gases and electrons and aging components of old gear. The human being BUILDING the thing imparts something to physical gear that I don't think happens when someone sits in front of a screen writing code.

I worked at Paul Reed Smith for a few years building guitars, and they used to play tones in the drying room. Wood dries for years before it's used, and playing those tones through the wood helped season the wood to sound better. Funny thing was, two guitars cut from the same tree, made by the same people, would sound and play completely different. I really don't understand how people can order instruments on Ebay.

Jason Booth wrote:Windows includes a little test app called sound recorder - you might want to try it first, since it's the simplest thing out there.

They still put that thing in there?!?! Didn't even think to check.

Programs like Audacity are designed to work with much more complex systems than your using, and often add thier own complexities into the mix - better to avoid them until you're sure basic audio is coming into the computer.

Good advice. Once you've recorded a couple of notes in Sound Recorder, you'll know signal is getting to Audacity's doorstep. Then you can plunge in.

The paradox of choice is brutal. I actually came to this realization when I was recording at Berklee - my 8 track recordings were coming out better than my 24 track ones simply because I was forced to make decisions early when I had to bounce things down.

If I had a dollar for every time I've heard that sentiment...

Besides having to choose and commit, I think there's an energy imparted by having to make those decisions without the safety net of the Undo button or virtual tracks. Actually cutting tape with a blade while the client stands there watching? Talk about focus...

I worked at Paul Reed Smith for a few years building guitars,

Oh, yum!!

and they used to play tones in the drying room. Wood dries for years before it's used, and playing those tones through the wood helped season the wood to sound better. Funny thing was, two guitars cut from the same tree, made by the same people, would sound and play completely different.

That's what I'm talking about.

I really don't understand how people can order instruments on Ebay.

<hyperbole> Incomprehensible to me. How could you forego touching the thing? It's like cybersex versus dancing with your soulmate for the first time.</hyperbole>

I finally got it up and running! After having no luck for a while, I eventually got the keyboard to play through the computer speakers. The LINE-IN still doesn't seem to get any signal, but when I put it on STEREO MIX it just records whatever is coming out of the speakers.

My computer froze the first several times that I tried and my soundcard was freaking out...(the sound would just stop working and my computer wouldn't recognize that it even had a sound card until I restarted the computer.) I was just about to give up when it suddenly worked.

Thanks again for your help Hoby, Jason, and Gemeneye! It's not much of a set-up but at least I am getting my feet wet.