Which multitrack software to choose

The question of which multitrack software to settle with on the long run is almost as important as choosing the right, near zero latency sound card that is reliable, works for you and will serve well in most of your projects. The easy answer to this question is to go with multiple software on your computer and have the chance to change between these for each of your projects.

However, I am quite sure, there are high number of wanna-be audio engineers like me around the world, who are not that loose on the budget and cannot afford having multiple multitrack software running on their portable studios = in most cases this would be their laptop. Also, having multiple, different systems on the same computer might cause stability issues. Most people stick to their favourite recording environment for most of the time, even if they have access to multiple resources.

Once you have made up your mind and are going for a software based multi-track recording solution, there are quite a high number of good options available that can be grouped the easiest by the operating system they support. At the time of writing this article, the following software can be considered as reliable, Mac or PC based multitrack recording solutions:

Software	Available	price	link
Ableton live	Mac, PC	349 EUR	link
Ableton suite	Mac, PC	549 EUR	link
Audacity	Mac, PC	free	link
Studio One	Mac	310 EUR	link
Reaper	Mac, PC	30 EUR	link
Logic studio	Mac	366 EUR	link
Ntrack	Mac, PC	64 EUR	link
Adobe audition	Pc (Mac)	256	link
Sonar Cakewalk	Mac, PC	36 – 150 EUR	link
Garage band	Mac	15 EUR	link
Cubase	Mac, PC	610 EUR	link

Please note that this article will not give you any comparison of these software, in many cases it would be at lest unfair, if not impossible, to compare certain elements of this list. A very good example would be comparing Audacity with Cubase.

Luckily, there are quite a few options available at the cheap end of the list, but we all known that buying something cheap can eventually end up being very expensive. Limited functionalities, missing effects / plugins might force the user to upgrade to a more expensive and feature rich software shortly after the purchase. Similarly, you may realise very fast that the stability of some budget software still leave much to be desired. Serious, regular work cannot be planned on something unreliable.

There is the other end of the road of course, and you might end up getting lost in the thousand different options / chaotic interface of Logic Pro, and eventually realise that you should have gone for something a lot simpler, like Garage Band or Reaper. Your productivity level could seriously affected negatively, if you have to spend hours in finding your way around.

Zoom R16 resources

After my recent ordering of Zoom R16, I thought I would collect the best Zoom R16 resources to one place, for reference.

1. The best, most detailed, insightful review of the Zoom R16 can be found on Jamon's page.

I would highlight the acoustic guitar sample recording and this electric demo. While none of them our outstanding in quality, these clearly show that the Zoom R16 clearly meets industry standards without any special tweaks. Also, let me steal his unpacking video from youtube:

2. Official Zoom 16 pages: Zoom Japan (check the style of the page :-), Samsontech

3. Zoom R16 users' manual, give it a quick look before pushing the "add to basket" button, just to make sure you are clear on what you are purchasing.

Zoom R16 Operation Manual ( 32.13 MB PDF file)
Zoom R16 Audio Interface Manual in PDF format ( 7.03 MB PDF file) 

4. Zoom R16 firmware updates

5. Trusted Zoom R16 reviews:

•  Zoom R16: All-Rounder (Audofanzine.com)
• A multitrack recorder, interface and controller (musicradar.com)
• Have computers made digital multitrackers obsolete? Zoom don’t think so. (soundonsound.com)

6. Relevant threads on Zoomforum.us

Buying a Zoom R16

As you might have already read in this post, I am a great fan of Zoom products in general. I would never say they are perfect, but let's be honest, there is no such thing as perfect, when it comes to home recording devices. At best, perfect means the least compromise you will need to make when settling with a model of your choice.

 

official Zoom R16 video from Samsontech

I have settled with the Zoom R16. After searching around on the net for quite a while, and having owned / tried a few Zoom, Tascam, Korg and Fostex portable multitrack recorders, I felt pretty safe and sure pressing the "Add to basket" button yesterday night at Europe's most well-known online music webshop. So, why the Zoom R16?

The Zoom R16 (in theory) ticks most of the boxes when it comes to budget home recording. Let's see a list of the features that are the most appealing to me:

• 8 tracks simultaneous recording
• 24 bit recording
• built in mics, same as the ones you will find in a Zoom H2 (wow)
• can be used as a DAW interface
• sends 8 independent channels over USB to any multitracking software
• up to 96khz sampling when used as an audio interface
• records on SD card, up to 32 GB
• utilizing Secure Digital (SD) memory
• battery operation (no humming bird :-)
• USB host function
• 8 XLR / jack combo inputs
• phantom power (but on 2 tracks only)
• Mackie control emulation 
• runs on battery for 5-6 hours

Good stuff, but will probably not use that much:

• 100 built-in studio effects
• mastering effects
• multi-band compressor
• Steinberg Cubase LE 4

For more official info, check the official websites here and here. On the second site, you can have a listen to an example recording of a live session using Samson mics and the Zoom R16. First of all, it is an average mix at best, but more importantly, the singer is really out of tune here and there. Not a wise choice for showing the capabilities of the Zoom R16.

So, if Klaus is fast in preparing my shipment, I shall be able to start testing the Zoom R16 this weekend, to see if it ticks all the boxes in reality as well, and not just in theory. Fingers crossed.

Zoom recorders and effects

I am a long standing fan of Zoom products, I had quite a few recorders and effects from Zoom and was always generally happy with their products. 

The very first Zoom device I had was a Zoom GFX 707 II, and all I can say is that I loved it and I still miss it. Every now and then I still fire up Ebay in search for this brilliant multieffect pedal.

Zoom GFX 707 II

•  Effect Programs: 48 Types / 95 Variations.
•  Max Simultaneous Effects: 9
•  Patch Memories: 60 (User 30/Preset 30)
•  Display: 6-digit alphanumeric LED, 2-digit 7-segment LED
•  more info: http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/bfx708_gfx707/

Unfortunately, I sold it together with an electric guitar, something I have regretted a thousand times. After a while, I wanted to buy it back, but the new owner had also sold it buy then :-(.

The second Zoom device I had was the Zoom MRS-4, originally announced in 2002, I bought mine used in 2003. It was somewhat limited in capabilities (recording only in 32khz), but still opened up a whole new digital multitracking world for me, one without a computer.

My first, near CD quality recordings were all born on the MRS-4, something I sold after 7 years of ownership, only to upgrade MRS-8. While MRS-4 was really great, I had to cope with 3 limitations:

• Sampling rate: 32khz
  This was not a worry at that time + due to a special compression being used, the quality was very close on an average listening to CD quality
  
  
• Media storage: Smart Media Card
  Due to the outdated technology, these cards are limited to 128 MB in size, and were pretty hard to source after a while. An SMC to XD card adapter bought for 7 euros allowed the usage of 256 MB XD cards, which solved the issue for me.
  
  
• No stereo recording capabilities 
  This was a real show stopper for me. My digital piano produced a beautiful, though fairly noisy stereo output that I was just unable to capture with this device properly + I think the 32khz recording was the worst when a digital piano was the source for recording.

My third Zoom device was / is a Zoom B1. I cannot write too much about this, I consider it as a very cheap, low-end bass multieffect with a very poor sounding built in drum machine. For the price I paid for it, and for the 5 sounds I use from the available patches, I think it was a good deal, but if it went wrong, I would purchase a different model most likely.

I also had a Zoom MRS-8 for two months, but whilst it had two dedicated stereo tracks, a built in drum machine and was using SD cards for storage, somehow it did not really talk to me and we departed after a short time. I think it is a good recording device, the internal mic is also very good quality, the larger LCD screen and the jog wheel are all very handy, but you know how it is, sometimes it just does not work for you. So I sold that as well.

Apart from spending a few sentimental moments on my past Zoom devices, I just wanted to give a historical snapshot of why I am currently looking at buying a Zoom R16. But this shall be another post.

Firewire vs USB soundcards

One of the first questions a home studio owner has to decide on is whether to go with a USB or a Fireware based soundcard. This article intends to provide a brief overview of both solutions.

 A good compromise? Both USB and Firewire connections at the back of MOTU UltraLite-mk3 Hybrid

Let's see what Wikipedia brings up for USB:

"USB development began in 1994 by a group of seven companies:Compaq, DEC, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, NEC and Nortel. USB was intended to make it fundamentally easier to connect external devices to PCs by replacing the multitude of connectors at the back of PCs, addressing the usability issues of existing interfaces, and simplifying software configuration of all devices connected to USB, as well as permitting greater bandwidths for external devices. The first silicon for USB was made by Intel in 1995."

Different version of USB:

• 1996: USB 1.0, data transfer speed 1.5 Mbit/sec
• 1998: USB 1.1, data transfer speed 12 Mbit/sec
• 2000: USB 2.0, data transfer speed 480 Mbit/sec
• 2010: USB 3.0, data transfer speed 5000 Mbit/sec

It is worth noting that USB 3.0 did not really spread around in external sound card devices and as such, will not be discussed here in details

The other side of the halfpenny coin, Firewire:

"FireWire is Apple's name for the IEEE 1394 High Speed Serial Bus. Development was initiated by Apple in 1986, major contributions were also made by Texas Instruments,  Sony and IBM. The system is commonly used for connection of digital video cameras, but is also popular in professional audio systems. Firewire 400 was introduced in 1995 and has a data transfer speed rate of 400 mbit/sec, according to specifications."

So, according to specification sheets, USB 2.0 has a higher data transfer rate than Firewire connections. However, based on my own experience and echoed by thousands on every forum on the internet, data transfers over FireWire interfaces always outperform USB 2.0 connections. How come?

The reason behind this is very simple. I have never seen a USB 2.0 device that would have achieved the theoretical speed rate of 480 mbit/sec. In my own experience, 200-270 mbit/sec speed is the maximum you can get out of an average USB data device.

back panel of  Lexicon Alpha USB sound card

After this quick and very basic introduction to the differences between USB and Firewire connections, let's see the same picture from a home recording point of view. 

I, personally, do not see the speed difference as the main issue when it comes to external sound cards. In a home recording environment you rarely want to record more than 8-12 tracks at the same time and that is feasible both with USB and Firewire devices.It is important to point out though that if you go with USB, you will need a stronger machine for the same number of input tracks, simply because of the way USB connections work. As opposed to Firewire solutions, the CPU of the computer is expected to handle all data moving almost fully alone.

Firewire, on the other hand, is able to work more independently, and has the ability to take over a huge amount of work from the processor of you machine, thus freeing up system resources for you.

When you look around on the market, you will find a lot more USB based audio interfaces than FireWire ones. 

• Devices with an USB audio interface on thomann.de: 190 results
  
• Devices with Firewire audio interface on thomann.de: 91 results

Some people say the reason is to do with licensing. Marketing a Firewire connection based device requires you to pay a relatively high license fee (~2 USD) after every single piece produced. Also, many argue that USB devices are simpler to create as compatibility and driver issues are easier to avoid if you can expect the CPU to do the work instead of the main device.

Based on all the above, there is no single answer to the 'USB vs Firewire souncard' question and unless

a, you have a need for a 16+ simultaneous track recording capability

b, you are restricted by not having a firewire connection 

c, you are on a  low budget

the decision will most likely be made on non-connection based specifications of the various sounds cards you have our eyes on.