Hi Aaron
I do not consider it a 'Pissing' match as you call it, it's an exchange of
views, and at least you seem to know (something) about multitrack recording.
As I am now a lone Guitarist (and I've been told to go back down the rabbit
hole!!) I best leave this one alone (although I'm willing to bet that some
of the rock albums we know and love were recorded on a machine running 32
bit XP).
One to research for all who care?
Happy new year
Maurice ;-)
Sorry I disagree, the majority of pro recording (PC) applications run
on windows XP with maybe 2GB of ram, indeed many a recording pro will
advise you to use XP (you don't need 64 bit at all)
My guess would be that this is an apples and oranges comparison. Sure you
can do a single vocal + instrument with 2GB, but you couldn't use the same
hardware scenario if trying to record 16+ tracks simultaneously along with
the real-time application of effects (during mixdown). At least that is my
experience. The only cases where I have seen multi-track recording with
very little hardware is when it is specialized hardware. For example, I
have worked a fair amount with a Mackie HDR 24/96 with a Yamaha 02R for
routing/mixing and that CAN record many tracks well, but neither of the
devices are running Windows or IBM i.
To bring this back around to the current discussion. Operating systems are
built with different purposes in mind and at some level they can all
facilitate the simple tasks. But the strengths and weaknesses start to show
once the various components/features limits are tested.
I know I am going to be kicking myself for getting involved in a pissing
match with you (again) :-)
Aaron Bartell
www.MowYourLawn.com/blog
www.OpenRPGUI.com
www.SoftwareSavesLives.com
midrange.com
