it's just that using a computer makes me instantly wanna get stuck in detail-mode and i lose the vibe pretty quickly.
plus although it will be temperature-controlled i still get a bit nervous about putting a computer in there.
my amps will be live in the "studio", but my guitars (aside from a beater) will still be in the house proper.
$200 hit-the-ground-running budget
- preservation
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3584
- Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:49 pm
- Location: RVA
- marqueemoon
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 7389
- Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:37 pm
- Location: Seattle
Re: $200 hit-the-ground-running budget
1. A computer still seems like the most cost effective way to accomplish your stated goal.*preservation wrote:it's just that using a computer makes me instantly wanna get stuck in detail-mode and i lose the vibe pretty quickly.
plus although it will be temperature-controlled i still get a bit nervous about putting a computer in there.
my amps will be live in the "studio", but my guitars (aside from a beater) will still be in the house proper.
2. Whether you keep the computer in the "studio" or not it will eventually become a paperweight.
*I'm not a big fan of the process either. It's hard to put the visual element in proper perspective. I think the temptations are stronger when working alone too. When you're recording with a band there's a clearer line between tracking and mixing. When working alone it's easier to get pulled into tweaking things and away from making music.
- soggy mittens
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2086
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 2:08 am
- Location: middle of somewhere