Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ACID vs. GarageBand

J

jaredm

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 16, 2004
7
0
CA
I can't really seem to distinguish the differences between these two apps except that they require a different OS. Acid is also loop based, records audio @ up to 24 bit and 96 as compared to the GB 16 and 44.1. MIDI instruments are usable in both for the purpose of recording soft synths. I've also heard that GB doesn't support different time signatures. What happens if I want to play around with a piece in 3/4, 6/8, or 5/4? Acid also exports to burn CD's and in more formats than just AIFF. Also, I've been watching the forums on the apple homepage all day about GB and many people seem to be having trouble with their cpu's being able to handle more than a few tracks when the soft synths and/or audio recordings are used. The concepts are great. I'm not using either program. I would like to use a program that has these features but not if I'm going to have problems with it. I'm considering buying a ibook to use this program and because I need a laptop but now I'm questioning whether or not it's worth it.

Thanks for your comments,

Jared
 
Re: ACID vs. GarageBand

Originally posted by jaredm
I can't really seem to distinguish the differences between these two apps except that they require a different OS. Acid is also loop based, records audio @ up to 24 bit and 96 as compared to the GB 16 and 44.1. MIDI instruments are usable in both for the purpose of recording soft synths. I've also heard that GB doesn't support different time signatures. What happens if I want to play around with a piece in 3/4, 6/8, or 5/4? Acid also exports to burn CD's and in more formats than just AIFF. Also, I've been watching the forums on the apple homepage all day about GB and many people seem to be having trouble with their cpu's being able to handle more than a few tracks when the soft synths and/or audio recordings are used. The concepts are great. I'm not using either program. I would like to use a program that has these features but not if I'm going to have problems with it. I'm considering buying a ibook to use this program and because I need a laptop but now I'm questioning whether or not it's worth it.

Thanks for your comments,

Jared
Click to expand...

I can tell you've made up your mind already aboout GarageBand, just by the tone of your post, but just to clarify - GB is capable of lots of time signatures (I think a total of 10) - including 3/4, 5/4, 6/8. And I did have it hang up on me once, but once I shut all the other programs, save for Safari, Mail, and Adium (I closed iPhoto, Final Cut, and AppleWorks) I haven't had problems since. And you can burn GB songs onto CD from iTunes - I did it today with a looped beat and rode the buss Eminem style from 8Mile with a pen and pad coming up with lyrics.

I don't think you should buy an iBook just to use GB, if that's what you're thinking. I do think you should buy an iBook, especially if you don't own a mac, for a whole lot of other reasons (GB very much included - it's a wonderful app).

Davis
 
if you want something Acid-like for the Mac you need to check out Ableton Live. it's insane. SoundTrack is more Acid-like than GarageBand but SoundTrack still couldn't even carry Live's jockstrap.
 
Originally posted by tjwett
if you want something Acid-like for the Mac you need to check out Ableton Live. it's insane. SoundTrack is more Acid-like than GarageBand but SoundTrack still couldn't even carry Live's jockstrap.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for the day when people stop talking about Soundtrack as if it were a tool for music composition. Has Apple ever positioned it this way? To me it's always just been a tool for video professionals, not music professionals.

I don't really see how a comparison between Soundtrack and Live is appropriate. Sure, Live is cool and all, and very Acidy-ish (for much more money) but it's made and marketed for Music-Making folk, while Soundtrack is made and marketed for Movie-Making folk.

Davis
 
Originally posted by DavisBAnimal
I'm still waiting for the day when people stop talking about Soundtrack as if it were a tool for music composition. Has Apple ever positioned it this way? To me it's always just been a tool for video professionals, not music professionals.

I don't really see how a comparison between Soundtrack and Live is appropriate. Sure, Live is cool and all, and very Acidy-ish (for much more money) but it's made and marketed for Music-Making folk, while Soundtrack is made and marketed for Movie-Making folk.

Davis
Click to expand...

I agree totally. I never considered SoundTrack to be a viable music solution. But I think it they can be talked about together. Other than Live, SoundTrack is the only other quality Mac app that handles loops and timestretching in a similar way. Could be serious stuff if it were geared towards musicians and tweaked a bit, I think Apple just doesn't really want to get into the looper business. It's useless competing with Live anyway in that department. :)
 
Originally posted by tjwett
I agree totally. I never considered SoundTrack to be a viable music solution. But I think it they can be talked about together. Other than Live, SoundTrack is the only other quality Mac app that handles loops and timestretching in a similar way. Could be serious stuff if it were geared towards musicians and tweaked a bit, I think Apple just doesn't really want to get into the looper business. It's useless competing with Live anyway in that department. :)
Click to expand...

Agreed - Live users are just as fanatic about Live as we Mac users are about our Macs - and justifiably so (it's a sweet, sweet app).

Davis
 
man, what an odd question...

this is really two questions.

do you want a PeeCee or a Mac?

if you want a mac, buy one. Then get garageBand for free.

if you want a PeeCee, buy one. Then go pay 400.00 smackers for acid. add 5.1 mixing and a few other features that for an amateur are dismissable.

then ask your self if you are a pro or an amateur. if you don't own acid already, you are not going to miss the few features. And when you are ready for more features you can buy live.

you can't really down garageBand against acid. garageBand does 85% of what acid does, runs on a Mac (which is infinitely important to me), between o-20% of the price of acid.

to me, there is no question, but i am an amateur when it comes to music production (i'm a graphic designer).

acid is nice, but i won't have a pc anywhere except work (and then only for testing reasons).

hope that helps.

peace,
technocoy
 
Thanks for the comments guys. I wasn't trying to down GB. I'm just trying to get a reasonable comparison between the two. The whole idea for me is just to use loops to come up with song writing ideas and to do a little recording. Thanks for clearing up the meter issue. the more time signatures the better. Anyway, I found someone in town who has GB so I can actually expirment with it and see if I like it. If not, I heard that bitheadz has a similar software, Reazon (I think), that may be another option. Have a good day.
 
Judge GarageBand by what you're able to produce with it. No matter how good an application is, it doesn't mean anything if you can't use it to create what you want. If it's easy to use, quick to lay tracks and gets you the results you want, use it. If it takes too much left brain time chances are you won't want to work with it.
Coming from a recording and sound production background, GarageBand is an exteremely easy, low learning curve app, that should get even after-school rappers decent results.
 
Originally posted by jaredm
Thanks for the comments guys. I wasn't trying to down GB. I'm just trying to get a reasonable comparison between the two. The whole idea for me is just to use loops to come up with song writing ideas and to do a little recording. Thanks for clearing up the meter issue. the more time signatures the better. Anyway, I found someone in town who has GB so I can actually expirment with it and see if I like it. If not, I heard that bitheadz has a similar software, Reazon (I think), that may be another option. Have a good day.
Click to expand...

i think you are talking about Reason from Propellerhead software. it won't do what you need. it doesn't allow any recording of audio. it is a virtual "rack" of synths, samplers, and drum machines that operates as a self-contained studio. you can get audio OUT of it into other apps with ReWire. i suggest you take a look at Ableton Live. it's truly amazing and sounds like just what you need. been making music on the computer for close to 10 years and it's totally changed my life. grab the demo and enjoy.

http://www.ableton.com
 
Sorry, I didn't mean Reason, I meant Phazer. Here are the details.

http://www.bitheadz.com/phrazer/phrazertext.html

Phrazer 2 Information
Phrazer is the ultimate solution for loop based composition and arranging on a Mac. Whether you want to sync it up to your sequencer, create a soundtrack to your home movies, or use it live as part of your rig, Phrazer 2 has the tools to make it happen.
You can bring in standard audio files (now including MP 3's), ACID files, Unity DS- 1, or Unity Session files! Phrazer will bring them in without you having to worry about matching tempos or keys.
A sample editor is provided for fine tuning audio files and loop points and you can Phrazer in Logic, ProTools, Cubase, or Digital Performer.

* Over 900mb of loops included
* Multitrack editing and playback
* G4 optimized
* MIDI clock sync
* Unlimited trac count (cpu dependent)
* QuickTime Movie support
* Roland PC300 USB controller support
* 2 effects per track
* Built-in sample editor
* Play from RAM or stream from disk
 
Originally posted by jaredm
Sorry, I didn't mean Reason, I meant Phazer...
Click to expand...

Phrazer is OK but it's pretty ghetto. Again, I really think you should try Live, if you aren't blown away I'd be very surprised.

Here's how it stacks up to Phrazer with the features you mentioned:

* Over 900mb of loops included
-Live comes with a few Gigs worth
* Multitrack editing and playback
-And then some! You can record, edit, ad fx, automate, assign, change pitch, tempo, and tons more, all at once, all in realtime, and without ever pressing Stop.
* G4 optimized
-Nope, but it runs so lean anyway.
* MIDI clock sync
-Sure, plus SMPTE and others.
* Unlimited trac count (cpu dependent)
-Naturally, FX too
* QuickTime Movie support
Nope, but ReWire makes it easy
* Roland PC300 USB controller support
-Supports every MIDI keyboard and controller in the world, they all do actually
* 2 effects per track
Unlimited FX, automation, and control on every track
* Built-in sample editor
Nope, but with elastic audio who needs it?
* Play from RAM or stream from disk
-Yup

Plus it does a million and one other things, better than anything else. I used Logic since version 2 and tons of other expensive apps and hardware and Live has taken over my studio and my workflow. It's just so damn fast to work in. So easy. What takes an hour in another sequencer I get get done in 30 seconds with Live. No joke. Download the demo, and READ THE MANUAL. It will really give you a good idea of what it's capable of. So many features.
 
Originally posted by DavisBAnimal
I'm still waiting for the day when people stop talking about Soundtrack as if it were a tool for music composition. Has Apple ever positioned it this way?
Click to expand...

Very first sentence at http://www.apple.com/soundtrack/
Soundtrack brings the art of music composing to everyone.
Click to expand...

Very SECOND sentence at http://www.apple.com/soundtrack/
With minimal cost and effort, you can produce custom music to your video, DVD or Web project.
Click to expand...

Isn't taking things out of context fun?

EDIT: But really, the program is called SOUNDTRACK! I don't think there's a great mystery there regarding its purpose...maybe...for making...SOUNDTRACKS!
 
Originally posted by Datazoid
But really, the program is called SOUNDTRACK! I don't think there's a great mystery there regarding its purpose...
Click to expand...
I was not questioning the purpose of the program. You explicitely asked
Has Apple ever positioned it this way
Click to expand...
And there you had it. A sentence like that the first one at Soundtrack's page, (which BTW, is something that definitely was chosen by Apple metering even each coma in there) is irremediably going to mislead people, and that is actually what is happening, for instance, in this thread.
 
Originally posted by elmimmo
I was not questioning the purpose of the program. You explicitely askedAnd there you had it. A sentence like that the first one at Soundtrack's page, (which BTW, is something that definitely was chosen by Apple metering even each coma in there) is irremediably going to mislead people, and that is actually what is happening, for instance, in this thread.
Click to expand...

Well I can see how it can be misleading... if you only read the first sentence.



Lethal
 
maybe im talking about a different type of software, because i dont know much about it, but im surprised no one has said anything about pro tools
how does this stack up to acid, gb, and ableton?
 
Soundtrack

Soundtrack is pretty amazing. It does a better job of handling Loops then Garageband, plus it comes with 5000 loops. The quality is better then Garageband as well. I have both, but find
Soundtrack to be more like ACID on the PC side. Both of these Apple programs are still new, so I expect Apple to update these with more and more features that will blow you away.
 
tjwett.

Live looks like a great program. I'll try it when I get my new machine. Thanks for the advice.

Jared
 
$64 Question

Is there anyway to use Garage Band to do multi-track live recording? I mean, for example, to simultaneously capture four tracks from a TASCAM 428 or such device? Or is it stuck to one track at a time recording?
Many thanks.


Amos-frustrated-wannabe-recording. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back