Hi,

I'm old, or so it feels like.

I was a somewhat reknowned composer during the MOD/Tracker years (namely using Impulse Tracker for a decade).

Then I switched to straight MIDI trackers, but given MIDI's nature, it was very hard to determine exactly how this would play on different machines.

I'm also a multi-instrumentist (guitar/bass, drums, keyboards, trumpet, cello, etc.)

Lately, I've found myself asking what's the next step here. Given that I appreciate the concept of a tracker to compose music (as opposed to jumping straight to actual instruments), I'd be inclined to search for a tool that allows me this. Something simple, yet efficient.

I've heard of some files that can be used to remap MIDI-like files to actual complex instrument samples to get the best of both worlds and I'm curious.

Obviously, I'm on a budget here, and I want to keep it simple and cheap (or free, if anything decent pops up).

Any recommendations?

For about $600 you can get Pro Tools 11 and an ElevenRack interface. It will allow you to record and re-amp DI instruments like bass and guitars. This is your industry standard software.

For about $300 you can get CuBase which is the best of the home-user DAWs.

For about $200 you can get Reaper which is good for MIDI but not so good at live instrumentation. Apple's Logic is also in this price range but it's basically Garage Band in a new box.

For about $100 you can get FL Studio which is good for the price.

So from there it depends on what you consider cheap, and how you want to go in a price vs. quality. Pro Tools is the best, CuBase is good, Reaper and FL Studio are ok, Logic is fairly useless.

Oh and Ableton at $450 which is great for composing but not so great at editing. Right between Pro Tools and CuBase.

As CCH Audio pointed out, what you're looking for is a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW).

I strongly disagree with the notion that any DAW is better in this or that than another, however. In utility, all DAWs are essentially equal. Anything you can do with your music in one DAW, you will be able to do in another. The difference lies entirely in usability (workflow), and included virtual instruments and samples.

MusicRadar has an article here that lists 19 decent DAWs. Most DAWs offer free trial or demo versions; so your best bet is getting your hands on some, and seeing which one works best for you.

For composing with virtual instruments, the DAW essentially serves as a platform that you load your virtual instrument plugins into. You then create, record, and edit MIDI tracks to play these instruments. Once you're set up with a DAW, you can mainly focus on getting more and better virtual instruments. EastWest/SoundsOnline for example has many great instruments that you will often hear in commercial productions.

If you have means of inputting and editing MIDI data that you don't need a DAW for (e.g., a MIDI-controller keyboard), you may not need a DAW, as many virtual instruments come with standalone players that typically let you record a wave file of what you're playing. So if you can run the digital signal through an analog mixer, you don't need the DAW as a platform. But I do recommend getting one for the flexibility it provides alone.

Another important thing to keep in mind is that virtual instruments that use extensive sample libraries require quite a lot of RAM, and can also peak your CPU usage. To not run into any headaches, I recommend at least 4GB of RAM and a decent processor. A dedicated hard drive at 7,200rpm (speed) is also recommended for the more extensive libraries (some of which actually come shipped on hard drives).

Happy composing!

Thanks a bunch for the replies guys! Exactly what I was hoping to get and really insightful!

If you have means of inputting and editing MIDI data that you don't need a DAW for (e.g., a MIDI-controller keyboard), you may not need a DAW, as many virtual instruments come with standalone players that typically let you record a wave file of what you're playing. So if you can run the digital signal through an analog mixer, you don't need the DAW as a platform. But I do recommend getting one for the flexibility it provides alone.

Though I have the means, I'm a big fan of composing from software. I can always revisit later and play from the keyboard (to catch all the nuances, etc.) but it should give me very good drafts.

Another important thing to keep in mind is that virtual instruments that use extensive sample libraries require quite a lot of RAM, and can also peak your CPU usage. To not run into any headaches, I recommend at least 4GB of RAM and a decent processor. A dedicated hard drive at 7,200rpm (speed) is also recommended for the more extensive libraries (some of which actually come shipped on hard drives).

I'm running 8 GB RAM, twin SSDs and a i7 2400k processor. Hopefully that should help maximize my efficiency with heavy tools/libraries. I suspect that RAM will be my bottleneck.

Thanks again!

I would say on a basic level most DAWs are the same. But when you really get into it, there is a big difference between a $30,000 Pro Tools rig and a $100 DAW. Each DAW has it's strengths and weaknesses. If you're not dealing with live instruments or vocals, and nothing you're making is going out at broadcast quality, I would get CuBase. It's great for composing and good for editing. Hans Zimmer even uses CuBase to compose his film scores and then brings it into his Pro Tools rig to edit/mix/master.

Actually, I used to record with CuBase, but only as a means to record multiple tracks. I didn't do much editing, or composing with it. I'm still a bit foreign to the concept of DAW, but I'll manage (thank god there's the internet!)

DAWs are awesome. I still keep a razor blade in a little glass display case just to remind me of the days of tape =p

FL studio is easy to use :)