In his book, The Road Map: The Must-Have Guide for the New Music Business, author Robert Wolff tackles the challenges of today's digitized, DIY world head-on, offering mountains of advice to the aspiring musician on how to make a career of it using the Internet, technology, and common business sense. We chatted with Robert via email about some of the tech, production, and promotion issues facing today's musicians.

GW: OK, let's kick it off with a religious question. In your book, you show a preference for Macs. Why do you think it's better for beginner musicians to start out using Macs instead of PCs?

Robert Wolff: It's always their choice what to use based on their budget and needs. While there have been amazing advances in audio-application PCs with hybrid AMD and Intel configurations, to this day, the majority of world class top-of-the-food-chain audio and video users still use and prefer Macs: especially with the Mac G5 Quad Core and the Mac's ability to now run BOTH Windows and Mac operating systems. The great thing is -- regardless of whether you choose PC or Mac -- you're now able to get dual core or higher technology at a great price. I tell people to spend a few days online and see who's using what and why, go to your local PC and Mac store and then make a good decision based on what will work best for you.

GW: So it really comes down to personal preference then?

Wolff: Absolutely. If you feel more comfortable with a PC and like the music software programs for it, then that's your music axe, so keep using it and make some great music with it.

I just read that Intel has launched a new series of processors that many are saying will give AMD a lot of competition for capturing the high-end music audience. This is great news for both PC and Mac users since both are using Intel chips.

GW: When it comes to audio interfaces, you seem to be a big advocate for the MOTU 828mkII. What do you think are the particular advantages in using it?

Wolff: There are a bunch of great audio interfaces out there right now. Just look at Apogee, RME, Focusrite, E-MU, Lynx, M-Audio, Mackie, PreSonus, Tascam, Lexicon, and the list goes on. I think MOTU gives a pretty big bang for the buck and so do a lot of other people; however, I'm not saying MOTU is the only brand you should be looking at.

Like any and every piece of gear, it all comes down to your needs. What do you need it to do? And how much do you want to spend? When you check around with who's using what, how they're using it and where, a lot of people are digging the MOTU stuff because it gives them very respectable performance and features at a good price point.

But I say, don't stop there. Put MOTU on your reference list and also compare all the cool stuff that's out there right now to it. If you find a better product at a better price and it fits your needs better, then don't hesitate and grab it. At the end of the day, all that matters is what you like, what can work best for your needs and budget right now, at this moment, in your music journey. Once the big bucks start rolling in (which they will if you'll just stay with it), there will always be amazing world-class boutique gear that will have your name all over it.

GW: Why is it important to have 24-bit 96-KHz recording when CDs only offer 16 bit?

Wolff: You know, Bob Clearmountain really opened my eyes to this when I interviewed him for the book. It seems there are two schools of thinking:

School Number One believes that, even though our consumer music playback systems are not yet to the mass market saturation point where the majority of homes have them and cannot fully translate the full fidelity (i.e., bit, sample and frequency response and rates) music gear is able to provide, it doesn't really matter, since a source recorded at a higher bit and sampling rate is better than one recorded at a lower one.

School Number Two believes that the majority of listeners today couldn't tell the difference between something recorded at 16 or 24 bits, 32 or 64 floating points, 44.1, 88.2, 96 or 192kHz. All that matters to them is the emotion. Is the song great? Does it have a groove and does it move them in some way? Given the huge market saturation of iPods, cellphones that play music, and all the other less-than-studio-quality playback systems most people have, perhaps musicians are spending too much time worrying about which sample rate and newest high-tech gear to buy, when they could be better using that precious time to make music that a lot of people would love in a big way. Never let technology get in the way of you creating your music.

GW: Can you explain why recording musicians would find the MOTU 828mkII Cuemix DSP useful?

Wolff: One of the cool things people tell me they like about the CueMix thing is that it eliminates to a large degree the need for an external mixer, since the CueMix gives them the mixer snapshot and controls right on their computer screens and allows them to digitally mix and monitor with no separate mixer needed and no latency. This can be quite a benefit if you're on the road or working with your laptop and it would be too difficult to always carry a mixer with you. If that's exactly what you're needing right now, then I say check it out further. For a lot of people who are looking for a few more options, I tell them to start thinking about adding some kind of analog front end to their system, like a summing mixer or even regular mixer.

Most people would love to have a API, Neve, or SSL front end to their studio and DAW for the great EQs, mic preamps and other processing, but the cost and physical space to house such great gear is just not practical. I tell them to look at the Mackie Onyx series stuff. Look at summing things from API, Neve, SPL, and Dangerous. All great stuff and much cheaper than a full-blown vintage or soon-to-be-vintage mixing board.

While a lot of people mix "in the box," there's still nothing like being able to route, patch, and control all your outboard gear with real knobs and faders, and then use the amazing capabilities of your favorite DAW software for editing, plugins, etc.

GW: A lot of people have a hard time understanding the difference between MIDI and audio recording. Can you explain the difference? When is it appropriate to use one instead of the other?

Wolff: Let's keep it simple. Think of MIDI, which stands for "music instrument digital interface," as a standard and process -- a "digital highway," so to speak -- that lets music instruments and equipment talk to each other regardless of which company makes the gear. It allows your Roland XV-5080 sound module to receive and send data to and from your Korg Triton keyboard or Yamaha synth or controls from your Novation ReMote SL midi controller or any other synth/sound module you have. It's a worldwide standard communication protocol that allows you to use lots of different gear, from different companies, and use all of it to create your sounds and music.

While MIDI is a protocol that is used in many audio recordings, you typically don't hear one say, "Let's record it to MIDI." You can make audio recording without ever using MIDI.

For example, when recording guitars, drums and vocals to tape, there can easily be no MIDI involved at all. However, use one of your electronic synths or keyboards for pads, sounds, leads or a controller that uses samples to get your sounds, and you then use MIDI as the "music communication line" to get those sounds from a MIDI device to a MIDI interface or computer that allows those sounds to be converted to notes and something musical you can hear.

GW: You also bring up the widely used Pro Tools. Why has Pro Tools become the industry standard at professional music studios? Will the results be as good if I use another software platform such as Digital Performer or Logic?

Wolff: Pro Tools is a terrific DAW platform, and I know many friends and colleagues who use it and love it. I think Pro Tools became a well-known name because it was essentially first out of the gate for high-end, professional audio applications. But it's expensive if you get into the real pro application for it with the HD 1,2,3 Accel systems and all the peripherals that go along with it. For the majority of my readers all over the world, it's a price they're not too happy to pay.

But here's the great news: DAW apps like Logic Pro 7, Nuendo 3, DP5 and others have now become terrific options. The essence of the higher Pro Tools systems' power is its TDM processing cards that come with its HD 1, 2, 3 systems and for years, and it's been their performance and low latency that people want. However, these things aren't cheap. Just go to any gear dealer and tell them you want a basic Pro Tools HD 1 Accel system and you'll see how much they cost.

Yet, with the amazing breakthroughs in price and performance of native systems (i.e., the computer is able to do the processing and doesn't need TDM/DSP cards), like the Mac G5 Dual or Quad and the AMD or Intel Dual Core systems, you're now able to get incredible performance for a fraction of the of the Pro Tools HD price.

Pro Tools has its strong points as does Nuendo and Logic and Digital Performer. It all comes down to what do you need, how much do you have to spend and which platform you enjoy working on most? I will say that lots and lots of people are making the switch from Pro Tools to Nuendo 3 and Logic 7 and many people still love and use DP. They've told me they're simply getting the same sound and with features they like and for a much bigger bang for the buck.

GW: What is the major difference between Pro Tools HD and LE? Is it possible to get the same results with LE?

Wolff: A big difference is cost. Then you get into things like more or less features, number of recording tracks, availability of different plug-ins, sample rates, etc. You can easily spend $20k or more for a full blown Pro Tools HD3 system compared to under $500 for LE. Of course, LE is as the name implies and will not and does not give you all the features and capabilities that an HD system offers, BUT . . . the cool thing is you can take your LE tracks to an HD-capable studio and then add whatever HD editing and processing stuff from there.

I tell people if you don't have a serious pro studio or gigs that require a fully blown HD system, then for goodness sakes, get yourself the cheapest Pro Tools LE system than can work for you and voila! . . . you've got Pro Tools!

GW: What's the biggest thing you learned about mixing from Bob Clearmountain?

Wolff: There are so many things, I mean, where do I start? Bob Clearmountain is a legend and for good reason. He's the best at what he does. Not only is he so down to earth and such a regular guy like you and I, he's humble and he loves what he does and who he works with.

Clearmountain, as he signs his e-mails to me, opened my eyes to never forgetting why you do the things you do. That is "To Make Music!" Don't get caught up in all the latest version of this or that new software or spend your life staring in front of a computer screen, clicking a mouse, and thinking you're making music.

Get back to the roots of music and how to record it. Twist those mixer knobs, move those faders, experiment with new sounds and techniques. Find the sound and style of music and recording that says, "This IS me." Forget all the hype you hear and read around you. Instead, spend your time becoming great at what you do and the world will beat a path to your door.

GW: So Clearmountain thinks more like an artist than a technician?

Wolff: Yes! He told me that his job is to translate what the artist's message and song is about, in the best way that accomplishes both. That means, he doesn't come to a mixing session with any preconceived ideas like "Boy, that Empirical Labs Fatso sure sounded awesome on the last album I mixed, so I'll use it on this one too." Everything -- from what gear to use and not use, what and how much EQ, compression, or any other processes -- is decided after he talks with the artist/producer and after he hears the song.

What I like about Clearmountain's way of thinking is that the artist, music, song and its message is always first. His job is simply to make everything the best it can be and keep it true to the artist's vision and message.

That why when he listens to a song, he really listens -- to the words, instruments, and arrangement. If it's a raw song with intensely powerful words and emotions, chances are he's not going to be giving it the Celine Dion big fat sounding wet Lexicon 480/960 reverb treatment on the vocals.

Every effect, every EQ, every piece of gear used must have a reason and a specific purpose for him to use it that fits that song and artist perfectly. Essentially, he's taking a raw painting and simply adding or taking away the things it needs to make it the very best masterpiece possible.

GW: Why is mastering important to a band recording its own material?

Wolff: I tell people to think of mastering as the "last most important thing" you can do to make your music and songs sound great. You can buy the TC Finalizer or any other kind of mastering software plug-in you can find, but none of it will have the same effect as if your music is recorded right and then sent to someone like Bob Ludwig who can make it sound unlike anything you imagined possible. It will be the best money you will ever spend on your music, guaranteed.

GW: What does mastering do for a mix? Does it make it easier to listen to a piece of music on a variety of systems? Does it make the mix louder?

Wolff: Mastering can make a mix (if it's recorded and mixed correctly) sound big and full and with the right EQ and separation and a stereo field that gives proper spacing and placement to vocals and instruments so they can be picked out and heard on the record and not like they sound crowded, busy, and just a bunch of recorded musical clutter.

It gives a mix the kind of sound quality and level of volume that will sound the same on the greatest variety of playback systems. Let's face it, most people aren't going to be playing your music on your same speakers or kinds of gear, so you need to give them a finished product that has the best chance of sounding great on the widest variety of listening devices. Mastering does that.

GW: What's the biggest thing you learned about the mastering process from Bob Ludwig?

Wolff: One of the things I think Bob would say is to create a great song and the best recording of that song that you can, with whatever you can (one thing he highly recommended was to include some kind of analog tape pathway . . . be it as the "record tracks to" or "mix down tracks down to" process in your recording), and then let the mastering engineer make your music sound the very best it can.

In my view, and that of many, many others, Bob Ludwig is the very best in the world, and a big lesson I think we can all learn from him is no matter how acclaimed or great he is, Bob is always learning and wants to keep becoming even better at what he does. He's inspired by everyone and everything and if we emulate that philosophy, there's no way we will not become even better and bigger than we are right now.

GW: How has Internet changed the way music is promoted and distributed?

Wolff: It's changed everything. The Internet puts any and everyone on the same level playing field. In the past, when it came to music success, the accepted thinking was that one needed a major record label deal to use the label's huge distribution and promotions network to get your music out to the world.

Now, if you have a great Web site (so cheap!), good promo copy, great music, and you know how the PR game is played, you can create such a powerful image and vibe that people won't know if you've got a music business and an office full of hundreds of people or you're doing it as a one-man-show from your bedroom.

With the ability to Internet broadcast, you've got a potential audience of more than 500 million people who can be turned on to your music tonight! HELLO!

GW: Any words of inspiration for musicians who want to be successful outside the major label box?

Wolff: It's so easy to do. I tell people to lose your illusions and give up the myths and false beliefs you've been accepting as your reality for too long about how to be a success in today's music business.

Literally tomorrow, if someone creates a great song and records it decently, I can show them how to go from frustrated to amazed at the opportunities in less than 24 hours.

There are so many markets. There is so much opportunity and so much money waiting to be made from your music. You just need to know to how to do it. You've spent so many years, money, and so much time getting to the point where you are right now. Most people just need to know how to "do something with it," and that's where I can help.