| Author
|
Is there any Hardware Enthusiasts here?
|
EYB
Noized
Started Topics :
111
Posts :
2849
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 14:10
|
Quote:
|
hahaha i wanna see any of u making a good song without using any software!!
why dont you post examples of ur fat sounding hardware tunes so we can hear the differrence. Other wise is just buls.....t
just do it.. lets hear those fat sounding analog harware stompers!!!
|
|
Yeah, let's hear them!!
Where are ur killer tracks mr "This-topic-ISN'T-about-analog-or-digital-comparison-whine-whine" luizmenezesjr
  Signature |
|
|
|
14-year old e-tard
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
797
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 14:24
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 08:52, piXan wrote:
hahaha i wanna see any of u making a good song without using any software!!
why dont you post examples of ur fat sounding hardware tunes so we can hear the differrence. Other wise is just buls.....t
just do it.. lets hear those fat sounding analog harware stompers!!!
|
|
Go to http://www.streetwisemusic.com and do a search for nectarios. All of the tunes he and Vigi have done together, where done in Nectarios' studio where he is mainly using analog modular synths.
Most of his tunes have been in the top 10 breakbeat charts of magazines like Mixmag and DJmag, with "Phoenix" and "Guru" reaching the #1 spot. Also his music is getting air plays on UK's biggest radio stations like BBC Radio 1, Kiss FM, Capital, Ministry of Sound radio (where they recently interviewed him and Vigi for their massive success in the breakbeat scene, although Nectarios has released a couple of trance tunes with Pan under the Unison project).
Tunes like "Phoenix" are also used for background music for some of the biggest european digital TV stations like SKY Digital. 
Me>You |
|
|
|
br0d
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
355
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 14:32
|
The "hardware" aspect, as mentioned, is a fallacy.
Most of the good, popular synths now are VA. They are digital. It just happens that the best developers have been writing and designing mostly for hardware companies, so the fallacy is that there is something inherently better about "synth appliances." This is not true. They were writing for hardware becaue computer technology and processing power was not up to snuff yet. It now is. So standalone hardware other than controllers, is proceeeding to die, as it should, because there is no point in having two different machines working together to produce the same song, while their processors can only communicate through unnecessarily limited interfaces (MIDI/USB/etc.) Having the synth on the PC is much more versatile. Daughterboard/DSP synths will now take their place (to cut down on piracy, and free up CPU. ) This seems remedial to me. Write a whole tune full of outboard synths, and spend half your day re-finding your levels bouncing it to audio, basically remixing your tune into audio, and then maybe even sliding all your parts around to fix your 5-10ms MIDI latencies. Knock yourselves out. I prefer sample accuracy, and Cubase export.
When you start getting into perfect VSTi emulations of the superior schematics found in the so called "good" hardware models, such as with the Powercore Virus, the outdated concept of recording, bouncing, latency, plugs, cables, physical space, etc associated with standalone hardware starts to seem stupid. So it's not that outboard hardware is inherently inferior in sound, it's just that it creates extra work which lengthens workflow and can often subtly affect tightness. Try a 64th note snare roll on a Roland module (known for latency.) Try it on a MPU-401 interface. It's ridiculous.
This is not an ego war here, this is about practicality. There are better, more inexpensive FX inside the box, more easily accessed, than there are in your FX rack, I can almost guarantee it. So if the "good synths" (Access/Waldorf/Nord/Classic Analog Emulations) go into the box at the same time as the CPU tech skyrockets, I can't imagine why any dood in his right mind, interested in convenience and efficiency would want a studio full of modules, unless he's trying to impress some tail. Or unless he's one of those golden eared snobs who is hell bent on saying "the emulation just doesn't sound the same" whenever someone copies the identical schematic from a classic synth. Snobs, who, incidentally, as I pointed out before, never actually subject themselves to a blinded test to prove they can actually hear the differnce. All ego stuff, IMO. I don't care which pro uses hardware and which pro uses software. Pros can blow me, even the word sounds annoying. I care about my own workflow. Workflow is what is important.
|
|
|
|
br0d
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
355
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 14:34
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 14:24, 14-year old e-tard wrote:
Go to http://www.streetwisemusic.com and do a search for nectarios. All of the tunes he and Vigi have done together, where done in Nectarios' studio where he is mainly using analog modular synths.
|
|
Hahah I think you ARE nectarios |
|
|
|
14-year old e-tard
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
797
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 15:26
|
Nothing like an analog vs digital thread to help pass the day quick
Although I agree about software being more practical, I don't agree that it sounds the same as hardware and I am not comparing the powercore/TDM Virus and the hardware Virus, which is not a valid hardware/software comparison, although one comes on CD and the other ina box with keys and knobs.
For my liking, analog hardware sounds way better than software when it comes to analog sounds. It simply pisses all over it.
If I liked digital sounds then I would say that the Nord Lead, Z1, Wavestation, DX 7 piss all over a model D minimoog, a memorymoog, P5, J8...etc.
It's simply down to taste. But the practical superiority of software is non debatable for sure. The software version of the minimoog will be very stable, whereas good luck programming a real minimoog's filter to track the keyboard for more than 2 8ves!
Then again, inspiration is non debatable.
Some people might get their kicks from masturbating with the mouse, or looking at 3+ 21" screens when making tunes, whilst others might like to be surrounded by big boxes with falshing LEDs that have wires hanging out from them and look at the computer screen as less as possible.
The midi protocol is not the reason why sequencing external gear is not as tight as sequencing soft synths. Do the same using an MPC, or Atari (and sort out the fixed delay for each channel) and everything is fine. It's software's fault (crappy OSs) that prevent a computer based studio from sequencing external gear tight.
Another note on the bouncing and recording process. Some people do record soft synths through external pre amps and compressors that colour the sound to their liking. So with soft synths you get to record stuff in as well.
Same with hardware effects. It is very simple to assign a buss to your sundcard's output that goes into the outboard effects unit. My cheapest effects processor is a Lexicon MPX-100 that I bought for £60 and that sounds light years better than software that costs twice than that.
But hardware is indeed more expensine...but if your hardware (or software to include both sides of the coin) makes you back all the money you payed for it and then some, then the intial cost is pretty much irrelevant.
Me>You |
|
|
|
slyman604
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
263
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 16:58
|
" So standalone hardware other than controllers, is proceeeding to die, as it should, because there is no point in having two different machines working together"
i think you forget about cracked software though. The reason we will always have hardware synths is becuase alot of companies dont want to get into a market to have their product stolen. |
|
|
|
Salvia
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
13
Posts :
24
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 17:06
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 08:52, piXan wrote:
hahaha i wanna see any of u making a good song without using any software!!
why dont you post examples of ur fat sounding hardware tunes so we can hear the differrence. Other wise is just buls.....t
just do it.. lets hear those fat sounding analog harware stompers!!!
|
|
Well, Didnt Hallucinogen use all hardware when he made L.S.D. and the Twisted album back in the early 90's? |
|
|
|
jhanna
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
178
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 19:04
|
brod: amen
salvia: it isnt the early nineties anymore ,in case u didnt notice! since then there a are a "few" changes in electronic music production. hey and the track is awesame, but i woudnt call it exactly fat... |
|
|
|
Pavel
Troll
Started Topics :
313
Posts :
8649
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 19:08
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 17:06, Salvia wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 08:52, piXan wrote:
hahaha i wanna see any of u making a good song without using any software!!
why dont you post examples of ur fat sounding hardware tunes so we can hear the differrence. Other wise is just buls.....t
just do it.. lets hear those fat sounding analog harware stompers!!!
|
|
Well, Didnt Hallucinogen use all hardware when he made L.S.D. and the Twisted album back in the early 90's?
|
|
Hmm do you objectively believe that it sounds better than an average tune nowadays? Let's just put our personal feelings aside and re-think about it. For me this tune is a milestone of psy trance, probably my favorite ever. But! Did it survive the time test? Does it still sound so fat, technically only speaking, not musically. I personally don't think so. The kick lacks the power, there is almost no bass. And the overall mixing sounds a bit muddy.
I'm sorry if i slaughtered any holy cows right now, but face it, hardware evolves. And production values evolve. And please don't let me comment on SFX and first Astral Projection tunes. Pre-Mahadeva era. Today, for me atleast they are barely hearable.
Flame on.
Everyone in the world is doing something without me |
|
|
|
Pavel
Troll
Started Topics :
313
Posts :
8649
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 19:10
|
Oh and Simon's live version of LSD, the one he plays nowadays is totally different. He replaced the kick drum and the bassline with his current sounds, and it just kicks ass.
np:/Hallucinogen - LSD
Everyone in the world is doing something without me |
|
|
|
jhanna
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
178
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 19:23
|
Hey i love hardware:
my Pentium IV 1Gb RAM CPU
MOTU 828 MKII FIREWIRE
NOVATION RE-MOTE
The musician makes music, not the machines |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 19:59
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 15:26, 14-year old e-tard wrote:
Some people might get their kicks from masturbating with the mouse,
|
|
You are at it again. You are doing exactly the same thing as you were doing when talking about the Virus. You might not literaly be saying that you think that your opinion is the measure for all things but that is certainly the impression you are giving. It shines through your posts like a supernova. (Not the synth obviously).
Can you please have some respect for people and agree to disagree instead of posting your barely witheld arrogance?
Thanks,
UnderTow |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 20:31
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-18 14:32, br0d wrote:
The "hardware" aspect, as mentioned, is a fallacy.
Most of the good, popular synths now are VA. They are digital. It just happens that the best developers have been writing and designing mostly for hardware companies, so the fallacy is that there is something inherently better about "synth appliances." This is not true. Having the synth on the PC is much more versatile.
|
|
Well this isn't entirely true. You can do certain routing tricks with feedback in the analogue domain that would sound horrible in the digital domain. I agree with the rest though.
Quote:
|
Daughterboard/DSP synths will now take their place (to cut down on piracy, and free up CPU. ) This seems remedial to me. Write a whole tune full of outboard synths, and spend half your day re-finding your levels bouncing it to audio, basically remixing your tune into audio, and then maybe even sliding all your parts around to fix your 5-10ms MIDI latencies. Knock yourselves out. I prefer sample accuracy, and Cubase export.
|
|
I agree with you except that there are some nice digital mixers with total recall. When I still had my O2R I could have the mixer's preset saved with each project. The funny thing is that I sold it because it sounded so crap compared to my analogue desk.  So although my analogue desk doesn't have any recall or automation, I still prefer it because it has a nice warm sound compared to digital stuff.
Btw, latency is no issue in this case as I make stem mixes in Sonar that are sent out to
the analogue desk and I record the stereo bus output back into Sonar. Well ok I need to replace the power supply first. My last few tracks sound very digital to me as they are mixed and bounced entirely in the digital domain. Having the Drawmer, DBX and Focusrite dynamics working on the sound does add something ... So does the analogue EQ on the desk.
Quote:
|
When you start getting into perfect VSTi emulations of the superior schematics found in the so called "good" hardware models, such as with the Powercore Virus, the outdated concept of recording, bouncing, latency, plugs, cables, physical space, etc associated with standalone hardware starts to seem stupid. So it's not that outboard hardware is inherently inferior in sound, it's just that it creates extra work which lengthens workflow and can often subtly affect tightness.
|
|
Absolutely agreed but on the other hand, the increased inspiration I get from my hardware makes up for all that in both time and, much more importantly, musicality.
If you talk purely about workflow, you get another issue with software: Setting up your control surface to control all your different plugins. Remembering what is linked to what. Switching between presets in the controler each time you want to control a different app/plugin. So again, both have advantages and disadvantages.
Quote:
|
This is not an ego war here, this is about practicality. There are better, more inexpensive FX inside the box, more easily accessed, than there are in your FX rack, I can almost guarantee it.
|
|
After reading the SOS review on the SoundScape Mixpander (and reading other reviews online + the info on the site) I have very very very serious NEGS. (Not Enough Gear Syndrome ). Man does that look like a very nice solution.
Now my ideal setup looks something like this: PC with dual Xeon/Opteron. UAD-1. PowerCore. 2x Mixpander. 2x CM SixtyFour. 6x Neutrik 48 patchbay (just to terminate the DB8 connectors). My current analogue console or maybe an upgrade to an SSL 9000. Once I have won the lotery and have all this setup I will be able to route anything to anywhere at the click of a mouse.
... Damn! Who woke me up from my dream?
Quote:
|
So if the "good synths" (Access/Waldorf/Nord/Classic Analog Emulations) go into the box at the same time as the CPU tech skyrockets, I can't imagine why any dood in his right mind, interested in convenience and efficiency would want a studio full of modules, unless he's trying to impress some tail.
|
|
Like I said, I find much more inspiration from hardware interfaces. The fact that different synths have different knobs/sliders/buttons at different places to control different parameters in the synths means that I will do different things with them. So besides the different tone and options of a synth, the interface will make me work differently too.
There is also the satisfaction of going into the studio and turning everything on and deciding what I'm going to use today. And there are those times when I don't feel like working behind the screen. I can then turn to my Andromeda and just play with the machine to make different sounds without thinking in the sequencer box. It just gives different ideas.
This isn't snobbery. It is just what makes my creative mind tick. It might not work for everyone but I don't care too much about that.
Quote:
|
I care about my own workflow. Workflow is what is important.
|
|
Agreed. But I am also considering the creative workflow when I have no insipration. That is part of the package for me.
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 20:39
|
PS: In case it wasn't clear, I use both hardware and software. I like both.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Apr 18, 2005 21:11
|
I like hardware... a lot... it also gives inspiration, unlike most softsynths wich sound too alike (and most don't even cmoe nearer to my hardware synths in terms of modulation, and i only bought cheap stuff compared to what's out there)...
Software is cool because most people have their PCs/Macs stacked with software they didn't pay for... if they had to pay for it they would probably go the hardware way...
Still Synth1 is free and kicks ass (little ass only
I'm re-writting what i've written before in similar threads... but then...
I can say that in the last months i've kept myself away from hardware and was using 100% software (mostly for being lazy, and having little space in my bedroom) until yesterday when i was looking for a simple lead sound i couldn't achieve with any of the softsyths at my disposal... so i took my novation nova out of the closet and... instant magic... and a nova is an outdated synth wich can be bought for as little as most software is (second hand only, of course, novation has moved to other products)... hell knows what could have happened if i had a nord, virus, andromeda, voyager, or anything else more expensive..
Still... the Nova is a VA... theorically it's software could be ported to a PC/MAC... but notice... t the extent of my knowledge novation has only ported synths like the K-Station (V-Station) and the BassStations!
Both are great sounding but simpler in terms of modulation, etc... What may i conclude??? There's more processing power in a Old Synth like the Nova than in todays average computer...
... that may be the answer why having an external synth can still be usefull today...
At least until AMD or Intel raise the average processing power in desktop systems...
...Or we have OSs that dont cripple or hardware...
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
|
