Villalobos hating on Ableton

[slow riot]

why not just write some text like

<-- a Villalobos song

next to your youtube FFS. communication is a two way street.

I listened to that track, it's a waste of time. it's exactly the vapid pretentious crap I'd expect a twat like him to make. it was the same quantized loops over and over again with some really lame unmusical uninteresting bass wankery over the top. I really expected more.

this is how I like to communicate, I'm sorry that you do not agree with this style.

i like this track. it has just the right ingredients for me. atmosphere. repetition in the right amount. big twisting trumpetty riff with matching subs.

different strokes for different folks i guess.

[necho]

about the jazz thing -

I like jazz.... some of it is complete wank though.

Point is - when some TECHNO producer starts waxing lyrical about jazz - starts pretending that he's some kind of hep jazz cat, then you know he's past the point of no return.

Mate - you make electronic dance music - you are NOT (and probably never will be) a jazz man. Pretending you are does NOT make you edgy and intellectual - it makes you a dick.

[oddstep]

fundamentally what difference does it make if Ricardo Villalobos likes or does not like tracks made using Live. If he was Ableton Live positive would that negate the aspects of his personality that that people are getting vexed by? Would Live sound different? Would you encourage people to buy Live as being 'RV certified'.
Personally, I think his productions are incredible and I like the way he has got an opinion on everything. His politics seem OK too. However I won't be switching to Logic and modular synths to ensure that I can make the 'right' music.

[necho]

fundamentally what difference does it make if Ricardo Villalobos likes or does not like tracks made using Live.

It doesn't make any difference.... it just gives us something to bitch about when we should be working.

[snakedogman]

Point is - when some TECHNO producer starts waxing lyrical about jazz - starts pretending that he's some kind of hep jazz cat, then you know he's past the point of no return.

this is true, same with Laurent Garnier.

[oddstep]

[nigel1]

LMFAO!!
I can't believe someone actually came out and said this sh*t. I've been making records for 20 somewhat years...and this ranks right up there with the cat that came into
the music store and asked for a M One D One. (that's gonna take a minute for the young cats to get..LOL) Everyone is entitled to their opinion though...but as someone in the public eye I would've been a bit
more neutral...anyways.

I've had PT HD, Logic, and was currently on Nuendo for 6 years b4 making the switch to Live 8. Whilst I will agree that one can "sorta" guess-timate if the record was made in live due to
some of the plug-ins it provides...this could possibly hold true for other DAW's as well...if they provided distinct enough plug ins as Live does. Though I've kinda found this akin to someone
trying to tell me what mic i've used in a record though...LMAO.
I've done A/B comparisons to no avail and the honest truth IMHO is that Live's engine is a bit more superior in holding stereo depth/width than a few other competitors. While the numbers dictate that DAW's in theory have no sound of their own..the reality is that they sort of do. IF you don't know what you're doing. For example I find that
Nuendo's group busses don't hold up well at all so you work around that. This has been argued ad nauseam. BUT to drop a statement like he does is kind of reckless. Due to the fact that he'll influence many potential users that actually follow him. In the end it is the skill of the individual's mixing and producing while knowing his tool's limitations that dictates your "sound". You don't blame the program. The program is just a tool. I for example render all my tracks through tape right back into Live. Why? is it because i think Live's fidelity is inferior? No! but because I prefer and reminisce about a certain sound that was obtained by using analog gear from our heyday. Why blame a tool? The tool operates as it was designed to. A palette of paint is just that...it doesn't paint for you.

My sentiment is that Live has created an incredible tool that has allowed everyone from the layman to the genius to make music. Some cringe...but this to me is ingenious. Was I worried at first that any Tom,Dick and Harry could make a record? well...YEAH! After all these years it took to learn all I could about my trade?...sure
But in the end...my thoughts changed to...well f**k! Time to step up my game! The competition is getting stiffer! I'm all for re-educating myself and pushing myself to new limits. Live to me..gives me the tools to
achieve this.


respect
Dennis Ferrer
http://www.objektivity.com
http://www.myspace.com/dennisferrer

I'd like to say...who the f*ck cares if you used a brick to make a diamond....it's still a diamond. The end result is how history and your peers will judge you.

[dom]

Good one, Dennis.
And welcome to the forum.

Cheers,
Dom

[nigel1]

good to be part of the fam..Dom

peace

[necho]

nice way to round off the thread Mr Dennis....

My thoughts exactly.

[nebulae]

+1 Dennis

Seems to me like Los Lobos is more worried that everyone can now make a beat. Well BFD! That just means La Bamba has to work harder at making his minimal sound original.

Live's engine has nothing to do with it. And by slamming it, I feel he loses credibility.

[davepermen]

he never was credible for me. but i like quite some of his work. so his work is credible. he never was.

and +1 to denis, great statement.

[leedsquietman]

Agree with Dennis's sentiments.

Reminds me a bit of top mixer Dave Pensado's comments in Sound On Sound January 2007, when he says 'Show me a guy who criticizes digital or a specific digital format and I'll show you a guy who hasn't learned how to use it properly' and also 'I don't believe that 16/44.1 is inferior. The mathematics behind this might speak otherwise, but a good engineer would be able to work around it with a little more attention to detail'.

Villalobos sounds like he hasn't put the hours in with the equipment he's criticizing to have an objective opinion of it - put concisely, this means he's ignorant.

I still love analog sound and I really want a 2" tape machine for mixing to, It can make a difference to record digital, mix analog and bring it back into digital - in the early days when converters were a bit so so, many engineers did it this way. That way you can get the real tape compression and analog mojo for real and then send it back into your DAW to finalize and it does work better than plugin simulations. However, this is just a 'different' sound, it doesn't mean that a fully digital D-D-D record sounds bad at all, like Dave Pensado says, to get something which isn't sterile, you just have to work a little harder and it's perfectly possibly to have great sounding records totally in the box.

[Sage]

If you have experience with any DAW, you should be able to hear it if they are using the stock plugins. Live is no less neutral than Logic or PT etc.
The danger of working entirely within the box with any DAW is that you sound like that DAW and don't have a sound of your own.

[3dot...]

wouldn't say he is hating on ableton. he just says that you can recognize stuff made in ableton. he probably means stuff that features warp-artifacts, beat repeat and resonator.

and he is probably right that real-life acoustic instruments have a certain quality in sound that is still hard to achieve with synthetic music. I mean, take a skilled tabla-player and try to do something as rich as that with a drum-machine. nearly impossible.

doesn't mean that digital music is less worthy.

but if your main interest is sound, then I agree - good instrumentalists playing good instruments on a well recorded record deliver.

agreeing.