Hardware Snobs
stiefelmusik wrote:well, like most people these days i use both software and hardware for music production. each has it's own advantage/appeal, etc. and it just depends on what i'm trying to do, what mood i'm in, etc. as to which i prefer. HOWEVER there is ONE MAJOR ADVANTAGE to hardware that is particularly significant to me, especially as a macintosh computer user: hardware (synths, FX, etc.) generally LASTS a lot longer! For example I'm still using synths and other gear that I purchased OVER 20 YEARS AGO. But how much software am I using for that long? None. Software is just that: SOFT! I have a case full of CD's of "obsolete software" ... but I do not have the equivalent in "obsolete gear". In fact, obsolete gear still has more potential/appeal than obsolete software.
For me, buying software is like renting a car: I pay to use it, but I never think of myself as "owning it" ... not like a piece of hardware
Software doesn't become obselete if you maintain the systems that run it.
Heck what is stopping you from keeping an old G-400 or something running OS9 if you liked your OS9 software?
Or an old Atari running an elderly version MIDI only version of Cubase?
People do ...
; )
JaseFOS
-Live10.1 |Push2|Maschinemk2|KeyLab61|LaunchPad|MCUpro|MCExt|MCExt|iPad2|TouchABLE2
-Mac Pro 5.1 (dual hex core Xeon 3.46gHz, 28Gb RAM) running MacOS 10.13.6
-Universal Audio Apollo Quad (firewire)
-SHITLOADS OF HARDWARE SYNTHS
-Live10.1 |Push2|Maschinemk2|KeyLab61|LaunchPad|MCUpro|MCExt|MCExt|iPad2|TouchABLE2
-Mac Pro 5.1 (dual hex core Xeon 3.46gHz, 28Gb RAM) running MacOS 10.13.6
-Universal Audio Apollo Quad (firewire)
-SHITLOADS OF HARDWARE SYNTHS
-
SonnyBonnier
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:23 am
- Location: Lalaland
I´like to know what kind of hardware we´re talking about here...
About seven or eight years ago, we bought an EMU E6400 sampler to our studio. This was the shit back then. The best sampler on earth (64 Mbit RAM...), and we paid 4000$ for it.
Now it´s worth absolutely nothing. You know why? Programs for 500$ are 20 times more powerful and ten times more flexible.. Timestretching in real time anyone? Totally impossible back then....
It´s still not possible to make a 100% emulation of an analog synth like, for example, the OSCar. But the impOSCar is pretty fucking close, and what better is, you can carry it around in your laptop... And if you got the program, you can use it over and over again in the same song..
No one has ever made a softsynth that really sounds like the TB-303 (Sorry, Rebirth is a piece of shit program...), but who gives a fuck... If you really know your way around, say, Reaktor, you can come up with sounds that Kraftwerk would have sold their moms and destroyed their racing bikes for..
Fairlight..? 200,000$, and two seconds of sampling time... You think Martin Gore is nostalgic about that?
You don´t think Eric B & Rakim would have loved working with Ableton?
Do you really think people will buy hardware synths in, say, fifteen years?
About seven or eight years ago, we bought an EMU E6400 sampler to our studio. This was the shit back then. The best sampler on earth (64 Mbit RAM...), and we paid 4000$ for it.
Now it´s worth absolutely nothing. You know why? Programs for 500$ are 20 times more powerful and ten times more flexible.. Timestretching in real time anyone? Totally impossible back then....
It´s still not possible to make a 100% emulation of an analog synth like, for example, the OSCar. But the impOSCar is pretty fucking close, and what better is, you can carry it around in your laptop... And if you got the program, you can use it over and over again in the same song..
No one has ever made a softsynth that really sounds like the TB-303 (Sorry, Rebirth is a piece of shit program...), but who gives a fuck... If you really know your way around, say, Reaktor, you can come up with sounds that Kraftwerk would have sold their moms and destroyed their racing bikes for..
Fairlight..? 200,000$, and two seconds of sampling time... You think Martin Gore is nostalgic about that?
You don´t think Eric B & Rakim would have loved working with Ableton?
Do you really think people will buy hardware synths in, say, fifteen years?
-
Vercengetorex
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2002 12:38 pm
- Location: Brooklyn, NYC
Here is one piece of hardware the NO software can even come close to right now...
http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=1013
Take a look at that sample rate folks...
1MHz
http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=1013
Take a look at that sample rate folks...
1MHz
I cant think of a sig
I own an Emu 64 sampler! So mine is double obsolete, they totally ditched me in no mans land with that £2,500 fucker (1993 ?)
I even paid the megabucks to upgrade the hard-drive to 800 meg or something like that. I think I still have it anyway, I think it's in a chest somewhere as I haven't needed to touch it in about 5 years!
The benefit of softsynths are that they are independent from the audio hardware - so If I want to run Rebirth out of a 96khz card .. I could. Try getting an audio path upgrade on the E64, not so easy. The first time I sampled our moog rogue on that, then A/B compared the sound ... I realised that sampling wasn't all it was cracked up to be.
Meanwhile I still use my Korg Mono-Poly for lead stuff, also my SY85 as it has a nice feeling keyboard as a master. Both still useful after all these years, both have sounds of their own.
With hardware - dedicated interfaces are the primary plus .. thats why playing guitar becomes so spontaneous, the frets are always frets, the bridge always the bridge. With a multipurpose interface it is hard to become one with your instrument when 'dial 1' can be either filter cut-off or track1 volume.
I even paid the megabucks to upgrade the hard-drive to 800 meg or something like that. I think I still have it anyway, I think it's in a chest somewhere as I haven't needed to touch it in about 5 years!
The benefit of softsynths are that they are independent from the audio hardware - so If I want to run Rebirth out of a 96khz card .. I could. Try getting an audio path upgrade on the E64, not so easy. The first time I sampled our moog rogue on that, then A/B compared the sound ... I realised that sampling wasn't all it was cracked up to be.
Meanwhile I still use my Korg Mono-Poly for lead stuff, also my SY85 as it has a nice feeling keyboard as a master. Both still useful after all these years, both have sounds of their own.
With hardware - dedicated interfaces are the primary plus .. thats why playing guitar becomes so spontaneous, the frets are always frets, the bridge always the bridge. With a multipurpose interface it is hard to become one with your instrument when 'dial 1' can be either filter cut-off or track1 volume.
yes times are a changing but the winds of change dont nescessarily effect your audience positively. We can have all the technology, light shows, visuals and whatever but the fact is the performer in most cases is still the focus of attention. you may think this is an outdated mode of performing but with all due respect its still the modus operanti and a software package lIke ableton live is not going to change that any time soon.hambone1 wrote:Times, technology, and people are changing. This is a multimedia world of cellphones, PDAs, video games, the web, iPods, etc...
In my opinion, for what little it's worth, the visual impact can come from places other than antiquated (yet occasionally talented) turntablist showboating.
Video, percussion, interactive MIDI controllers, etc.
The future is now.
Im talking about DJ performances here not a live electronic act. If its the later you can get off with the Kraftwerk look. Robert Heinkes gigs with multiple guys using Laptops is cool. Thats their angle and it works for them for many reasons but mostly the music I would imagine. But if your one guy DJ'ing and fiddling with a laptop I am convinced this has a negative effect on your audience. If your a solo electronic act you can get off with it, but even then the audience feels detached.
This is not an Ableton Live problem this is a problem for all performers using laptops regardless of software.
Last, I wanted to say it does matter who you are. If you are very well known you can get off with just about anything as people are coming to see you anyway. if your trying to build your name (Arnt we all) its a totally different game. I think we all need to keep that in mind. None of this will be a problem in five or ten years time as the technology will have moved on a lot allowing us to really perform a live show while fully interacting with the audience. For now we do have to be a little careful or we could find we alienate dance music lovers even more than they already are.
hardware snobs and old software
[quote="stiefelmusik"],I'm still using synths and other gear that I purchased OVER 20 YEARS AGO. But how much software am I using for that long? None. Software is just that:[/quote]
I use 20 year old software and LIVE and andyware and tweakbench, ACID, Melodyne, etc.
I keep a 386 just to run Cool Shoes' Soundglobs which goes to the kernel of DOS and takes over teh cpu. It is twenty year old software that wont run on anything past windows and capable of flooding a system with more midi than anything can handle. I love it and have no modern equivalent. The owner has no intention of rewriting it (I asked him). Wes Craven's Shocker was done exclusively using this software.
Whati don't use anymore is Cakewalk, never liked the complexity.
I do use n 808 and not software drums, even though I have a library and dedicated drum samplers.
I use 20 year old software and LIVE and andyware and tweakbench, ACID, Melodyne, etc.
I keep a 386 just to run Cool Shoes' Soundglobs which goes to the kernel of DOS and takes over teh cpu. It is twenty year old software that wont run on anything past windows and capable of flooding a system with more midi than anything can handle. I love it and have no modern equivalent. The owner has no intention of rewriting it (I asked him). Wes Craven's Shocker was done exclusively using this software.
Whati don't use anymore is Cakewalk, never liked the complexity.
I do use n 808 and not software drums, even though I have a library and dedicated drum samplers.
I have an Emu e6400 and still use it sometimes as an fx processor (SCSI is f*d so no loading samples anymore!) it makes things sound full and fat, wicked converters on those. Plus the filters a badass!!
I have a few analog synths (Waldorf Pulse, Evolver, Akai vx-90) they all have a nice roundness and fullness which I never could replicate using software.
I also use outboard gear for distortion and valve saturation, again, cant get the same crunch or warmth out of software.
But software (Live + Kontakt) is the central point of my studio, allowing me to record, edit, arrange, resample etc....
At first I thought the VST revolution was a god-send ... but after about a year I realised it all sounded a bit 'thin' and lifeless... hence becoming a gear slut since I started earning enough.
Having said that I am not anti-software, it is possible to make amaxing music on software only setups, but for the kind of sounds I like I like to have a bit of analog and outboard gear. Plus its refreshing to go back to knobs and lcd's once in a while!
I have a few analog synths (Waldorf Pulse, Evolver, Akai vx-90) they all have a nice roundness and fullness which I never could replicate using software.
I also use outboard gear for distortion and valve saturation, again, cant get the same crunch or warmth out of software.
But software (Live + Kontakt) is the central point of my studio, allowing me to record, edit, arrange, resample etc....
At first I thought the VST revolution was a god-send ... but after about a year I realised it all sounded a bit 'thin' and lifeless... hence becoming a gear slut since I started earning enough.
Having said that I am not anti-software, it is possible to make amaxing music on software only setups, but for the kind of sounds I like I like to have a bit of analog and outboard gear. Plus its refreshing to go back to knobs and lcd's once in a while!
I definitely fall into the category of "BOTH is best." I love software samplers, DAWs, and synths. Live alone makes recording and sequencing infinitely easier than any hardware sequencer I've seen. But there are some things that, for my workflow, hardware does better. One of these is drum sequencing--I've tried drum programming in software, but nothing can compete with a good old-fashioned hardware step sequencer for programming drums.
And then, of course, there's analog "warmth," "character," or whatever you prefer to call it. I'm someone who really *likes* the pristine sound of digital instruments. But for some things--distortion, for example--I prefer the sound I can get by running things through an analog filter.
When it comes down to it, hardware vs. software is a silly debate, because everyone works differently and everyone prefers different sounds. I agree with those who have mentioned hardware as a status symbol. When I was first starting out, I listened to all the analog vs. digital debates, and it left me feeling like, "This sucks. I'll never be able to make anything that sounds good until I can afford a few thousand dollars' worth of analog gear." The bottom line, though, is that you can make fantastic music no matter what tools you have. It's not the size of your rack; it's how you use it.
(The one place where this may not be true is with really high-end mastering hardware, which is probably still beyond the reach of what's available to the home studio. But if you're going to put something out on a label, they'll send it off to a mastering engineer at a pro studio, anyway, so it's not really something to worry about.)
And then, of course, there's analog "warmth," "character," or whatever you prefer to call it. I'm someone who really *likes* the pristine sound of digital instruments. But for some things--distortion, for example--I prefer the sound I can get by running things through an analog filter.
When it comes down to it, hardware vs. software is a silly debate, because everyone works differently and everyone prefers different sounds. I agree with those who have mentioned hardware as a status symbol. When I was first starting out, I listened to all the analog vs. digital debates, and it left me feeling like, "This sucks. I'll never be able to make anything that sounds good until I can afford a few thousand dollars' worth of analog gear." The bottom line, though, is that you can make fantastic music no matter what tools you have. It's not the size of your rack; it's how you use it.
(The one place where this may not be true is with really high-end mastering hardware, which is probably still beyond the reach of what's available to the home studio. But if you're going to put something out on a label, they'll send it off to a mastering engineer at a pro studio, anyway, so it's not really something to worry about.)
-
anonymouse
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 2:33 am
Some great points made above; particularly related to it being a personal preference thing.
It is amazing how much power, complexity and flexibility you can fit into a good spec laptop (or better, two partnered together) stuffed with software.
I don't really agree with the debate about some 1980s analog monster sounding better than a properly done VST or reaktor ensemble. Lots of the emulators sound amazing. If your composition if going to suffer because some slight nuace of true analog is missing, then you are making music for a tiny audience that can appreciate these things. Your composition is based on the instrumentation rather than the strength of your idea ... so that's another debate.
I love hardware. Mainly for the robustness and tangibility. I think any dedicated producer/musician (or whatever you want to label yourself as) must have at least one big 61 key plus keyboard with decent keys and onboard sounds that can be tweaked. A rack mount sound module is valuable too. Maybe it is psychological, but I feel much more relaxed blending hardware and a laptop together. I like the immediate wireless freedom you have with a keyboard and its own patches. Certainly for composing and doodling. A good midi controller and reaktor etc is also great, but flipping the 'on' switch in a piece of hardware and instantly getting to work is just very nice.
It really is a case of plucking the best from both worlds. I prefer to sequence and loop on a laptop though. So much flexibility.
Whatever about the hard/soft debate; I really don't see there being any more useful instruments yet to be developed. We are waaaay overloaded on power now.
If it was possible to commit a crime and be sent to prison with all your music gear, I'd do it in a flash. I'd pay to spend a year in a monastery with no distraction and just complete so many projects I never get a chance to finish. [edit - with a strip of bars and nightclubs about a mile away, so as I can mingle with the ladies when nature calls]
It is amazing how much power, complexity and flexibility you can fit into a good spec laptop (or better, two partnered together) stuffed with software.
I don't really agree with the debate about some 1980s analog monster sounding better than a properly done VST or reaktor ensemble. Lots of the emulators sound amazing. If your composition if going to suffer because some slight nuace of true analog is missing, then you are making music for a tiny audience that can appreciate these things. Your composition is based on the instrumentation rather than the strength of your idea ... so that's another debate.
I love hardware. Mainly for the robustness and tangibility. I think any dedicated producer/musician (or whatever you want to label yourself as) must have at least one big 61 key plus keyboard with decent keys and onboard sounds that can be tweaked. A rack mount sound module is valuable too. Maybe it is psychological, but I feel much more relaxed blending hardware and a laptop together. I like the immediate wireless freedom you have with a keyboard and its own patches. Certainly for composing and doodling. A good midi controller and reaktor etc is also great, but flipping the 'on' switch in a piece of hardware and instantly getting to work is just very nice.
It really is a case of plucking the best from both worlds. I prefer to sequence and loop on a laptop though. So much flexibility.
Whatever about the hard/soft debate; I really don't see there being any more useful instruments yet to be developed. We are waaaay overloaded on power now.
If it was possible to commit a crime and be sent to prison with all your music gear, I'd do it in a flash. I'd pay to spend a year in a monastery with no distraction and just complete so many projects I never get a chance to finish. [edit - with a strip of bars and nightclubs about a mile away, so as I can mingle with the ladies when nature calls]
zeitgeist, I couldn't agree more. I do own a lot of hardware, but if I have to be completely honest it might just be because computers didn't quite have the same possibilities when I bought the gear. The sounds are still amazing, and my now pseudo-aging Kurzweil k2000r still rivals my 1.5gigaHz centrino.
Nowadays I'm leaning towards a finetuned setup of hardware (midi) controllers and sequencers( plus ONE analogue synth at a time) and my laptop. a good combination.
Nowadays I'm leaning towards a finetuned setup of hardware (midi) controllers and sequencers( plus ONE analogue synth at a time) and my laptop. a good combination.
mbp 2.66, osx 10.6.8, 8GB ram.
-
stiefelmusik
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: essen, germany
Quite right! People do. People like me! I'm still using OS 9 for all of my audio work, and I still have an Atari 1040ST running an ancient version of Cubase which I still use occasionally. But that's not the point I was trying to make. It's just that in my experience hardware tends to "outlast" software. Again, that's just my experience. For example, I've been using much of the same outboard gear through several generations of computers (PC 486, Pentium PC, Pentium III, Mac G3, Mac G4, etc.). Obviously some pieces of hardware (like soundcards, etc.) didn't transition well, but most of it did. Most of the software, however, is no longer being used (e.g. the Atari stuff, all of the Win 3.1 stuff). One advantage PC users have over mac users is the ability to run a lot of legacy software on a modern OS like XP. Can't do that with Mac OS X. That's one of the main reasons I haven't switched to OS 9: I'm just not ready for all of that great software to become "obsolete" ...jasefos wrote:
Software doesn't become obselete if you maintain the systems that run it.
Heck what is stopping you from keeping an old G-400 or something running OS9 if you liked your OS9 software?
Or an old Atari running an elderly version MIDI only version of Cubase?
People do ...
; )
... another good point above was "it depends on what hardware you buy" as to it's usefulness down the road. Very true. I have a few pieces of dog gear up in the attic (like a "MIDI DJ" sequencer with 5 1/4 inch floppy discs... and HR-16 (although I loved it at the time)... a Proteus FX (man that thing sucks. why did I buy that?)... i could go on.
someone should start another thread:
what was your worst hardware purchase of all time?
cheers
This... thread, uhm, made me ... sleepy...
See you tomorrow, lads.
// C
See you tomorrow, lads.
// C
PC Laptop Acer, XP Home SP2, build in crappy sound card.
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/