Virtual Vs. Actual

[FORMAT]

Hey fellow studioheads!

I would like to know how much of your music you do inside the computer only and how much hardware do you use these days - in other words, what your studio setup for production in 2004 looks like. What do you think just can't be replaced by virtual instruments?
I personally will never replace my guitar rig with virtual stuff - my stompboxes are definitely easier to tweak than mouse-clicking on the screen.

I would be interested in paritcular to hear how you're going about
- Reverb
- Compression
- Equalizing

Inside the machine or not??

Cheers,
happy beat-twisting
R.

[mlexicon]

for some reason im drawn to wanting to do my mastering in the real...

[FORMAT]

Mastering is something to be best left to professionals anyway isn't it?
I mean, in a real mastering studio etc etc.

In my question I meant music production as such - making loops, arranging etc

[decadnids]

i used to do it all in the puter, but now I am moving away from the puter, as I prefer using hardware stuff - as I find the computer rubbish.

sequencer, using at moment mmt8. its simple, but effective.

although at the moment I am sequencing the puter from the mmt8, i hope to buy some more hardware stuff soon, so that I can stop using the puter all togther, although I might use it as an effects processor.

[r_v]

i'm all about the hardware at the moment. been sequencing on an mpc2000 for at least 5 years now. i do use the computer to edit/process my drum samples before loading them into the sampler and for creating nord modular patches so the computer is still an integral part of the studio, but hardware makes all the noises.

i plan to start using my laptop to run virtual instruments sequenced from the mpc as i would say that software holds more exciting possibilities for sound generation in 2004. the whole software/hardware debate is irelevant to me, they're all just tools for doing the same job and, as with many things, the best solution is probably a mixture of both.

[komakid]

in my own studio enviroment most stuff is done with the computer. the whole mix and arrangment is inside the mashine. what i use are external instruments like synthies, drums, guitars wich i record into the computer and arrange and edit them there. eqing compression and reverberation happens in the computer. i miss the opportunity where i have the possibillity of using good hardware equipment for mixing. when i played more intense with a band we were also visiting rock n roll studios where everything is based on hardware. like a analog multitrack or compressors, consoles ... whatever. i really miss that.

[Loz]

hardware for me, definitely. you just cannot 'jam' with a computer, and yet with hardware, you can just play around until something good comes out.

[FORMAT]

Yeah, most people seem to use both --- as I don't own much hardware (just an E-5000) , I cannot really see myself going in that direction even though a computer seems less intuitive (a friend uses a rs-7000 and it's so much more musical than, say Ableton).....

[mr_chombee]

I use the computer for sequencing purposes only. some plugs seem to be very interesting nowadays, but I never really got into this mouse-clicking stuff and probably never will.

[christtjj]

i do everything inside the computer. reverb, delay, eq, compressors, limiters. everything. i do have a few hardward synths, eq/reverb boxes, mixer & such, turntables and things, but once the performance is in, i stick digital. mastering is fine to do digitally as well. i just feel that it saves some time, money, & dsp cuz i'm not converting things back and forth, loosing 1's & 0's with my crappy converters.

yup, and my shit sounds alright.

http://yard.tandjrec.com/sounds.html

[Loz]

don't mention the 'L'-word to Mr Chombee

[mr_chombee]

btw, the board member mash up flyer made me insane. had many sleepless nights, but I'm getting better now...

[Loz]

haha

forgotten all about that


although to go back to the topic at hand, I just find it a lot more fun to play with real instruments than a laptop. When I'm listening to music, it's interesting to see the people actually play, rather than hide behind a laptop, but with most dance music styles, I get so much into the music I couldn't care less how it's made.

however, when making music, I do it primarily for me. therefore, clicking a mouse for 45 minutes or whatever is dull, but knob-twiddling, button pressing and slider sliding is great fun indeed, and makes me feel more in control and almost feel the music, which I just don't get with a laptop.

also, if you're using real sequencers and synths, you've got two hands, with 10 fingers between them. On a laptop, you've effectively got a single finger to do everything, which can get quite hectic in a live environment, if you want to change a lot of things at once.

[anarchosyn]

Well, now let an old blowhard give a go at this...

Originally I was 100% external, dealing in the CV/Din-sync realm (with a few basic midi boxes, but I entered into electronic music with a distaste for digital and midi in particular). I must also admit that I was 100% ignorant of how to even write a break beat with a drum program, I just knew I wanted to do it. I found the majority of my headaches stemmed from bad cables, dealing with 60 hz hum from crappy drum boxes, noise from older gear, etc. In retrospect, it all added an interesting character to my compositions, but I was never happy with the punch of my music.


Over the years, my knobbie studio became 100% virtual. My old headaches were gone, but new one's came in to replace them. Bugs, crashes, thin sound, crappy digital filters, etc.


here is my current (and quite fresh) studio setup:

Everything is cyclic...


External Gear:

*TX81Z (yamaha fm synth)
*Nord Modular Rack
*Sherman Filterbank (new)
*Frostwave Resonator (new)
*Waldorf Micro Q (new)
*DR.660 drum machine.
*Kawai XD-5 drum machine.
*ESI 32 sampler (paper weight).
* a few rack compressors of dubious quality (alesis and behringer)
* a few crap effex racks (midiverb 2, quadraverb GT, alesis wedge).
* some ebay stuff I'm about to buy (reverb effex mainly).
* USB Quattro (soon to be fire based).
* m-audio Studio Monitors (model number escapes me, not the budget version)
* Studio 64 xtc (multi port midi box made into a paperweight thanks to gibson)
* Bass Guitar
* PC 1.3 ghz p4
* Powerbook G4
* 2 mixers (both behringer, one being budget and small, the other is basically a mackie 1604)


Internal Gear:

* Reaktor
* SuperCollider
* Battery
* Cubase SL 2
* Plogue Bidule (great FFT manipulations available)
* (soon) Pluggo 3.1
* OSX 10.2.8
* smattering of free plugins (smart electronix, etc).
* Waves (pc)
* Soundforge (pc)
* Audition (pc) - hell, I work for adobe after all )
* Soundhack (AMAZING - couldn't live without this)
* other bits of odd kit.
* Absynth 2
* Live 2 (for fun, for now )

I'm actually at work, so this list may be incomplete, but it covers tha majority of my basis.

My routing is:

External gear -> Behringer mixer #1 (1604 clone) ->
USB Quattro -> G4 Powerbook ->
(maybe some supercollider stuff in here via JackOSX audio routing software) ->
Cubase SL 2's Mixer -> VST Effex.

Internal gear, hosted in cubase -> Cubase mixer.

Cubase SL/SX 2 can connect external effex into the mixer as insert
effects, so that's how I'm handling my filterboxes and external racks
(this changes on a track by track basis on whether I'm using them this way
or with my external gear via the "1604" aux sends).

ANYHOW,

Summed internal and external gear -> Quattro outputs ->
Behringer mixer #2 -> Behringer Compressor -> Studio Monitors.


How do I like this? It's fun. I have yet to write more than 16 bars of a pattern in Cubase SL, or really push this current setup, but that has a lot to do with other currents in my life (girlfriend, work, new room mates, rebuilding studio from one room to another). The design was laid out on paper last years, but only became reality recently (cubase is fairly fresh in my studio, on mac).

The mix between soft and hard is quite nice, and my softsynths sit nicely with my hardware, as do the drums. I can pick and choose whether I want to deal in the HW realm or SW per track, and this flexibility to move quickly between one foundation to another is exactly what I've been looking for.

Only downside is I must bounce all my external gear down to a single wav, as they come into a single stereo channel currently. This is because I'm using my powerbook both as a sequencer and recorder (I don't do my stuff live at the moment, but linearly and bounce my sonic sculptures down) when finished. Soon I'll be back up for live tweaking, when I migrate the Quattro to the PC and dedicate a Firwire device to my Mac.

Currently, the PC is out of the loop, but will be networked when I purchase a $5 cat 5 cable for ethernet communication (at which point it become a sample manipulator / mastering station).

[cut out]

i went from radio shack keyboard/drummachine and 4 track to sampler and MC 303 to sequence with (a mates) to sampler and computer to sequence with then to mainly computer using logic, which i was using for the last 3 years - only really using outboard stuff like effects to get that 'not all done in a computer sound'... however, this year it is all about taking it on the road for me, hence my delivery this morning of an mpc1000 and a nord micromodular...

i cant wait to get this shit up and running properly, just had an initial play today and i am so glad i dont need to go to the computer to make music any more... will still use computer in alot of different ways, but 80% of music making from now on is on boxes...

gotta say, even though i;ve used nord modulars before, hearing it in my own set up for the first time has made me realise how totally shit most soft-synths are... they are so weak compared to this baby, i am in love and going to have to buy another!

[anarchosyn]

Originally posted by Loz
hardware for me, definitely. you just cannot 'jam' with a computer, and yet with hardware, you can just play around until something good comes out.

*cough* ableton live *cough*..

[Loz]

maybe I should rephrase that

"I cannot jam with a computer"

for reasons I put in my second post.. I just can't get into it, can't feel it.

[JE:5]

I'm exactly the same, I just find it really tedius making music on computer. With hardware I can write all my patterns and then sequence it live and I have access to all the controls right there in front of me. With PC I have to write the patterns then link all the patterns together which I find really boring. I always end up sitting there with the same loop going on for ages deciding where to put in variations.

[anarchosyn]

Damn, I suck. I never did address your questions, did I? Ok, here is a shorter take on it...


[quote]Originally posted by FORMAT
[b]Hey fellow studioheads!

I would like to know how much of your music you do inside the computer only and how much hardware do you use these days - in other words, what your studio setup for production in 2004 looks like.
[quote]

Ok, this is how far I read last time.

What do you think just can't be replaced by virtual instruments?
I personally will never replace my guitar rig with virtual stuff - my stompboxes are definitely easier to tweak than mouse-clicking on the screen.

Why not buy a knob box? On the pedal tip, only a distortion pedal, or colorful/wonky vintage pedal with characteristics you can't replicate, would be on my "must be hardware" list. Everything else can be made / found in a far more insane manner via plugins (see grmtools, pluggo, reaktor, and destroyfx plugins for fun things to abuse guitars with).

I would be interested in paritcular to hear how you're going about
- Reverb
- Compression
- Equalizing

Inside the machine or not??

Reverb out 100%. Only decent computer reverbs are convolution reverbs, and these will eat cycles like candy on most modern systems. Sure, you can find some passable crap via vst/au/etc, but the good stuff is still general hardware.

Compression can be done very well virtually. I hear, but have never seen with my own eyes, that the BEST compressors are still hardware. Keep in mind, I'm referencing hardware that would run in the $1000+ range. I'd personally use the Wave's compressors before even a $700 hardware compressor (particulary the multiband compressors that twerk swears by).

EQ can be done AMAZINGLY well via virtual methods - but the imperfection of hardware lends a certain color (that honestly shouldn't be there) to the sound. Some EQ plugin manufactures replicate this kind of bad/good quality to get signature EQ sounds, but I've never been one to get hot and bothered over stuff like this.
Generally, when I want an eq, any will do as long as I can vary the Q, have a decent cut/boost range and pinpoint the freq range I'm after.

[komakid]

there are some nice reverbs for the computer. i like the rverb from waves or the naturalverb from steinberg inspires me, too (it sounds a little bit like the lexicon 220 - of course not really, but it goes in that direction).
from the hardware reverbs i love the URSA major verb, it makes so fabolous sounds, great box. i used it two years ago for a whole recording session with a band. it's the best for endless growing spaces ...
has anyone used the URSA space delay. i didn't, yet, only heard the sounds that it produces,,,,, i have to get one

[KaOz]

ill get new equipment soon...

finally 2x mmt8
yamaha fs1r
motu 828 mkII
Behringer midi controller ( BCF motorfader series )
eventide eclipse

+ my software

dont need more

[anarchosyn]

Kaoz. how is the eclipse and fs1r in your opinion? None of my friends ever liked the FS1R, but when they demo'ed it for me my jaw dropped at its ability to create such dynamically evolving patches (what is the root of that, btw?).

That was over 6 years ago though, or so it feels.. since then I've discovered other gear that will do that for me. Even still, it seems like a very cool box.

[KaOz]

most people are to lame to handle it. u can do alot with

its good, get one

[phaedrus]

I use a computer for everything: sequencing mastering, the whole bunch. I don't have that much experience with hardware except for one synth I used to mess around with. I'm very satisfied with the way it sounds, although I don't know if it could have sounded better had I used hardware.

As far as the intuitive part is concerned, I've found several ways to get around it. For one, using a decent midi controller, and second being creative with plugins. There are several plugins that can give an entirely new dimension to your sequences. For instance the sonic destructor and filtrator (TC works) can really turn a standard drum/synth loop upside down. Third, some synths have a randomize function (Discodsp discovery). Just by inserting a note and randomizing the knobs, you can get to most amazing sounds.

[Loz]

with randomisation.. do you even need a producer to do anything, just click randomise and instant hit.

[KaOz]

i forgot the Schoeps microphones ( cm 60 )

[komakid]

Originally posted by KaOz
i forgot the Schoeps microphones ( cm 60 )

great microphones, but to expensive for me ....

[KaOz]

got 2 for 650

[FORMAT]

Hey,
thanks for your input! Even though anarchosyn recommended an external box for Reverb, I'll try out Logic Pro with the Space Designer first - one of the main disadvantages of external hardware is all the cables and routing isn't it? So much more convenient to do it in the laptop...

But I agree - knobs are much more direct.
That's why I'm observing the Korg electribe thread - I should think that you get much better results a lot quicker from such a device despite the fact that all could be done with internal samplers/gadgets as well (Ableton ....) ---- or does the electribe do stuff that can't be done in the computer???

[KaOz]

u cant do everything with a puter