 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forums - Drums / rhythms / programming
Subject: computer vs. hardware
Original Message Date: 14-Jun-00 @ 05:51 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
oh dam, hit the return button, randomly
sorry guys...
let us talk about this topic:
in my opinion is using computer programs for creating samples (soft synths) not very useful.
1. for making music you need an INSTRUMENT you can rely to personally, appearence, functions vitalise your mind, a flat, shivering screen harms your creatrivity..
2. i don't like monitors! i have got a doepfer schaltwerk for composing in midi, much better than cubase
o.k. i agree: sequencing on a computer is standart, you have got better support and more offers.
i started to make music with my amiga (protracker!), still one of my cherriest machines, i do not doubt wheter it is easier to get a cheerful result on your comp than with your soundmachine, it is!
i am asking myself right now if music isn't in any realtion to machines, probably....
maybe i just this confusing tap is just a reaction on the current developement of the music market.
yet i am sure you cannot reproduce the sound of a music machine with a comp. (hmm..pulsar...letting the hardware in your co). the reason is as simply as hard to believe: hardware-problem, computer simulate, m-machines (of course! analogue babies, i love them) produce!
it could be that i am talking a lot of shit..in your perspective... i know what i am saying is true for me.. so let me have your comments...
sorry guys...
let us talk about this topic:
in my opinion is using computer programs for creating samples (soft synths) not very useful.
1. for making music you need an INSTRUMENT you can rely to personally, appearence, functions vitalise your mind, a flat, shivering screen harms your creatrivity..
2. i don't like monitors! i have got a doepfer schaltwerk for composing in midi, much better than cubase
o.k. i agree: sequencing on a computer is standart, you have got better support and more offers.
i started to make music with my amiga (protracker!), still one of my cherriest machines, i do not doubt wheter it is easier to get a cheerful result on your comp than with your soundmachine, it is!
i am asking myself right now if music isn't in any realtion to machines, probably....
maybe i just this confusing tap is just a reaction on the current developement of the music market.
yet i am sure you cannot reproduce the sound of a music machine with a comp. (hmm..pulsar...letting the hardware in your co). the reason is as simply as hard to believe: hardware-problem, computer simulate, m-machines (of course! analogue babies, i love them) produce!
it could be that i am talking a lot of shit..in your perspective... i know what i am saying is true for me.. so let me have your comments...
Message 11/48 15-Jun-00 @ 01:14 PM - RE: computer vs. hardware
k:
this (computer-based timing) is something i've been worrying about, cause i just upgraded my setup to have my pentium (200MMX/64MB) running cubase (w/ MOTU midiexpress) for sequencing (previously it was a w-30 internal sequencer... i just _love_ grids full of numbers...)
anyway it's not up and running yet (i need to look into insurance before moving stuff into my apartment), but i'm starting to dread the first time i use it... is there anything i can do to solve this? i'm not doing digital audio or anything, and i'd have no problem wiping my pc and reserving it solely for cubase (and sample editing) if this is going to help, but i'm afraid there's nothing i can do... will an older ver. of cubase help? or should i pick up an atari? i don't really have tons of cash to put into a sequencer (it's all going into patchbays and snakes), but at the same time anything but rock-solid timing is not going to be acceptible. i'm only using it for midi... if a 386 can handle that, can't my pentium? or does the way windows work fuck everything up (i've got w95)?
anyway, any hints/tips/advice would be greatly appreciated, even if it's only "you're screwed, you can't fix windows"... then at least i'd know for sure.
thanks
this (computer-based timing) is something i've been worrying about, cause i just upgraded my setup to have my pentium (200MMX/64MB) running cubase (w/ MOTU midiexpress) for sequencing (previously it was a w-30 internal sequencer... i just _love_ grids full of numbers...)
anyway it's not up and running yet (i need to look into insurance before moving stuff into my apartment), but i'm starting to dread the first time i use it... is there anything i can do to solve this? i'm not doing digital audio or anything, and i'd have no problem wiping my pc and reserving it solely for cubase (and sample editing) if this is going to help, but i'm afraid there's nothing i can do... will an older ver. of cubase help? or should i pick up an atari? i don't really have tons of cash to put into a sequencer (it's all going into patchbays and snakes), but at the same time anything but rock-solid timing is not going to be acceptible. i'm only using it for midi... if a 386 can handle that, can't my pentium? or does the way windows work fuck everything up (i've got w95)?
anyway, any hints/tips/advice would be greatly appreciated, even if it's only "you're screwed, you can't fix windows"... then at least i'd know for sure.
thanks
Message 12/48 15-Jun-00 @ 02:05 PM - RE: computer vs. hardware
Software or Hardware?
The new Creamware sampler and modular synth cards plus Yamahas PLG cards could be the way to go...hardware making the sounds and software for what its good at - editing and storing.
The new Creamware sampler and modular synth cards plus Yamahas PLG cards could be the way to go...hardware making the sounds and software for what its good at - editing and storing.
Message 13/48 16-Jun-00 @ 10:03 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
Everything in the PC, I don't think so. Maybe in a couple of years. I mean, try running a sequencer, a soft sampler, one softsynth and plug-ins and see what happens. That doesn't mean the pc is not usefull, just see it as another tool in your rig. If you're broke , just get Fruity and go nuts, it's a great program. And you'll still use it when you get a hardware sampler.
Message 14/48 17-Jun-00 @ 09:53 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
You would get a lot more satisfaction out of something you can touch w/ something other than a mouse.Besides computers have a fatal flaw(@ least 4 me),latency,not to mention crap feel in the timing.Maybe if all you know is the computer it might be ok.For me I started sequencing on a roland W-30 back in '89.B4 that I just used a drum machine and an arppegiator.So I can't stand the fucking computer.This friend of mine who owns or has owned about every piece of hardware and also every computer seq. says for computers the Atari wins hands down.
Message 15/48 17-Jun-00 @ 09:31 PM - RE: computer vs. hardware
I use a Latronic Notron as master and a Roland 80 slaved to it. plenty of tracks, no timing issues. Yes it cost a bit much but it all works tight. Also the interfaces are well designed. Well designed Roland and SUPERB AS FUCK Notron. Notron friendly buddy sequencer. Yes. Allrighty folks.
Message 17/48 18-Jun-00 @ 01:35 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
id have to say you all are crazy if you cant at least agree software is just as good as hardware.
its a huge pain in the ass to use my MPC and have to step back through the pattern to find a beat i want to fall on a different step. and then lets say i want it 2 steps after a hihat, so then i have to find where thats located...etc etc...lots of work on a small screen
whereas with something like any freeware pc sequencer program, you can have a nice grid with all instruments layed out before you. at a glance click or unclick a step. its just so much faster to work
with at least 75% of professional users (lame term i know) using programs such as logic and cubase etc, that has to say something about them.
sometimes hardware makes things harder but lets you come up with different ideas etc. all has its place, but the arguments about timing and not being able to make good tracks....come on now...
its a huge pain in the ass to use my MPC and have to step back through the pattern to find a beat i want to fall on a different step. and then lets say i want it 2 steps after a hihat, so then i have to find where thats located...etc etc...lots of work on a small screen
whereas with something like any freeware pc sequencer program, you can have a nice grid with all instruments layed out before you. at a glance click or unclick a step. its just so much faster to work
with at least 75% of professional users (lame term i know) using programs such as logic and cubase etc, that has to say something about them.
sometimes hardware makes things harder but lets you come up with different ideas etc. all has its place, but the arguments about timing and not being able to make good tracks....come on now...
Message 18/48 18-Jun-00 @ 07:13 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
Stubborn fuck is me. I used to think Cubase *wasn't* sent from hell. Oh well, I've taken a strange route. Can't go telling everyone to use the setup i do (although having *those two* pieces of hardware right there is unbeatable for me) because that would be a bit rude. Use what gets you the result you seek, ideally with minimum of headache & long-winded processes.
Message 19/48 08-Jul-00 @ 01:43 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
Espoo2
Posts: 505
Link?: No link
File?: No file
Hmmm.... I love all my software.... RAM is a bitch though... but if the mouse is your problem, get a phat boy.... real-time knobs to twiddle your softsynths with, and a midi keyboard to trigger the samples... works for me...
Message 20/48 12-Jul-00 @ 02:48 AM - RE: computer vs. hardware
where do I get Cubase and other good software?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
There are 48 total messages for this topic
Reply to Thread
You need to register/login to use the forum.
Click here to Signup or Login !
[you'll be brought right back to this point after signing up]
Back to Forum
