Page 2 of 4

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:57 am
by effector
using software doesn't necessarily mean losing tactile control, and for many purposes, like recording and editing, it's just a far more practical solution than tape. sure, you can spend hours calibrating your tape machine and praying that it won't break at a critical moment, not to mention trying to keep it synchronized with everything else in your studio, or you can suck it up and join the rest of the 21st century.

also, if you really have to have 'lo fi' sound, you can get it without a tape machine, you just have to WORK a little harder to get it. there's no hiding your laziness when you record digitally :wink:

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:11 pm
by Mr Rich
effector wrote:if you really have to have 'lo fi' sound, you can get it without a tape machine, you just have to WORK a little harder to get it. there's no hiding your laziness when you record digitally :wink:
The ironic thing is, that you can gat a 'more lo-fi than lo-fi' sound with modern systems; Digidesign's Lo-Fi plug-in for one, or if you need to be more subtle, McDSP's Analogue Channel package is brilliant.

If you only want lo-fi, then old is fine. If you need the best of both worlds, you need to either spend a fortune on super-high-end analogue, or go digital.

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:45 pm
by Tek
Got to be soft.

I started off with hardware and what a pain in the bum that was.

Then went to software and it was easy peasy but the sound just wasn't there . . .

So I bought some hardware and yes . . . . I remember why I changed!

Still I can sample the hardware and bung it in - and it looks soooo cool. But then its heavy, and takes up loads of space, and needs wires - lots of them, and midi cables - lots of them, and interfaces, and timers, and clock syncs, and racks (more space) but . . . oh yer they look good!

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:49 pm
by Tek
Just a quick note - I love Reason but hate Cubase as they never seem to run together - so thats maybe both love and hate both hardware and software! ! !

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:09 pm
by pour_furets
My earliest experiences with electronic music were playing with .wav files in a rudimentary wave editor- might have been an early version of Sound Forge, I don't remember. This was in the mid-90s. From there I moved on to using an early version of Cakewalk- before it involved audio or anything like that- to sequence hardware instruments. Some years later I purchased Cubase 3.7r2, the first version for Windows that would accommodate virtual instruments. I read the hype on the box and frankly didn't believe it. I simply used the program like I had been using Cakewalk before- sequencing my growing collection of hardware. In 2001 I finally got a computer that would allow me to run software instruments efficiently and I was quite impressed by their capabilities. I was learning more and more about CSound at the time and working with several free VSTis from the internet. I was mixing these with my hardware instruments, but still mainly using hardware. I had a friend that was obsessed with Reason, but I just didn't dig it because I didn't feel it was flexible enough. I kept eyeing Reaktor thinking that would be the program for me. Not long after, I did finally get a copy of Reaktor along with Kontakt (Musician's Friend employee discount yay!). Present day and the moral of this epic...I still use a mix of hardware and software, but I don't feel that either is superior or that they are mutually exclusive of one another. It's all just tools for making music and it's up to the musician to use them to their fullest. If I had to strip my set up down to just one tool, I would choose my computer running Reaktor because this is the environment I find that lets me explore all of my sonic meanderings as I think of them. But that's me and the way I operate- to each their own. That's the cool thing about electronic music- there are about as many ways to make it as there are people making it.

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:29 pm
by rawnoiseattack
Yeah, my main reason for the post was just to see which of the two people prefered. I don't think one is better than the other, I just prefer hardware... and can't seem to get along with software very well.

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:59 am
by reptar
I don't like software instruments particularly, they don't inspire me at all compared to hardware. I love recording and editing in protools and live though. I don't think you can really ask who likes hardware and who likes software, it always ends up with most people wanting to say both.

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 6:19 am
by ex_action_figure
You have to find the right software,
As far as sequencing software is infinitely better as far as limits (or lack of) and interface, I mean it really doesn't get any better then mouse and keyboard for arranging recorded data hook up an mpc midi pad and that’s all you need

When it comes to softsynths it all depends
There is alot of software out there that does things that hardware doesn't do, and if it did it would cost $5000 I mean look at reaktor
also there is alot of software that emulates old synths, the best emulation of vintage synths I have heard is in software(moog modularV, arp2600V mini moog V)
But everyone loves knobs and actually tweaking them I like hardware synths better then I like software synths however dismissing all software is kinda dumb, in the end it's all about sounds.


Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 10:30 am
by THM
Hard or soft ?
:idea: Just try to use the best of both worlds.

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 11:24 pm
by zukskywalker
Not enough choices in the poll. My favorite keyboards are the Yamaha Concert Grand and the Hammond B3. Hands down. Period.
Will I ever gig with either again? Highly doubtful. Enter NI B4 and Ivory, a different kind of pain for sure, but isn't that where we're going as a society? Film has just about vanished, drafting tables are a thing of the past, and even videotape editing has all but disappeared. Soft MIDI is a godsend if you're ready for the complexities.
(I still have my C64 and a bunch of early Commodore music software. I knew this was coming.)

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 12:52 am
by rawnoiseattack
In regards to "not enough choices in the poll". I did this to get an honest opinion on which one you prefer. If I put up a "both" column...I don't think that there would be an accurate depiction of which one you prefer. I know alot of you use both and like both. My poll was to see which one you like better...

By the way, I still can't stand using software myself....

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:43 am
by jp8
"Hardware's the truth, software's the spoof"

Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 5:34 pm
by garranimal
For synth work I need to have instant access to physical sliders, knobs and buttons. The mouse doesn't get me off....I would need to buy keyboard controllers for the softsynths anyway....

Now, that said, it is very interesting to note I am relying very heavily on software for my sampling needs - it is absolutely godsend and I couldn't imagine my life without it now.

Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 7:06 pm
by effector
i think a 'both' choice would have ruined the poll, since that's what everybody would choose! :wink:

Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2005 5:49 am
by Architecture
I like working with software for polishing up tracks that were made on a fun hardware machine or software program (like Freebee, check it out). I can't making the actual tracks in a computer sequencer, I either have to play it live, or put into my EA-1's sequencer, and have fun with it.

Initial creation is way easier on hardware than software. Another favorate program of mine is Fasttracker 2, It seems so much more intuitive than using piano roll. plus i like lo-fi 8 bit sampling, so its perfect for it.

So both, but for different things.