A USELESS NERD DEBATE TO WASTE YOUR TIME
Comments
-
exactly that! it seems that there is always something going on! ahhaha few years back I was able to dedicate more time to my music, but I sucked at it, now that I am better I have no time to just lose myself in the music without thinking "I must finish this" or "I have 2 more hours than I have that thing to do today". hahah
I'd really like one day to do it full time, I'd invest one day of the week just to play around and make weird stuff!
0 -
Absolutely there are good arguments for both "sides". A friend of mine makes live acts and he uses only hardware, digital and some devices analog + a yamaha mixer, he has most important controls right in front of him and it just works for him.
1 -
To do with learning new synths, It took me 2 days to learn Syntakt, and once you know 1 of the Elektron boxes, you know them all. Im a busy father of 3 kids & a tech worker, and I had plenty of time to figure it out, and I also avoid devices or systems that Im worried might take too much time to figure out. I mean if I learned Maschine, the time spent learning and troubleshooting and routing that software was a bit greater than the time spent learning Syntakt.
Ive been on the sampler side of things for a long time (mostly 20+ years), but the way the industry is moving lately motivated me to look out for the long term viability of my instruments and I want to make sure not only that I have a great instrument, but that it continues to be a great instrument into the future. So my consideration about how to approach this is not only based on musical acumen, but the stability and longevity of the tech itself.
3 -
again great argument! great great argument! this is one of the things that a lot of hardware musician pointed out to me over the years, the longevity of the tools.
Now I'm not just talking about drums machines, I am going a little bit off-topic, a lot of people told me to consider a workstation or set-up that doesn't rely on computers, because regardless of how the technology moves, those hardwares will be always musical instruments, which is the most objective truth, for example now I'd like to update my OS, but guess what? I am scared in case stuff starts to break down, (it happened before and I had few months of horror), if I had a stand alone set-up I'd be less worried.
2 -
Yeah, originally I didnt really think much about the longevity of the software but Ive been burned a couple times now, so now a large part of my consideration when choosing a new instrument is longevity, reliability, usefulness.
The basic idea of buying samples or sample-based instruments for a serious role in my studio and paying premium for what is ultimately a much more limited instrument doesnt seem like a good long term strategy, so Im going more and more into the hardware drum machine/synth world to try to avoid scheduled obsolescence, etc.
Yeah — the hardware Im buying now will continue running and if it dies ill fix it, but nobody is going to make hostile changes to the PC OS and make it less useful/broken for me. Upgrading an OS can indeed be a nightmare, not to mention when OS vendors make unilateral changes without respecting or even notifying customers. Got to build a resilient band/studio! : )
1 -
very true!
1 -
guys it is incredible how coincidences happens, out of no-where yesterday is seen this video on my YouTube homepage, I guess this discussion was in the air, I like how he been reasonable, I respect that!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Swkqurg-LM
0 -
I completely understand the guy on YouTube's position. For many years my focus was on hardware and live performance only so my world revolved around my Helix. What changed for me was COVID. In that time period there was no real live performances going on, so I turned back to production work on a computer. Post-COVID some things never returned in the same way. Live bands took on a smaller role because they were expensive. Likewise live band performance can be time consuming and inconvenient. So I moved on to do things I saw other large production people like Disney and some major artists who were facing the same problem of keeping live performance costs more reasonable and manageable. And that lead me to NI and backing tracks for a smaller, more efficient, and better quality (my opinion) live stage production.
At this point I don't think I could ever go back. Live stage productions will always have considerable downsides even beyond costs. Personnel issues not the least of them. Ego's, availability, level of commitment and dedication are major problems, especially if you perform regularly. Setup and breakdown time are always a struggle in a live band. All of which are dramatically improved by working with backing tracks where it's much easier because there's less people involved and easier to make changes to personnel in a rapid fashion. Pretty much all the same benefits achieved in electronic or hip hop live productions which tended to take over the dominance of live band performances.
I don't agree so much with the poster's "art" concept because I think you can do it on either. That's all personal and it comes down to whether or not you're capable of being creative and thinking outside the box to create something unique and emotionally powerful (in your opinion). For myself that's a no-brainer. For myself my stage production is a direct representation of what I envisioned in my head in the first place with little to no variation from it.
1 -
I think he was saying the same thing as you, I think he meant that hardware was his form of "art", while for someone else can be a laptop and mouse, for me is the hybrid workflow that I have with NI software hardware stuff, it scratches the itch of being hands-on and the efficiency when I need to get stuff done fast with a double click.
At the end anyone needs to find his balance, between productivity, efficiency, enjoyment, discovery and learning, I believe that's what's makes the "art", I think the guy on the video acknowledged that.
0 -
Art is what you make it, and how you make it is up to you. A truer statement you cannot find. Of course its always good to think about the longevity of your art supplies so that your "make art out of anything" philosophy doesnt wind up being short-lived lol, but I generally agree.
Edit: its weird: NI marketing sent me a sales email with a few links including one to "hardware vs software: debate" and that link sent me here. They email "debate" links to people now??
1 -
Why not both!
Elektron Analog Rytm MKII kind of has a foot in both worlds - it is a drum synth, but also a sampler (the sampler has a high frequency rolloff though)
However, if I had to choose only one or the other, I'd pick a sampler. PCM audio can reproduce any sound you can record, whereas a synth always has some sort of limited sound pallette compared to that.
2 -
I am in the same camp. I'd pick that too. Obviously if you can, both is better!!
0 -
yeh true, art is not the tool, even though the tool may impact the art, the art would exist without, but it could be different. whit a different paint brush, maybe Picasso would had putted the nose in the right place! ahah
anyway, I think you where here before, at the beginning of the discussion I think.
0 -
On the video:
The conclusion was one all should embrace: it is not the tools that matter, it is the results.
His argument for why he uses hardware is the best argument: because it's fun.
This is the same reason I use a computer (with one versatile hardware controller).I also agree with the idea that we should try to limit our choices. It took me a while to escape the mentality of wanting to own every type of compressor, reverb, saturator, etc. But I have reduced what I use, and might never buy another of most effects types. Despite what the marketing blurb might say, no one is producing ‘game changing’ effects plugins. We are in an age of amazing software, most anything that comes out now is just another flavour of the same thing. It's rare that something radically different is made. I have an Ableton template set up with effects in place that get inserted automatically on specific channels and I don't even think about swapping them out most of the time.
On synths vs samplers and versatility.
Synths and samplers have different strengths. The tweakability of the base sound in a synth is superior. The ability to fairly easily get new base sounds into a sampler is superior. Neither makes one type of instrument inherently better.
Though I am a preset guy and probably always will be, curiosity has me learning synthesis. The variety of sound you can get out of a simple subtractive synthesiser is quite amazing.
What works best for me may not work best for you, but if I can have only one I'm picking the synth.
1 -
I liked what he said in the video too, and same as you, a great controller for me is a must because is how I do most of my music (software), but in my set-up I always had at least one hardware, doesn't have to be a moog or a Juno ecc.. just something usable and simple, because sometimes I want the same fun as the guy in the video, but 90% of the time I don't, and I have more fun with a controller and a VST.
It's amazing how every one has a reasonable reason behind their workflow (or desired workflow), and I also believe that the quest to find your own method it is part of the journey in music, and the musician you'll become.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 18 Welcome
- 1.7K Hangout
- 67 NI News
- 895 Tech Talks
- 4.6K Native Access
- 17.8K Komplete
- 2.2K Komplete General
- 4.8K Komplete Kontrol
- 6.3K Kontakt
- 1.1K Reaktor
- 407 Battery 4
- 918 Guitar Rig & FX
- 466 Massive X & Synths
- 1.5K Other Software & Hardware
- 6.4K Maschine
- 8.2K Traktor
- 8.2K Traktor Software & Hardware
- Check out everything you can do
- Create an account
- See member benefits
- Answer questions
- Ask the community
- See product news
- Connect with creators