Site Search   TV Channel 1  Add this Player to my Google page. Add this Player to your MySpace page or personal website.
 Videos   Songs   Blogs   Forums   Podcast 
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: someone help me with my hardware vs software dilemna

  1. #1


    Agree? Yes No

    Unhappy someone help me with my hardware vs software dilemna

    ok...i make all my sounds and music virtual...the thing is, i want to use more hardware because i feel that as flexible and infinite the virtual environment seems, i just feel like id be lossing valuable experience with hardware, not to mention nostalgia.

    but here in lies the problem...i dont have much to spend on a whole plethora of gear, so im apprehensive about buying that say "insert cool gear name here", but i just have this feeling that as soon as i explore it...ill say "eeh...this sounds exsactly like something i can synthesis on my computer, what a waste of money" and then i wont really benefit from having it in the first place.

    but this can be the reality of it, other wise there wouldnt be a market out they for hardware. all i want is a trusty digital synth that i can customize and explore with unique results, and preferably a module, ---but this isnt my specific question exsactly...my question is for someone else to explain some of the benifits of using hardware as opposed to software..(excluding the obvious midi control and sequencing). im strictly talking about difference in sound, character and quality...

    i do have a JUNO 60, i like it a lot, its simple and has character...

  2. #2


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    software: good for computer savy people, cheaper, great interfaces, you have to reboot when you make big changes, looks less cooler than hardwares, portable, & crashes.
    hardware: hands on tools, expensive, take up space, looks cooler than software, less crashes, and better for live.

    Just like people still collect the 80s digital synths oppose to analog or VA, once true fans for certain market exists, it usually will not go away. There will be always market for hardware.
    Some people prefer apples over oranges.
    www.myspace.com/pswk
    www.popstarwhokills.com (ElectroRock)
    www.myspace.com/youngjoon (Breaks)
    www.myspace.com/grep (IDM)
    www.myspace.com/requiemnoise (Industrial)

    \"There is no abstract art. You must always start with something. Afterward you can remove all traces of reality.\"
    - Pablo Picasso

    \"The world only goes round by misunderstanding.\"
    - Charles Baudelaire

    \"It is quality, not quantity.\"

    \"why is it feel like a greatful dead show here? like that hippe that constantly talks about one band and how they changed their lives.\"

    PLEASE NO MORE \"I am a robot music.\" You are not a robot. Learn to program better like human beings.\"

    Electro is House music. If you don\'t like House music, please don\'t put down Electro, because it is trendy to say it. It might suprise you that Electro and House music were invented by Gay Black Americans in the mid 80s. They weren\'t invented by the beatless people who like to coin new trendy phrases.

    I am so tired of \"I want to be Depeche Mode or Erasure for the last 25 years.\" I hope I am not the only one. 25 years is a quarter of century and about a 1/3 of human life. If a person spends a 1/3 of his or her life having the same tastes, I don\'t know if that person acquired enough information to have an interesting life or has a problem understanding he or she is no longer a teenager.

    So called artists who never change, why do you call yourself an artist again?

  3. #3


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    ok that reassuring, kinda what i always thought

    so the reality of virtual synths is in fact that i will really be able to obtain any quality of sound,fx, whatever without out the need of hardware...and also that i very well may not find much use in hardware if i am afraid of the whole "ehh, this sounds just like something i can process on a computer, what a waste of money" the fine line distinguishing virtual systhesis from hardware will only become less recognizable...over time

    thx
    the music will blind you

  4. #4


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    yes... in fact, i no longer use any hardware synths, but you have to spend more time treating your mix.
    www.myspace.com/pswk
    www.popstarwhokills.com (ElectroRock)
    www.myspace.com/youngjoon (Breaks)
    www.myspace.com/grep (IDM)
    www.myspace.com/requiemnoise (Industrial)

    \"There is no abstract art. You must always start with something. Afterward you can remove all traces of reality.\"
    - Pablo Picasso

    \"The world only goes round by misunderstanding.\"
    - Charles Baudelaire

    \"It is quality, not quantity.\"

    \"why is it feel like a greatful dead show here? like that hippe that constantly talks about one band and how they changed their lives.\"

    PLEASE NO MORE \"I am a robot music.\" You are not a robot. Learn to program better like human beings.\"

    Electro is House music. If you don\'t like House music, please don\'t put down Electro, because it is trendy to say it. It might suprise you that Electro and House music were invented by Gay Black Americans in the mid 80s. They weren\'t invented by the beatless people who like to coin new trendy phrases.

    I am so tired of \"I want to be Depeche Mode or Erasure for the last 25 years.\" I hope I am not the only one. 25 years is a quarter of century and about a 1/3 of human life. If a person spends a 1/3 of his or her life having the same tastes, I don\'t know if that person acquired enough information to have an interesting life or has a problem understanding he or she is no longer a teenager.

    So called artists who never change, why do you call yourself an artist again?

  5. #5


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    yeah i remember you saying "its all virtual, its so flexible". agreed. why would you have spend more time treating the mix? as apposed to less time doing so with hardware?

    i suppose the main reason why i would like to gain exp with hardware would be for the pupose of hands on learning of sound synthesis, but then again i suppose things like Reaktor could teach me all that...

    i suppose im just not used to the fact that virtual sysnthesis is, well, a newer technology that seemingly makes hardware obsolete...but that not entirley true of course...it just that, well, i suppose i dont kknow what my problem really is...in the years to come virtual sysnthesis is gonna advance so much and ill be there when it happen, why look back?

    when i have money, i try out more hardware...till then...it VST
    the music will blind you

  6. #6


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    That's a hard question. My all-time favorite synth is the Juno 106 for learning how to program. Then you can apply what you've learned on the VSTs, etc. But you've already got a Juno 60. That's very close to the 106 - less midi.

    I use both. But with each passing day, I use virtual more. Why? Because I can automate every knob/setting. That's power. I'll still use my Virus/Juno/909/etc because they're hooked-up and ready to go. And they provide a slightly different texture than virtual.

    Back to your question. Two schools of thought. One, something modern.. say like a Virus or Nord, etc. All will midi and multi-timb. operation so you can get the most out of one piece of gear plus the added value of having knobs. Two, you could go vintage. There's plenty of choices out there and and I'm sure a thread on this board about favorite boards. Me, I'd vote for Roland SH 101, Juno 106, Jupiters, etc. You can also get the rack versions of some of those with optional programmers. The Roland MKS-50, 70 and 80 are nice choices. The programmers have all the knobs.

    You've got the Juno 60. Learn that. And perhaps, you can branch-out from there. Does your 60 have a midi retrofit or converter? It's a nice fat-sounding synth! But only does one sound at a time.

    Another cool 80's synth is the Sequencial Six-Trak. It doesn't have tons of knobs, but you can program it from a set of buttons and one knob. It's the world's first six-part multi-timb. analog synth with midi. So, it's like having six, mono analog synths with midi. But, wouldn't make it a first choice. But certainly a second or third vintage synth.

    Good luck.
    www.tristraum.com

  7. #7


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    no idont have a midi convert for the juno., all my midi is as well virtual, if anything right now id obtain a midi controller such as a simple usb keyboard, but then again i would really opt for a rack mount synth module simply becasue theyre way cool lokking and i like the idea of sound and music simply coming from a box...its all premeditated for me so conducting and composing music via a bunch of weird looking maschines that you man like a cockpit or something really appeals to me...plus it shows i have control over those damn maschines...damn them
    the music will blind you

  8. #8


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    I am kind of in the same dilemma...I am into the computer music making scene and have little experience in the "hardware gear." I was thinking of branching the two together if and when I ever take it to the next level and perform "live." I just started learning the "ins and Outs" of Reason 2.5; but , I read in this month's issue of a UK magazine that i can't use Reason with "gear"..something about Reason doesnt have a midi-out , i think....Has anyone read or know about this???? Any ideas. I am open to any suggestion...

  9. #9


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    Originally posted by djiice30
    I am kind of in the same dilemma...I am into the computer music making scene and have little experience in the "hardware gear." I was thinking of branching the two together if and when I ever take it to the next level and perform "live." I just started learning the "ins and Outs" of Reason 2.5; but , I read in this month's issue of a UK magazine that i can't use Reason with "gear"..something about Reason doesnt have a midi-out , i think....Has anyone read or know about this???? Any ideas. I am open to any suggestion...
    What it boils down to is this: you can control the synths within reason via any midi controller, but you can't use reason to sequence outboard gear. That's not really a big deal however, as you can rewire reason to another sequencer (ie Cubase, Nuendo, Sonar).

    That way you can run whatever sequences you want off of Reason and at the same time control outboard gear, use VSTs, record vocals\other audio all at the same time, which is exactly what I do. It works great for me...

    It really comes down to a matter of preference though. If you're more comfortable with hardware, use it. Same w\ software obviously.

    I've been using more and more software recently, but I really can't do without my Microwave XTK, or Virus.... I love em' both and could never get rid of them!
    . Elias .
    Dubok

    www.dubok.net

  10. #10


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    (this is just my subjective opinion, yours may vary)

    software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software software

    look at all of the cool software goodness out there:

    Reaktor 4 (has some incredible sounding ensembles)
    Native Instruments (FM7, Absynth2, Pro-53, Vokator, etc)
    Ohmboyz (Quad Frohmage, Predatohm, Melohman, etc)
    Reason
    Buzz
    Waves (anything)
    Novation K-Station/BassStation
    Gigasampler
    Phatmatik Pro
    CSound
    GRM Tools
    Max/MSP
    Audiomulch
    Sonar
    SynthEdit
    this just scratches the surface

    i really do think that hardware is already pretty much obsolete. you can't perfectly emulate an Access Virus C in software, yet - but i think that's more due to Access not wanting to lose sales of the hardware than technical limitations. there is a whole world of sounds out there that you can't emulate in hardware period (for example: the Reaktor GrainCloud synth). and i do think that software is evolving at a much faster rate than hardware... in fact i can't think of a keyboard that's really caused a stir in the last few yeras, but i can think of tons of VST plugins. the future of synthesis isn't in more accurately simulating Juno 106's...

    anyhow, i'm sure there are a lot of people who want mostly old analog-sounding patches, and there always will be (it's sort of like recording to 2-inch tape), more power to them!

    - andrew
    http://www.irismusic.com
    http://www.alphaconspiracy.com

  11. #11


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    ah it has been reaninmated: yeah ive always felt tha software was the way to go. it just that still for some reason i feel compell to more versatillit wilth hardware, but i guess i cant get any more vesatile with software unless of course i intergrated it with hardware. ireally want hardware to learn of, but i suppose i could keep using my prime computer set up add an extra monitor (then it'll definity look cool) and get a decent midi controller....and then just add lots of nifty software and plug ins. i guess id only buy a piece of hardware that produce a sound that a computer can absolutely NOT replicate: that probably be an acoustic instrument that would require a mic, or simply like mention before a virus synth cuz those do sound unique...
    the music will blind you

  12. #12


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    i agree, software elimates the limits that hardware imposes. The only limit is the programmer's imagination. oh, and xeons rule.

  13. #13


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    And money for software licenses.

    I've participated in this debate before, and I'll make the point I did before and then run away again before PSWK whacks me with a rolled up newspaper:

    Find me a 20 year old software program that still works. Hell, find me a 10 year old software program that still works. My newest synth is 5 years old. My oldest is 23 years old. Whatever their limits, they still work fine. A hardware synthesizer declines to a known point of obsolescence and levels off. They are then at that level of usefulness indefinitely. But computer software keeps right on going further and further out of date.

    Now, if you have lots of money to upgrade all of your soft synths every few years, then this is not a limitation for you. Soft synths are wonderful technology, and I have nothing against them personally. I just can't afford to get into them and keep current with them.
    ====
    DAVID VESEL -- synthetic music for humans
    On the Electrogarden Network
    Official Web Site
    Your mileage may vary.

  14. #14


    Agree? Yes No

    Default

    david that is a really good point. i didnt think about that. only time willl tell tho...
    the music will blind you

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

EGN Keywords

,

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


ELECTROGARDEN | ARTIST NETWORK | TRACKS | MORE TRACKS | ARTISTS | MORE ARTISTS
NEWS | LIFE IS MUSIC | MAINSTREAM ARTICLES | ARTICLES | REVIEWS | FORUM | ARCHIVE | STORE | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE
THE ELECTROGARDEN NETWORK is a Trademark of ELECTROGARDEN.COM.
Copyright © 1999-2018 ELECTROGARDEN.COM, all rights reserved
Subscribers to Electrogarden Network Forums Feed Tweet this page! TWEET