New gear Vs exploring existing gear

[unfiltered420]

Originally Posted by Mefistophelees

I have a bunch of synths and they're all great but I'm finding I have become a bit of a generalist, I can get sounds out of any of them but don't know any of them in great detail.

I bought quite a lot in a fairly short time and I must admit that 4 or 5 of them have been switched on just once or twice. I haven't used them in tracks yet or even played with them beyond just when I first got them.

I noticed this recently as I was playing with the Andromeda and finding that while I thought I knew how to use it, there is a whole lot more it can do that I was completely unaware of. As I've play with it more and more I've found it producing sounds I didn't think it was capable of. I was thinking for a while I'd like a vintage VCO poly but actually I've now found the Andromeda can do the sounds I want.

This isn't just about the Andromeda though, I really haven't explored any of my synths in the detail they deserve.



I think there is an argument to be made for having less gear but getting to know it better.

What do you think?

ALWAYS explore what you have. Spend at least a year with any piece of gear worth buying. Even with my outboard processors it takes me about a year to explore all of their idiosyncrasies on different sources, and many time it has taken more than a year to really learn how to push it to its limits. That is with simple things with a few knobs. take a super complex synth, or even a simple one, like the minimoog model D in my case, and you can spend literally a lifetime exploring all of its possibilities.

Sometimes after all that time, you find out that it really doesn't work for you, but that is also a good thing. Finding out what doesn't work for you can be just as good. I recommend taking your best synth and getting a few basic meat and potatoes sounds that you like, and experimenting with effects and such. I have taken a page from guitar players who have only one sound really available to them, but modulate it with many combos of effects and create sounds unique to themselves.

You really need only one good instrument, especially if its a synth. More is cool, but find your bread and butter first.

[Rogue Ai]

While I don't really like software synths, they are great for trying new sounds as there are so many freeware plugins out there. It's quite helpful when you don't have any money but you want to try something new. That saying, rarely does any of them end up in a finished track.

[Persemone]

Originally Posted by Mefistophelees

I think there is an argument to be made for having less gear but getting to know it better.

What do you think?

Agreed completely. Gearslutz EMI&EMP is a mixed forum. On here are synth collectors ['which synth for my collection?', 'look what I just bought' type threads], some here are historic reminiscers or emulators ['look at this studio from 1970', 'how do I get that 1981 sound'] type threads], some here are looking to get into the game, some here are hobbyists looking for a new fun toy [the 'X vs Y' threads], and some on here are jobbing pros discussing particular aspects of their income.

There's nothing wrong with any of this, but the mistake is to think that to become a more complete producer you need to fit in with every group. In order to become successful in production you need nothing more than a single instrument, inspiration, a work ethic and a good set of ears - there's plenty of million selling albums recorded in this way.

BTW, I'm no saint - I'm as guilty as others at flipping gear, buying what I don't need, and bragging about my latest acquisition. I get older and more fluff comes along to distract me from my goals. When I was younger, I had less cash but more focus. I learned what little I had to the best of my ability. Maybe true zen occurs when, with my life experience, I regain the focus of my youth!

[Analog Prophet]

Originally Posted by Mefistophelees

I have a bunch of synths and they're all great but I'm finding I have become a bit of a generalist, I can get sounds out of any of them but don't know any of them in great detail.

I bought quite a lot in a fairly short time and I must admit that 4 or 5 of them have been switched on just once or twice. I haven't used them in tracks yet or even played with them beyond just when I first got them.

I noticed this recently as I was playing with the Andromeda and finding that while I thought I knew how to use it, there is a whole lot more it can do that I was completely unaware of. As I've play with it more and more I've found it producing sounds I didn't think it was capable of. I was thinking for a while I'd like a vintage VCO poly but actually I've now found the Andromeda can do the sounds I want.

This isn't just about the Andromeda though, I really haven't explored any of my synths in the detail they deserve.



I think there is an argument to be made for having less gear but getting to know it better.

What do you think?

You're absolutely right. I have "too much" gear, booth hardware and software. In different periods I spend time with some particular gear I have, dig deep down and try to explore it more. And it scares me - every time I find out that I don't need to buy anything more in my lifetime. But new gear is so exciting...

[padillac]

The latest episode of pensado's place is an interview with NEFF-U that's really good. In it NEFF-U talks about how he got into the industry and how his career developed. He says when he first got a job in LA, he brought a suitcase of clothes, an amp, and a Triton. That gearlist lasted his first 12 years in his career. If you look at your gearlist you'll probably realize there's enough potential to make all kinds of creative music for many lifetimes...it's your own creativity and lack of knowledge of tools (and/or too many options) that will limit you.

I definitely have more gear than I need right now and could probably do well to get rid of some of it (but I won't ). But I'm definitely not going to buy anything new any time soon. I'm picking out my basic toolkit so I can be productive when producing...and I have other times when I just screw around with synths / plugins / gear to try to create some new sounds and learn more about the gear that I have. It's fun to mess with, and I already own it, so why not use it? It's just if I try to use it while working on a tune, that's where I'll get stuck with too many options and not know what to do. So I'm trying to use these sessions to experiment and learn and create some samples that I can use in tunes...and when it comes to writing tunes I use my samples and the few bits of gear that I'm learning really really well.

[MusicFan]

Originally Posted by Mefistophelees

I have a bunch of synths and they're all great but I'm finding I have become a bit of a generalist, I can get sounds out of any of them but don't know any of them in great detail.

I bought quite a lot in a fairly short time and I must admit that 4 or 5 of them have been switched on just once or twice. I haven't used them in tracks yet or even played with them beyond just when I first got them.

I noticed this recently as I was playing with the Andromeda and finding that while I thought I knew how to use it, there is a whole lot more it can do that I was completely unaware of. As I've play with it more and more I've found it producing sounds I didn't think it was capable of. I was thinking for a while I'd like a vintage VCO poly but actually I've now found the Andromeda can do the sounds I want.

This isn't just about the Andromeda though, I really haven't explored any of my synths in the detail they deserve.



I think there is an argument to be made for having less gear but getting to know it better.

What do you think?

I guess, most of the synth fanatics have more synth power to explore in their arsenal, than they ever could in the time span of even several lifetimes....this applies at least to myself!
My first synth ever, was a Roland Juno-6 with a very simple subtractive synthesis architecture.
But I squeezed everything possible and impossible out of this thing and I've learned how many different sound facets I can get out of this simple synth and how much experience with several years of practicing are necessary to really fully explore and realize, what even a simple synth, like the JUNO-6, really can do.
My second synth was a Yamaha DX-7 and there is still much to explore after more than 25 years! My OASYS has some synth engines (especially AL-1 and MOD-7), which are impossible to fully explore in a single human lifetime...
and don't let us even mention deep soft synths like OMNISPHERE...

[cramseur]

I think this question is axiomatic to a great extent. Of course, most people have a lot of unexplored synth power. I don't know anyone else who has squeezed as much out of a dx7 as eno. An Andromeda? Jeezuz how much power is in there to explore?

As for getting more from less gear...everyone probably could. But why?

If money is the issue...I get that. If it makes you more productive...I get that too.

But not everyone here is a professional musician.
Some of us just like exploring different synths (as a hobby, I guess).
Some have no production quotas or timetables. We're just playing, and synths are our toys.
Music making is the natural outcome of our play.

I guess my point is:

Little gear or lots of gear...whatever makes you happy is okay by me.

[Brainchild]

I'm going through this for the first time really right now. I think everyone has to go through a period of trying different boxes out, and maybe different types of boxes, to find what works for them. I bought a lot of synths and effects, different sequencers and drum machines, trying to find the box or combo that would open the door to good music. Really for most people I think theres no way around that unless you just gel with one instrument early on and develop a special relationship with it. And there's no escaping the "these things are cool" aspect of wanting to make music with glossy boxes. Right now I've put everything in the studio away and am using only an MC-80 and an MPC 1000. Several years of creating sounds with all the other stuff gives me plenty of source material, but for the first time I'm finding that digging deep into the labyrinths of these boxes and not getting distracted by any other equipment is freeing me to make stuff happen to an almost scary and uncomfortable extent. Hopefully this will lead to an eventual re-expansion into everything else, but I guess long and short is that there's nothing like finding that one compact little nexus that you can really communicate with in an immediate reliable way.

[foodeater]

To someone that doesn't use electronic gear it definitely looks like I have a lot, but I feel it works okay for me because none of them distract me from the other. I do feel that I get the best results the more attention I devote to less gear and the longer I spend using them. For example, although I liked it from the get go the k5000 took a year to really click with.

On the one hand, I wish I had stuck with one synth for longer and I wonder if I would have learned more quickly. I'm also drawn toward deeper more complex synths that you have to spend a lot of time with because I get a great sense of exploration with them...Anyone want to sell me a cheap k2000?

On the other hand, different architectures exposed me to a different point of view and gave me a new way of looking at other synths. They also gave me a "break" and I think kept me from getting burnt out on other synths.

Sometimes a good deal comes up and while I would rather wait, I know it's something I want eventually, so I might as well get it now.

Composition always improves using less gear that I'm super comfortable with and takes a drop off when I get something new.

Personally, if I don't feel comfortable with the idea of sitting down with a sequencer, synth and sampler for a month, I really need to re-evaulate what I'm doing.

Oh, and I think finding a method of sequencing that clicks with you is more important to take care of first, before the sound creation side of things.

[bug2342]

Simple answer: both.

I would but myself on the hobbyist/collector side, but for most newer toys I programmed something like 40-100 sounds before I released them into the general "instrument pool" and lusted for new stuff. (So they still get used, but are not new and shiny any more)

Also my lust for new stuff is slightly dropping.

I think the good thing about new toys is, that it makes you think about building your sounds in a different way. While pretty much every modern (digital) synth will take a very long time to fully explore, many of them excel at doing some sounds.

The fun thing is, that there is some cross-inspiration. Maybe you tried something on a new toy, because it was obvious and easy, and later you try it on another machine, where you would have never thought about trying.

[muziksculp]

GAS & the Excitment factor of using something NEW is very tempting, and fun.

But... Discovering, learning, and digging deeper into what you already have to work with can be fun too. I always discover new ways of getting the same instrument to go further than what I initially thought it was capable of. Yes, it takes some time, effort, and reading the manuals carefully.

Don't forget, that you can always look at your setup from a MACRO-Perspective (oh.. well, that's what I like to call it basically, you can view an instrument, or even each patch within an instrument as a complex 'Single Oscillator' ! Which you can then layer in many unique combinations, and continue editing each instrument, be it HW or SW to achieve some very unique results.

Cheers,
Muziksculp

[gremlin moon]

I think softsynths/digital are the best for learning synthesis itself -- limitless: modulation possibilities, sample manipulation, effect-chains and instances are available.

The analog realm requires learning the synth itself, much like each car operates on the same principles but handles differently, the response of the circuitry is what is paramount and unique.

This is about relationships but it can also apply to synths:
NSF

[phreak260]

for me, one of the most exciting things is to go back to a synth i have had for a while and discovering a new timbre/sound/tone that i was only missing for lack of effort when it comes to programming.

i love new gear too, but the constant purchase of new things can get confusing over time and i found it to hamper music creation rather than enhance it.

[Yoozer]

One thing that's probably familiar for everyone here is the rush you get when you just switch it on and start playing. When I borrowed the AN1x from a friend for a few days, each factory preset inspired me and made me want to write a complete track around it - but this was before I got my first real VA of my own (which was the MicroQ with a whopping 300 memory locations, compared to the AN1x's 128). Still, the Q rack I got after that (and the Virus C after that) gave that same rush.

Consider it like this: the first minute with a new synth costs you the full price. The second minute only half of that. The fourth, only a quarter - and so on, until you travel to the point where the asymptote says that the time is really cheap. (kind of like Zeno's paradox for synthesizers).

If you only spent a few minutes, then those were pretty expensive minutes. You want to get your money's worth - so that means either using it more, or selling it so the minutes aren't that expensive anymore.

I think phreak260's suggestion is a good one and it should be in the list: rediscovering underused gear (though this is a luxury for anyone who can afford equipment to be underused). Sometimes you don't even have to dive deep - just turn it on and try it again.

As for less gear and knowing it better: I usually argue against "less is more" - that's too easy and misses several key points. Often there's a rosy view of the past and an age difference involved - back when you had less, you also had more time, more energy, and more to say. Just getting rid of the excess stuff or returning to the old setup is easy but won't bring back that feeling. Then there's focus; it's tempting to see a studio crammed full with gear, but it can also be daunting; so many toys, which to play with first? Regardless of how much knowledge you have of it all, that can still ruin your day (subconsciously even).

[CfNorENa]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

I usually argue against "less is more" - that's too easy and misses several key points.

Agreed. What everyone needs to find is the most productive (or rewarding) balance for them. But that's obviously not going to be the same for everyone.

In my case, I've settled on 5 as my "magic" number of synths. For what I want to do, and the time I have to do it in, that gives me just enough sonic range, which I feel I can control, without becoming distracting or overwhelming (or too expensive, on my budget). For some--especially those with more time and more knowledge (and more disposable income)--5 synths would be way too few; for others, that number would be way too big, unwieldly, overwhelming, etc.

So, instead of "less is more" or "more is more," shoot for the balance that works for you.

[Mefistophelees]

I perhaps think maybe I should have said buy things slower and learn them as you go along. I was lucky with money and bought a lot quickly.

On the other hand I don't regret what I bought and don't plan on selling any of them. I am happy with the choices I've made as I deliberately went for synths that are different from the others.

Originally Posted by bug2342

The fun thing is, that there is some cross-inspiration. Maybe you tried something on a new toy, because it was obvious and easy, and later you try it on another machine, where you would have never thought about trying.

This is very true. I haven't bought much recently (apart from a Saxophone!) and so I have been exploring my synths. One sound I really like is when you use cross modulation on a Polivoks. Set the ratios right and you get a very string-like sound.

You can't do this on many synths but I figured I might be able to do something similar with ring-modulation. I just tried that on an MS-20 to great effect, I actually got quite a selection of interesting sounds that way.

It turns out I have also done something similar on a modular - using a second oscillator an octave or 2 lower, to modulate the first.

So, yes having many synths is no downside for sonic exploration. Learning one helps you learn the others.

[unfiltered420]

"Simplicity elevates"

Bob Moog

"Complexity inhibits"

Me

[Bunjji]

Uummmmmm this is GS, buy all the gear!

[sammytaters]

Minimal gear gives rise to minimal thought. Complex gear give rise to complex thought. The more gear you have the smarter your music.

deleted by user

deleted by user

[jarlywarly]

I have been waylaid for years by my own perfectionism, OCD and gearlust. Recently I sold my small collection to concentrate on 3 pieces of gear. Consequently I find I am much happier becoming intimately acquainted with them, alone and as a team.

Learning to use new stuff takes an enormous amount of time and can be very frustrating at first, especially when surrounded by other pieces, not to mention the requirements to deal with life away from my hobby. I used to regularly feel guilty and depressed that I was loving one piece whilst ignoring the others. Silly I know, but nature of the beast for me personally.

Though I can see how, over time, and with increasing accomplishment at synthesis etc, having more gear may be inspirational in itself - if you have the time.

[AikiGhost]

My studio room is an utter mess and has run out of space, so I've had to institute a strict 1 in 1 out policy with gear. This has the advantage that I'm getting to know my stuff a lot better over time and I'm also moving slowly towards my "ultimate" setup.

[HaveItAll]

I have too much gear, so shoot me. It's for 2 reasons. Firstly I bought too many work stations just based on the presets instead of programming them from scratch. It's hard to do that without actually buying it first. Now, I only want small niche boxes and I have a really good idea about them first.


But the 2nd reason is that most experimenting leads to rubbish results (quite understandable) and a whole run of those just saps my interest and confidence. I generally start playing around and stop if nothing is fun after 15 minutes. I don't want a pattern of hour long failures becoming a rut.

I really have to work to avoid negative vibes. Then once in a while I'm walking on air with a good result.

Damn this synth thing is hard!

[kcearl]

Im buying no more now...I think I just wanted what Ive got and now Im going to sit back and learn everything more

though in truth none made me really want to learn them inside out until I bought the virus, I guess because Ive been so software based the TI's integration got me more involved with it...now I have VST editors with all my hardware and it gets me more interested

kinda defeats the puropse but whatever

[ChristianRock]

A couple good analog monosynths, an analog or hybrid poly, and a digital poly. That's all I think I need hardware-wise and that's my objective at this point.

For software synths, I'm going to stick with what I have (Massive, Absynth and Arturia Minimoog V free edition) and get to know it all well. I'm even avoiding any more free synths except maybe TAL Elek7ro) - the synths might be free but my time isn't.

I might splurge a bit more in terms of sample libraries though... but I'm mostly content with what I have right now.

[axm311]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

Consider it like this: the first minute with a new synth costs you the full price. The second minute only half of that. The fourth, only a quarter - and so on, until you travel to the point where the asymptote says that the time is really cheap. (kind of like Zeno's paradox for synthesizers).

If you only spent a few minutes, then those were pretty expensive minutes. You want to get your money's worth - so that means either using it more, or selling it so the minutes aren't that expensive anymore.

I love this post, it may have convinced me to get a machinedrum

[ChristianRock]

Yoozer will give you GAS

You have been warned

It's called "new gear syndrome", you always get excited about the new piece of gear you bought, but that doesn't last long. Law of diminishing returns says that if that's your drug, it will become a very expensive habit and you won't get much done.

Maybe stopping buying gear stone cold and forcing oneself to use what you got for at least a year, will get new gear syndrome under control.

[chevybusa]

Originally Posted by Mefistophelees

I think there is an argument to be made for having less gear but getting to know it better.

What do you think?

+INFINITY, couldn't agree more!!! It really is amazing how much you can get ouf of gear the more time you spend with it...that's why I'm still using Reason 4.0 and Komplete 5!!!!!!! Even though there have been newer versions out and I have spent thousands of hours with them, I'm STILL finding new things/usues for them and even better ways to use them, same goes for Logic Pro 9!!!