The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Going soft??????? Yep, finally seen the light. yippeeeeee! Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 11th June 2010
  #241
Lives for gear
 
The Architecture's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
Isn't it funny how in ANY software/hardware related thread, the software people feel compelled to jump in and shout the same old histrionics...


"Oh yeah, well great albums are made ITB too!"


Here's an insight, great albums are made with everything. Ok?


P.S. Odey is correct, and I know this for a fact because I've been a part of a few "ITB" albums... as I mixed them on an SSL with racks of outboard and mastered at Bernie Grundman... so yeah, I HOPE that "ITB" album sounds good!
Bruce Springsteens Nebraska anybody? that was made on a portastudio! and was a big hit.

I heart tape!
Old 11th June 2010
  #242
Lives for gear
 

Tomorrow is supposed to be sunny mmmmmm isnt that sweet

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kola View Post
no one any serious points?

Van burrin mixes totally within the box. Suppose trance sucks because of him too?
Old 11th June 2010
  #243
Lives for gear
 
murphythecat87's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
Isn't it funny how in ANY software/hardware related thread, the software people feel compelled to jump in and shout the same old histrionics...


"Oh yeah, well great albums are made ITB too!"


Here's an insight, great albums are made with everything. Ok?


P.S. Odey is correct, and I know this for a fact because I've been a part of a few "ITB" albums... as I mixed them on an SSL with racks of outboard and mastered at Bernie Grundman... so yeah, I HOPE that "ITB" album sounds good!
I was answering to a question one asked, and apart from the mixing and mastering, all the sounds are created by softsynth. And even if they use outboard eq's and compressor, they don't use expensive vintage synthesizer, so what's your point? And your experience is not a fact and do not represent all the "ITB" albums at all.

you really think that someone can't make a good album "ITB"? please
Old 11th June 2010
  #244
Lives for gear
 
in a blue field's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by murphythecat87 View Post
There is great music made in the ****in box, but music that doesn't sound analog, that's all.
this right here is where a lot of communication breakdowns are formed here on this forum. i hate texting/typing dialogue, does anyone else? so much miscommunication. missing inflections, emotions, body language (even if you cant see the person, then like breathing for example), all which convey things we as a species are not used to having to convey. there are enough old school analogue heads on this forum that sometimes, i feel like when a person says "analogue is better" what they mean is "software has not yet been able to reproduce exactly what this real-life synth sounds like", and that gets misinterpreted as "software is for kids" or something. (i'm not saying this is like the cure for arguments on GS or something, merely that it could possibly be one of many factors.) so when someone says "it doesnt sound analogue" sometimes it can mean "that's supposed to be a minimoog but, nice try no cigar".

not everyone wants to sound like that tho! i personally only buy analogue that i feel can very specifically, within my limited funds, rise above software; if it cant then i dont care about it. i dont have a big collection but examples would be my KV100 and my new sherman filterbank, stuff that push the limits, and i have a couple reverb pedals, again tho only bekuz i feel the algorithms are still really far behind, from personal A/Bs (which FWIW have been conducted in extremely professional recording environments)... and then there's a monosynth in my future, which i am getting pretty much solely for bass, which i just simply have higher trust in circuitry to really give me that oomph.... but i'm just saying, like take for example the dark energy... very kraftwerk-sounding, right? we all can agree on that probably? it's got that certain right-after-disco YES I AM A SYNTH vibe for sure. and i understand why people would covet that sound, and seek to include it in their music. but i f-ing HATE that sound! one synth you will for sure never find in my collection. the point is, i dont think there is this universal zenith of production, a top of the pyramid that is just "GOOD MUSIC", i think it differs for everyone and some people are just simply not going for that old sound.

i'm sorry to ramble on a bit but i just wanted to call attention to something i think happens on this board often, and a lot of petty neurotic conflict could be avoided if people just defined their terms better. there was a recent thread about fanboyism or something, and what's going on in this thread is covered there, i.e. the reasons for so much argument on the net as people defend their various material goods, but i thought it was completely wrong, this isnt about egos, i just think there's a massive amount of miscommunication on the web to which we (as in, all internet participants) are still adjusting. just make sure you define your terms, and stay aware of one simple fact: anyone who is here for the right reasons is someone (at least, i believe) who has no desire to argue about anything with anybody, rather to learn and to celebrate.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Odey View Post
Don't be fooled into thinking that all of these artists are entirely in the box.

Most of them have high end outboard gear, summing mixers, high end monitoring and have their tracks professionally mastered if not mixed somewhere else too.


a lot of people on that list are artists who make pretty much the last kind of music in existence today which could be relied upon to pay the bills. not every musician exists in some lofty intangible higher place where they have access to machines that let them channel what they wish to express to the masses; believe it or not, every now n then someone who's just a kid with a computer does indeed land a record contract.




btw i am pro-analogue. not pro-old, or pro-oldsound, just pro-circuitry
Old 11th June 2010
  #245
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
Isn't it funny how in ANY software/hardware related thread, the software people feel compelled to jump in and shout the same old histrionics...


"Oh yeah, well great albums are made ITB too!"


Here's an insight, great albums are made with everything. Ok?
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphythecat87 View Post
you really think that someone can't make a good album "ITB"? please

This is HILARIOUS! heh

First, I post above, THEN, as if to humorously prove my VERY POINT, this guy posts this little gem!

Too damn funny!!! ... and a little frightening, if it wasn't a joke!
Old 11th June 2010
  #246
Lives for gear
 
murphythecat87's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
This is HILARIOUS! heh

First, I post above, THEN, as if to humorously prove my VERY POINT, this guy posts this little gem!

Too damn funny!!! ... and a little frightening, if it wasn't a joke!
It wasn't a joke, I misunderstood heh
Old 11th June 2010
  #247
Lives for gear
 
Odey's Avatar
 

[QUOTE believe it or not, every now n then someone who's just a kid with a computer does indeed land a record contract.

[/QUOTE]

I think that's my point... Everynow and then. Its the exception not the rule.

No one is saying that good albums aren't mixed in the box. But if they are mixed in the box quite often there is a bit more equipment involved than most people think.

Most (and I stress most.. not all) successful electronic musicians have some good high end outboard gear to work with. And the record label will no doubt get the tracks mastered if the artist doesn't.
Old 11th June 2010
  #248
Lives for gear
 
Odey's Avatar
 

At the OP.. I think you should have a read of this article about Van Burren. His studio isn't what I would call ITB. In that picture I can see a desk and 16 channels of conversion.

Google Image Result for http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug09/images/AvB_04.jpg
Old 11th June 2010
  #249
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by murphythecat87 View Post
It wasn't a joke, I misunderstood heh
You know what, thanks for being a good sport about it then. Honestly

-Andrews
Old 11th June 2010
  #250
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odey View Post
At the OP.. I think you should have a read of this article about Van Burren. His studio isn't what I would call ITB.
But if you read the interview, you'll notice that his production partner pretty much starts with the default Logic synths to build sounds.

So when does something become OTB? If you have an ITB track, and you mix it OTB, does it become OTB? If you have an OTB track and you mix it ITB, does it become ITB? If you have an ITB (generated and mixed) track and have it mastered OTB, does it become OTB?

ITB and OTB are great quick labels for "that's what I want to use when making/mixing/mastering", but "it sounds ITB" makes me cringe.

If someone thinks a piece of music sucks, at least they should have the balls to say it instead of trying to weasel their way out of it.
Old 11th June 2010
  #251
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
But if you read the interview, you'll notice that his production partner pretty much starts with the default Logic synths to build sounds.

So when does something become OTB? If you have an ITB track, and you mix it OTB, does it become OTB? If you have an OTB track and you mix it ITB, does it become ITB? If you have an ITB (generated and mixed) track and have it mastered OTB, does it become OTB?

ITB and OTB are great quick labels for "that's what I want to use when making/mixing/mastering", but "it sounds ITB" makes me cringe.

If someone thinks a piece of music sucks, at least they should have the balls to say it instead of trying to weasel their way out of it.
I agree for the most part, but I've heard albums by bands that I really WANTED to like (hell, I wanted to love), but the "sound" was so collapsed, shrill and 2-D... ITB.

Again, I've heard plenty of great ITB albums and plenty of crap OTB albums.

But man, it sucks when you get bands like Depeche Mode who, of all people, SHOULD be able to make a great ITB album and that last one really blew chunks sonically

Oh and to further your other thoughts...

I think "ITB" should be tracked and mixed (barring mastering).

Almost all the music I make is a total hybrid of soft, hardware, analog, digital, soft fX, hardware effects, etc... but end of the day, I can't say "ITB" because I'm not really mixing with it's 2-buss processing, so the real heavy lifting is in the console. FWIW & just a thought.

-Andrews
Old 11th June 2010
  #252
Lives for gear
 
Odey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
But if you read the interview, you'll notice that his production partner pretty much starts with the default Logic synths to build sounds.

So when does something become OTB? If you have an ITB track, and you mix it OTB, does it become OTB? If you have an OTB track and you mix it ITB, does it become ITB? If you have an ITB (generated and mixed) track and have it mastered OTB, does it become OTB?

ITB and OTB are great quick labels for "that's what I want to use when making/mixing/mastering", but "it sounds ITB" makes me cringe.

If someone thinks a piece of music sucks, at least they should have the balls to say it instead of trying to weasel their way out of it.
I would say that his setup is pretty much a hybrid one. His brother playing the guitar and the singers he got for the album are not in the box. Neither is his console, his converters, his FX.. etc.. etc.. etc.
Old 11th June 2010
  #253
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
I agree for the most part, but I've heard albums by bands that I really WANTED to like (hell, I wanted to love), but the "sound" was so collapsed, shrill and 2-D... ITB.

Again, I've heard plenty of great ITB albums and plenty of crap OTB albums.

But man, it sucks when you get bands like Depeche Mode who, of all people, SHOULD be able to make a great ITB album and that last one really blew chunks sonically

Oh and to further your other thoughts...

I think "ITB" should be tracked and mixed (barring mastering).

Almost all the music I make is a total hybrid of soft, hardware, analog, digital, soft fX, hardware effects, etc... but end of the day, I can't say "ITB" because I'm not really mixing with it's 2-buss processing, so the real heavy lifting is in the console. FWIW & just a thought.

-Andrews
can we hear some ? interested
Old 11th June 2010
  #254
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
Oh and to further your other thoughts...

I think "ITB" should be tracked and mixed (barring mastering).
[...]
FWIW & just a thought.
Thanks. I think it's a good thing to include this gradient in the discussion - it takes the wraps off the argument so the internal consistency of it is laid bare. Otherwise it's getting too yin and yang and never the twain shall meet.
Old 11th June 2010
  #255
Lives for gear
 
crufty's Avatar
for what its worth, with no definitive proof, i feel like itb recording has degraded heavy metal. but there are so many variables (engineer, room, etc) its hard to say definitively. at any rate, I'm at about a 75% success rate of hearing an album, going hmm that sounds grating. Flip over the back see "recorded and mixed in protools at blah blah"

there may have been albums that were mixed on protools and i liked them and didn't care to find out where they were made...but about 75% of the time, on albums that I cringe a bit on, i look and yup---there it is.

anyway, not sure if others have noted this in other genres...

ps. logic presets are pretty good, i can see why folks don't pass them by. the fx settings esp are miles above any comparably priced hw unit.
Old 11th June 2010
  #256
Lives for gear
 
in a blue field's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crufty View Post
for what its worth, with no definitive proof, i feel like itb recording has degraded heavy metal. but there are so many variables (engineer, room, etc)

i definitely agree with that, i mean besides the point that electronic music of course is going to fare better being processed thru all electronics then anything that has to be alive and moving thru the air first, but i also think there are some recording techniques that start to decay. the less actual equipment used, the more plugs used, it only makes sense that you're going to get rusty on certain tactile experiences, one of them in the case of metal being the use of gates on double kicks, if you're recording live music then you need natural envelopes and organic sweeps. and i've definitely heard corrective autotune start to pop up in metal too these days, which in my head = both sides of the glass getting lazier. get that crap outa there and do another take, it doesnt belong in metal \m/
Old 14th June 2010
  #257
142977
Guest
I respect your points but just a few quick things to take into account:

– Sound
That missing 25% you mentioned mean a lot to me. Means I'm spending less time to EQ and fit everything. Obviously it takes experience to know how to fit everything.

– Filters
What I find mostly annoying with VAs are the filters. It's like software tries very hard to match the sound of analog filters but doesn't quite get there. Like climbing a mountain and almost reaching the top.

– Tactility
Real knobs for every parameter is just irreplaceable and sure there are controllers. But they are a pain in the ass to setup and every virtual instrument needs a different layout on your controller which your brain will have to adapt to. That's where it is still of huge value for me.

All those things really hinder your creativity once you get the juices going.

Don't get me wrong. I love digital, I love computers and I use them all the time. But only for the things I can't do with hardware (sample manipulation, physical modelling, additive synthesis…). That's where it still has huge value for me but in case of emulation of analog synths software still lacks something.
Old 15th June 2010
  #258
Lives for gear
 
Rude Talk's Avatar
 

I work on a new iMac, clearly not a box but a screen. You can really hear the difference screen vs box. Sounds much more glassy
Old 15th June 2010
  #259
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by the_apprentice View Post
– Tactility
Real knobs for every parameter is just irreplaceable and sure there are controllers. But they are a pain in the ass to setup and every virtual instrument needs a different layout on your controller which your brain will have to adapt to. That's where it is still of huge value for me.
No they aren't. Christ MIDI learn is literally:

tweak a softsynth knob once.
tweak a hardware knob once.

Done!
Old 15th June 2010
  #260
Lives for gear
 
Spectral Climax's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rude Talk View Post
I work on a new iMac, clearly not a box but a screen. You can really hear the difference screen vs box. Sounds much more glassy
Yeah...but boxes are analog and screens are digital...heh
Old 15th June 2010
  #261
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robobaby View Post
No they aren't.
Having suffered Cubase SX3, I fully support that sentiment.

Ableton Live on the other hand...

Quote:
Christ MIDI learn is literally:

tweak a softsynth knob once.
tweak a hardware knob once.

Done!
Yes, but the trick is to set up templates so that you don't have to repeat this every project, and having the controller recall these templates with as little work as possible.
Old 15th June 2010
  #262
Lives for gear
 

Its exactly the same process though. The most annoying bit is scripting multi function buttons but I'd say I spent more time remote MIDIfying and scripting hardware synths than softsynths. The softsynths were relatively painless.

The worst, most time consuming remote MIDIfication I had to do was for (typically old) hardware which had horrible MIDI implementation. That stuff required permanent filters and multiple junctions to block messages from your DAW that make it crap out in annoying ways. I pretty much never have to do that for softsynths.
Old 15th June 2010
  #263
Lives for gear
 
kilon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
.


Yes, but the trick is to set up templates so that you don't have to repeat this every project, and having the controller recall these templates with as little work as possible.
Not true with my Bcr2000 and Camel Audio Alchemy. Alchemy seems to remember all its midi learns each time I call it. I assigned it while I was still using it in Ableton live , and when I started using it in Gargeband the midi learns stayed the same with no issue. So I would guess that Alchemy saves its midi learns somewhere seperate from the DAW.

Bare in mind that the midi learns stay the same for all Alchemy preses so it is a global thing.

Pretty neat, and it extremely useful. I dont know if that is the same process for other soft plugins as I have not tried with other soft plugins. But for me at least , its a process of

Right Click on the virtual knob of choice -> choose "midi learn" -> turn the BCR2000 knob you wish to assign -> Bingo!
Old 15th June 2010
  #264
Lives for gear
 
crufty's Avatar
said it before will say it again

first daw that includes prebuilt templates for hw boxes will win my undying love and support

i was thinking about a plugin but then there are latency problems with that, I'd think. it really needs to be part of the daw so the timing is right.

If a compressor costs more then $2000 it should come with a usb / vst interface. *cough cough*

Now we'd be cooking with fire! here in the swamps of the southern us i think the heat is getting to me all this dreaming.

fwiw i think fabfilter twin is a brilliant gui and that kind of interface is a good reason to use soft synths.
Old 15th June 2010
  #265
Lives for gear
 
wwjd's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odey View Post
At the OP.. I think you should have a read of this article about Van Burren. His studio isn't what I would call ITB. In that picture I can see a desk and 16 channels of conversion.

Google Image Result for http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug09/images/AvB_04.jpg

good read. also in a picture caption:

"Although Armin Van Buuren is at pains to point out that none of them is actually necessary to his production process, his studio still boasts a wealth of hardware synths. "
Old 15th June 2010
  #266
Lives for gear
 
Eric J's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwjd View Post
good read. also in a picture caption:

"Although Armin Van Buuren is at pains to point out that none of them is actually necessary to his production process, his studio still boasts a wealth of hardware synths. "
I have my doubts that the guy is actually doing all the producing at this stage of his career. Likely that studio is used by a team of producers to shape the final sound.
Old 15th June 2010
  #267
Lives for gear
 
jbuonacc's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odey View Post
Don't be fooled into thinking that all of these artists are entirely in the box.
not sure about the others he mentioned, but i'm quite sure that Wisp doesn't use any expensive outboard (if anything OTB at all). i'd be willing to bet a few bucks that he doesn't have a 'treated room' either. :D his stuff these days is most likely professionally mastered, but i wouldn't be surprised if he's still doing everything with a cracked copy of Fruity Loops.

(ie - you don't need any of that **** to make a good album.)
Old 15th June 2010
  #268
Lives for gear
 
subby33's Avatar
 

I've heard a guy online that makes his tracks all "in the box" , for the most part. He does have a couple of cheap synths. But for the most part its all in the box.

However, he uses a 1,000 dollar 4 channel mixer to sum up parts. I dont have any real knowledge of what "summing" is, but I'm assuming its just seperating tracks through a mixer and then routing it back to the computer and recording it to get some warmth.

Anyway . . . he routes the bass synth, bass drum, and whatever else into this tube driven 4 channel mixer, and his stuff sounds AMAZING. It doesnt even sound like it needs mastering. So , what you can do in the box w/ summing seems pretty amazing to me. I'd research that whole idea further, but right now I'm too busy researching other stuff.
Old 15th June 2010
  #269
Lives for gear
 
Eric J's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by subby33 View Post
I've heard a guy online that makes his tracks all "in the box" , for the most part. He does have a couple of cheap synths. But for the most part its all in the box.

However, he uses a 1,000 dollar 4 channel mixer to sum up parts. I dont have any real knowledge of what "summing" is, but I'm assuming its just seperating tracks through a mixer and then routing it back to the computer and recording it to get some warmth.

Anyway . . . he routes the bass synth, bass drum, and whatever else into this tube driven 4 channel mixer, and his stuff sounds AMAZING. It doesnt even sound like it needs mastering. So , what you can do in the box w/ summing seems pretty amazing to me. I'd research that whole idea further, but right now I'm too busy researching other stuff.
This is precisely what I am planning on doing long term. I'm in the process of procuring a DA-16X and a Dangerous Music 2-bus LT for precisely this purpose. Send mix stems analog out from the DA-16X into the DM 2-bus LT, then back into the DAW for recording.

I was at a friend of mine's studio that has a similar setup and it sounded great.
Old 15th June 2010
  #270
Lives for gear
 
in a blue field's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by subby33 View Post
However, he uses a 1,000 dollar 4 channel mixer to sum up parts. I dont have any real knowledge of what "summing" is, but I'm assuming its just seperating tracks through a mixer and then routing it back to the computer

i wouldnt mind hearing gear choices from people who do this, and the why's behind those choices. and if they think it's a better option than just paying for an hour of studio time to have your stems go thru a 9000J and whatever else...
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
axtrak / Post Production forum
0
andychamp / So much gear, so little time
1
AlanTide / So much gear, so little time
3

Forum Jump
Forum Jump