Want something new, but what?

*Tripper*

Right well I've a bit of cash and I'm looking for a new piece of kit! I'm looking at a Roland SP-555. I've a MicroKorg so I'm sorted synth wise, anyone have any other ideas?

studiorat

*Tripper* wrote: »

I've a MicroKorg so I'm sorted synth wise, anyone have any other ideas?

Bigger synth!!! like this...

madtheory

What a strange question...

You think you're sorted with a MIcroKorg? I disagree, you could easily do better. I would go for a DSI Prophet 08 or a Poly Evolver.

Exactly how much do you have to spend? Why not spend it on a nice sun holiday? Lanzarote is quite peaceful- Playa Blanca is nice.

*Tripper*

Just got the korg, i'm not getting another synth for awhile.

indough

studiorat wrote: »

Bigger synth!!! like this...

oooh i love those

frobisher

Acoustic guitar?

sei046

Trust the singer songwriter lol!

frobisher

sei046 wrote: »

Trust the singer songwriter lol!

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

RealEstateKing

Write some songs, dont buy new kit!

Why on earth would anybody be buying hardware synths these days anyways?

Ill probably bet you've already got more synth power in your laptop in plugin form than was available to Kraftwerk, Tangerine Dream, Rick Wakemen and Jean Michel Jarre combined, and yet still you think, "If only I had x, then my music would be great!"

Synths are tools for making music with, if you start to think of them as toys in themselves, like Future Music or Computer Musician would like you to, you'll end up a pathetic shadow of your former musician self, jerking off the last of your life on to the crumpled pages of a buy and sell magazine "Musical Equipment" page.

While behind you you computer whirrs and a pale gostly light flickrs on your face, as you look through your folder on your hard-drive of half-finished, half-baked music that would be great if only you could find just the right hi-hat sound to lift up the bit after the breakdown.

Get out of the house. Meet some other people! Play gigs! Write songs! Sing your heart out! Live, live, while the spirit is still strong in you! Run from the marketers that would like you to think of music as just another way to spend money! *

*Disclaimer: This may not apply to you, so scroll on by if it doesnt.

indough

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Why on earth would anybody be buying hardware synths these days anyways?

some people like to make music on instruments

frobisher

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Write some songs, dont buy new kit!

The most important thing in music production is the songs. You can't polish a turd, although as Keef Richards said, you can varnish one.

RealEstateKing

some people like to make music on instruments

Fair enough, if you're talking about a rhodes piano or a hammond or something, but why would you pay for something thats essentially just a computer running a peice of custom software anyway?

indough

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Fair enough, if you're talking about a rhodes piano or a hammond or something, but why would you pay for something thats essentially just a computer running a peice of custom software anyway?

its still completely different from running a piece of software on a pc, you are not taking workflow into account

believe it or not the way in which you use music making equipment actually affects the end result, for example songs i make in reason will or logic will have a completely different type of sound to ones i make on hardware

RealEstateKing

"Workflow"

My God how wonderfully Rock N' Roll !

indough

why, is that the image we're aiming for here? :pac:

RealEstateKing

just smacks of dorkiness doesnt it?

There's something about the idea of music being 'work' that you sit at a computer and carry out, using certain software packages, as being a bit like what I do 9-5!

Depressing.

jimi_t

Well, if you don't already have one, a decent soundcard. If you do, then a decent interface. If you have both of them, depending what kind of music you're into, troll eBay for either a nice mic-pre or some sort of valve pre-amp. That said, if you have to ask for advice then you probably don't know what you're doing.

indough

RealEstateKing wrote: »

just smacks of dorkiness doesnt it?

There's something about the idea of music being 'work' that you sit at a computer and carry out, using certain software packages, as being a bit like what I do 9-5!

Depressing.

sure its always been that way though...of course most people only see the glamorous side of things, the excessive partying etc

frobisher

RealEstateKing: Hardware and software versions of the same synths sound different.

PaulBrewer

I'll sell you one of these .......

http://www.solidstatelogic.com/music/duality/index.asp

studiorat

frobisher wrote: »

RealEstateKing: Hardware and software versions of the same synths sound different.

+1.

RealEstateKing

RealEstateKing: Hardware and software versions of the same synths sound different.

Voodoo, plain and simple.

Anyways even if there was a difference, it's not one that makes a blind bit of difference. Its this modern obsessivness with tiny differences between different peices of technology that ruins music for so many people.

Music is supposed to be art: Expressing yourself, and moving others: If you spent 90% of your time dreaming about shiny new synths, and obsessing about this preamp vs that or whether the d/a convertors on this are better than the ones on that, you dont work on the parts of music that are actually important - y'know the ones that non-nerds give a **** about: Tunes, meaningful lyrics, playing instruments with passion and so on.

Amazingly, the amateur musican nowadays has access to more wonderful equipment (and cheaply) than his counterpart in the 90's could have dreamed about. And what is sad is so many of them lose themselves (and their talent) in it.

I bet you that the guy you know with a cassette four-track and an acoustic guitar makes ten times more music and plays far more gigs than the guy with a bedroom full of shiny stuff.

Neurojazz

I've had to build gear to certain genres (so require certain synths etc.. - without being up my arse and too picky!) - so that limits the gear a bit by picking an area.

I also would say that a bit of geeky knowledge also helps, but of course writing/finishing/experimenting with music takes to priority.

I tend to push knowledge and the art at the same time and write to apply that knowledge... weird stuff happens! (or the system melts and i find i have to work around)

I'm totally digital/synths after too many compitbility problems and physical space limitations/money and it has taken an aweful long time to get my programming skills upto what i could do with my hands on a keyboard (about 2-4 years), but now find it pretty easy to be creative within the computer only enviroment - people may beg to differ, but i'm making music that does the trick for me, so i carry on that way...

I had tried to use a guitar to midi convertor to get impliment my old guitar skills into new music but found that my programming was now quicker so abandoned it!

For choices of kit for this guy, he needs to pick a direction/genres and just work out bare minimums he needs that will keep him/her creative while he buys the gear (if possible) - and the beauty of cheapo vsti means he can replace in future with either nice vsti or hardware when they can afford it.

There are threads elsewhere in the forum with guides and free vst etc... which would be a great place to start and keep noodling around

PaulBrewer

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Anyways even if there was a difference, it's not one that makes a blind bit of difference. Its this modern obsessivness with tiny differences between different peices of technology that ruins music for so many people.

Music is supposed to be art: Expressing yourself, and moving others: If you spent 90% of your time dreaming about shiny new synths, and obsessing about this preamp vs that or whether the d/a convertors on this are better than the ones on that, you dont work on the parts of music that are actually important - y'know the ones that non-nerds give a **** about: Tunes, meaningful lyrics, playing instruments with passion and so on.

Amazingly, the amateur musican nowadays has access to more wonderful equipment (and cheaply) than his counterpart in the 90's could have dreamed about. And what is sad is so many of them lose themselves (and their talent) in it.

Absolutely True! But this is an argument FOR Good Gear , not against it.

When you have good gear none of those questions raise their Creativity Sapping heads.

A customer of mine, with whom I have regular arguments about the very same subject, dropped me in a Charity album he did with an array of artists. It was /is unlistenable. Perfectly good performances were destroyed by appalling sound.

I'm not looking at it from a gearsnob point of view either - I listen to 90% of my music on a Mac Laptop.

The studio I work in has a good selection of top end gear. I know I can walk in there and follow the 'muse' as quickly as needs be - the gear will never slow productivity or creativity because I know I can throw any mic on practically anything, anyway and I'll have a useable sound.

Also I know if I need to sculpt a sound I can, because I can trust my room and monitors. I have no excuse, if it's bad it's because I allowed it to be bad, if it's good my gear hasn't put a ceiling on how good it can be.

Trevor Horn made a very good point re monitors in a Video I posted recently
http://www.recordproduction.com/trevor-horn-record-producer.html

If you can't hear what you're doing, you can't take risks.

Like most things in life, it's a balance. Home guys want to believe that on their laptop and Euro 200 interface they can produce quality matching the high end studios. The industry loves to sell that dream.

I disagree.

Good Gear doesn't make your music Better.... but bad gear makes your Music Worse.

PaulBrewer

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Fair enough, if you're talking about a rhodes piano or a hammond or something, but why would you pay for something thats essentially just a computer running a peice of custom software anyway?

From a Sonic point of view your argument is sound. However there are other factors.

There was a UK production team based in Ireland a few years ago who worked out of Windmill studio.

They specialized in pop (Spice Girls/Kylie etc) and every time I got some new keyboard in they'd buy one.(This was when I worked in Music Maker) This, I guessed, made some sense as being pop the 'new' sound is king.

I went down there one day to drop in a new Roland, at the time, and they brought me in to have a look see.

The place was wedged with a zillion keyboards all wired in permanently to their console. I thought it strange, as said as much, querying their thinking.

Their reason was quite simple, they had everything to hand instantly, as soon as anyone had an idea, BANG, it was down on 'tape' .... onto the next part. Also as a rule they didn't sequence, except for a MPC for drums, everything was played.

The reason was creative, their way was the fastest most efficient way for them to make their kind of record.

jiltloop

RealEstateKing you say that synths are tools of music and not to see them as toys but then you also say that music isn't work and you should have fun..... hmmmm confusing arguement, you seem to be slightly contradictory there.
the way i see it is all synths are wonderful toys that allow you to play with them and have fun with them and also get some good music down in the process, and its the same with music, you can have great fun playing around and learning but it can be work at times. and having fun and playing with your synth toys (either software or hardware) is the best way to learn and improve.

RealEstateKing

RealEstateKing you say that synths are tools of music and not to see them as toys but then you also say that music isn't work and you should have fun..... hmmmm confusing arguement, you seem to be slightly contradictory there.

Well, what Im trying to say is that it is very easy to get caught up in an aquisitive mentality, constantly looking to fill your studio/bedroom with shiny new things to plug into each other, when ultimately, the thing that is really important is working on your playing/writing/singing/lyrical/compositional/engineering skills.

Otherwise, you end up becoming a bedroom nerd who never completes any music.

playing with your synth toys (either software or hardware) is the best way to learn and improve.

Its the best way to waste time that your could be spending writing/playing good music. The average punter is far more interested in good songs and genuine emotion than on that 5 hours you spent twiddling up just the right lead patch on your insanely complicated synth.

Im not saying people shouldnt use synths or anything: Just criticising the nerdy consumerist mentality that sometimes goes with it.

jiltloop

well sorry but not everyone makes music to please your average punter and make money. making music and playing around with synths is my hobby i'm not doing it to please anyone except me. i also plan to collect synths and hopefully have a room full of them, especially vintage synths because i'm fascinated by them. nothing wrong with being interested in the technolgy behind music aswell as music itself. we're not all trying to write the next platinum single, in fact the whole average punter side of music is something i don't find very appealing.

PaulBrewer

jiltloop wrote: »

making music and playing around with synths is my hobby i'm not doing it to please anyone except me.

Dead Right!

frobisher

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Like most things in life, it's a balance. Home guys want to believe that on their laptop and Euro 200 interface they can produce quality matching the high end studios. The industry loves to sell that dream.

But no-one reading this that only has a €200 card should ever not do their best and enjoy what they're doing. You can put together a great song on cheap gear and it can still be a great song and a great recording. Even if the recording isn't great you've already done the hardest bit of all and you can then go and re-record if you need. C'mon Paul, spread the encouragement!

PaulBrewer

frobisher wrote: »

But no-one reading this that only has a €200 card should ever not do their best and enjoy what they're doing. You can put together a great song on cheap gear and it can still be a great song and a great recording. Even if the recording isn't great you've already done the hardest bit of all and you can then go and re-record if you need. C'mon Paul, spread the encouragement!

Frobizzle, where you been?

Encouragement is one thing, however it must be tempered with realism.

If I might be so vain as to quote myself -

'Like most things in life, it's a balance'

frobisher

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Frobizzle, where you been?

It's summertime madness again, the big outdoor gigs and festivals are kicking in. Frobizzle be a pretty busy bee-zzle. On top of that my shiny fancy newish lappy needs repair. I've been stealing time on my sons PC and he is rather unimpressed when I even look at it.:rolleyes:

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Encouragement is one thing, however it must be tempered with realism.

If I might be so vain as to quote myself -

'Like most things in life, it's a balance'

I've always known we have quite differing views on this. I think that better gear will make better recordings ;I mean, like DUHH. BUT, music doesn't have to have the highest levels of fidelity in order to be valid. I say don't worry about your gear and just make music. Use what you have to the best of your ability, learn as you go, have copious quantities of satisfaction & fun. That all seems pretty damn fine to me. Don't worry if it's not Windmill Lane standard, just make music. If your music needs and deserves that level of recording and you want it then you'll get it. Until then just make music on whatever you have. You never know, you may evenm make a record on that basic gear that people will want to listen to. Hhhmmmm, now there's revolutinary idea. :cool:

PaulBrewer

frobisher wrote: »

You never know, you may evenm make a record on that basic gear that people will want to listen to. Hhhmmmm, now there's revolutinary idea. :cool:

Been there done that, lost interest! Want to do it bigger and better. Aim HIGH, there's far too much average around.

And that's not a revolutionary idea:cool:

Neurojazz

I'm being kept alive via iTunes for an mp3 made in REASON 3 with a single leadline added via CUBASE - that's pretty cheap and a lot of people are buying it and it's still getting airplay...

I won't be in line to remove the roof of my house, rent a crane and drop an SSL desk into the house anytime soon

I've also heard a child singing in the streets of dublin making music with air vibrations alone that flawed me - now that's cheap! - prehaps the guru brigade can bury him and his music under a heap of derision and valve compressors.

Soulful music comes from the strangest places, then tends to find an a$$ to crawl up at somepoint.

The techy stuff i love is when someone shows a really simple technique to get the most out of cheap gear to make it work it's best...

frobisher

Neurojazz wrote: »

I'm being kept alive via iTunes for an mp3 made in REASON 3 with a single leadline added via CUBASE - that's pretty cheap and a lot of people are buying it and it's still getting airplay...

I won't be in line to remove the roof of my house, rent a crane and drop an SSL desk into the house anytime soon

I've also heard a child singing in the streets of dublin making music with air vibrations alone that flawed me - now that's cheap! - prehaps the guru brigade can bury him and his music under a heap of derision and valve compressors.

Soulful music comes from the strangest places, then tends to find an a$$ to crawl up at somepoint.

The techy stuff i love is when someone shows a really simple technique to get the most out of cheap gear to make it work it's best...

Very well said.

RealEstateKing

well sorry but not everyone makes music to please your average punter and make money. making music and playing around with synths is my hobby i'm not doing it to please anyone except me. i also plan to collect synths and hopefully have a room full of them, especially vintage synths because i'm fascinated by them. nothing wrong with being interested in the technolgy behind music aswell as music itself. we're not all trying to write the next platinum single, in fact the whole average punter side of music is something i don't find very appealing.

"The whole punter side of music". Jesus, listen to yourself! You mean "people actually listening to what you do".

Im not suggesting you make ****ty pop music for **** to play in their Fiat Puntos, or even platinum singles (I certainly dont) but surely every musician wants other people to hear and enjoy their music, (even if it's only 3 people in a room above a pub) what the hell else is it for? !!

It's precisley this sort of hobbled attitude that Im talking about: How sad that a musician is only interested in music as a way of collecting things. It's analagous to a guy with a basement full of pornography and no interest in getting a girlfriend. It's wrong! (Sorry to be so harsh, but I feel really strongly that this bovine consumerist mentality has invaded the hallowed halls of the one thing in life that gives me true joy!)

As far as 'gear' is concerned: PaulBrewer is correct that it is difficult to get to "studio quality' in your own home when recording, but the reason for this is overwhelmingly:

(a) The quality of the rooms you're recording in: Boxy reverberations, standing waves etc.

(b) The quality of the engineer i.e. someone with years of experience of making records, not just someone who's picked up a few tips from a website.

(c) Having an acoustically treated room to mix it in. Doesnt matter how fancy your monitors are if the rooms crap.

I would honestly say that the 'gear' is nowhere near as important as those things: A couple of 1 or 200 euro chinese mics, M-audio preamps and monitors, and a 200 Euro soundcard and you can make an absolutely top quality album, if only you had the room to record and mix it in. I often find it hilarious that music magazines/websites are taking about the infintesmal differences between one preamp/convertor and another, while ignoring that, in the room it's gonna be used in the difference will be invisible.

PaulBrewer

RealEstateKing wrote: »

As far as 'gear' is concerned: PaulBrewer is correct that it is difficult to get to "studio quality' in your own home when recording, but the reason for this is overwhelmingly:

(a) The quality of the rooms you're recording in: Boxy reverberations, standing waves etc.

(b) The quality of the engineer i.e. someone with years of experience of making records, not just someone who's picked up a few tips from a website.

(c) Having an acoustically treated room to mix it in. Doesnt matter how fancy your monitors are if the rooms crap.

I would honestly say that the 'gear' is nowhere near as important as those things: A couple of 1 or 200 euro chinese mics, M-audio preamps and monitors, and a 200 Euro soundcard and you can make an absolutely top quality album, if only you had the room to record and mix it in. I often find it hilarious that music magazines/websites are taking about the infintesmal differences between one preamp/convertor and another, while ignoring that, in the room it's gonna be used in the difference will be invisible.

Nearly all true! However I disagree with the "infintesmal differences between one preamp/convertor" part.

There are monumental differences! Like 'What da Feck happened there?' differences.

RealEstateKing

There are monumental differences! Like 'What da Feck happened there?' differences.

It makes far more difference to the sound to move a microphone by an inch, cut/boost an eq by 1 or 2 dB, stick up the aux send on a reverb a little, or change the setting on a compressor, than to change from one relatively decent preamp to a higher end one. Just my opinion. In blind tests, most people cant tell any difference either.

But in any case, if running a studio and having lots of shiny gear is what you do for a living, I think this hair-splitting might be of use to you: Of course you dont want clients coming in to be faced with a rack full of Behringer.

What I object to is the way this hair-splitting has infected musicians in the past couple of years: If you're an ordinary musician, trying to be creative and write songs/play gigs/make recordings (and hold down a day job), you simply dont have time for this sort of geekery.

PaulBrewer

RealEstateKing wrote: »

I In blind tests, most people cant tell any difference either.

I beg to differ!

Neurojazz

...Once again a thread falls victim to 'high end' nonsense when the person who started the thread needs 'salt of the earth' advice. As i've worked in music shops for far too many years i can see that if i'd met someone of this 'high end is the only way' conviction in a shop looking for advice i'd be taking my business elsewhere! (no offence, but you ask the customer what they need, asses their skill level and try to sell them something that fits the bill)

RealEstateKing

Heres a nice article on the subject:

http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/avoiding-gear-acquisition-syndrome-when-to-upgrade-recording-gear/

PaulBrewer

Well we're totally OT now ... so we may as well keep going!

PaulBrewer

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Heres a nice article on the subject:

http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/avoiding-gear-acquisition-syndrome-when-to-upgrade-recording-gear/

Great article! Here's the last paragraph -

"I tell myself that I should only upgrade my recording gear with recording money because the difference between this piece of gear and that piece of gear is not that strong. However, what if that one piece of gear is the magic piece to the puzzle that really does dramatically improve my recordings and allows me to justify higher rates? An audio engineer MUST pursue these possibilities. I guess in the end, it’s important for us recording dudes/chicks to try out the high end gear as we can afford it and send it back if it doesn’t excite us and doesn’t make our jobs easier and allow us to charge more for our services. The big flaw is in keeping gear that isn’t worth the difference it has made. The bigger flaw is in tricking ourselves into liking a piece of gear that isn’t exciting us. The biggest flaw is not trying out the gear at all."

Quality pays in every aspect of life (Cars, TVs you name it), similarly quality costs.

My argument is never accumulate a ton of stuff, my argument is always get good stuff - once!

You use it for a long time, you don't sell it for half nothing in 3 years, and it doesn't get replaced by a 'better' one in 6 months. Perhaps not as easy to do in the Digital world but very easy to do in the analogue - the classics are classics for a reason!

Anyway, back onto the Topic - I don't know anything about the Roland SP-555!

jtsuited

Neurojazz wrote: »

...Once again a thread falls victim to 'high end' nonsense

Well said.

It amazes me how so much guff can be talked in the name of 'realism'.

The simple fact of the matter is that 'expert opinions' often have different vested interests inherent in them (it's not a coincidence that the main proponent of high-end stuff on this forum, is a salesman of such equipment).

This exists in most markets (economists correct me if i'm wrong).

Obviously guys who have invested in high-end stuff are going to say the differences are not infinetesimal no matter how much they believe otherwise.

And of course, the retailers of such high-end stuff are going to say likewise.

But if they are so confident in the size of the quality difference, why aren't they bombarding us with a/b listening tests ie. here's a guitar recorded through a behringer preamp versus a Grace etc.?

Surely if they believe that their gear is THAT much better sounding, they'd at least give us, the hapless customer, a listen to assess just how much an improvement we'll get for that extra amount of cash.

As opposed to [Insert Bigshot Producer's name here] uses gear x, and it p1sses all over your '200 euro soundcard'.

While there are differences (both big and small) with the high end stuff versus the cheap-as-chips stuff, most new, young engineers should be saving their money and time, and learning the actual craft.

Same goes for musicians. I've seen plenty of drummers going down a slippery slope of buying really expensive kits to get the sound their looking for, when really they should have learnt how to tune their Pearl Export properly and studied/practiced different microphone placements etc.

jtsuited

To answer the OP's question - maybe get a Blofeld (if you're dead set on hardware synths).

Tbh the microkorg isn't a great synth by any stretch of the imagination.

Maybe get some Arturia Softsynths - the Modular V and Jupiter-8V are pretty sweet.

PaulBrewer

jtsuited wrote: »

Well said.




Surely if they believe that their gear is THAT much better sounding, they'd at least give us, the hapless customer, a listen to assess just how much an improvement we'll get for that extra amount of cash.

Too many variables in that idea I think.

However I agree with the basic principle of hearing the difference - Haven't I been bangin' on about it for months now?

So I try to do one better, I'll give you the stuff to try in your own gaff.
One forum user here tried 3 Summing amps and came to his own , "correct" conclusion... which coincidentally differed from mine!
We both agreed on the 'effect' a unit was having, just he liked it and I didn't.

Also you may have read about our visit to SSL on Tuesday which I think everyone enjoyed. This gave anyone who was interested enough / had time to come over a meet the guys who build the stuff and try it. Who better to quiz than the bloke who helped design it?

Some guys loved the products, some didn't - but at least they could make a true decision for themselves having had their hands on it.

The goal isn't to confuse with options but empower the customer with definitive info ..... not opinions.

jiltloop

RealEstateKing wrote: »

"The whole punter side of music". Jesus, listen to yourself! You mean "people actually listening to what you do".

Im not suggesting you make ****ty pop music for **** to play in their Fiat Puntos, or even platinum singles (I certainly dont) but surely every musician wants other people to hear and enjoy their music, (even if it's only 3 people in a room above a pub) what the hell else is it for? !!

It's precisley this sort of hobbled attitude that Im talking about: How sad that a musician is only interested in music as a way of collecting things. It's analagous to a guy with a basement full of pornography and no interest in getting a girlfriend. It's wrong! (Sorry to be so harsh, but I feel really strongly that this bovine consumerist mentality has invaded the hallowed halls of the one thing in life that gives me true joy!)

As far as 'gear' is concerned: PaulBrewer is correct that it is difficult to get to "studio quality' in your own home when recording, but the reason for this is overwhelmingly:

(a) The quality of the rooms you're recording in: Boxy reverberations, standing waves etc.

(b) The quality of the engineer i.e. someone with years of experience of making records, not just someone who's picked up a few tips from a website.

(c) Having an acoustically treated room to mix it in. Doesnt matter how fancy your monitors are if the rooms crap.

I would honestly say that the 'gear' is nowhere near as important as those things: A couple of 1 or 200 euro chinese mics, M-audio preamps and monitors, and a 200 Euro soundcard and you can make an absolutely top quality album, if only you had the room to record and mix it in. I often find it hilarious that music magazines/websites are taking about the infintesmal differences between one preamp/convertor and another, while ignoring that, in the room it's gonna be used in the difference will be invisible.

when did i say i was only interested in music to collect things? you're being ignorant now. collecting synths for me, although obviously connected with music, is not the only reason that i am interested in music and to suggest that just shows to me that you think everyone should be a musician for the same reasons you are. everyone enjoys music and making music for different reasons and get satisfaction out of the process in different ways. thats why music is so universal and versatile and thats why there are so many genres of music. you need to understand that not everyone makes music to have other people listen to it and give them kudos, or to get a few claps from a few people in a pub. of course it can be satisfying to get your music heard, but i still get alot of satisfaction from making music even if i'm the only one who hears it. you have to realise that music can, for some people, be more than getting other people to listen to and enjoy.

RealEstateKing

Sorry if I was offensive, I was in a wierd mood yesterday.

you need to understand that not everyone makes music to have other people listen to it

I do understand this. And I think it's wrong. It is the product of modern technologies alienating people to the extent that they dont even want to play music to an audience anymore. Imagine you knew a guy who said he was an actor but had no desire to act in a play: He just liked to stay at home and declaim Shakespeare in the bathroom mirror for his own pleasure.

C'mon, get out there, play music, and make other people happy.

jiltloop

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Sorry if I was offensive, I was in a wierd mood yesterday.



I do understand this. And I think it's wrong. It is the product of modern technologies alienating people to the extent that they dont even want to play music to an audience anymore. Imagine you knew a guy who said he was an actor but had no desire to act in a play: He just liked to stay at home and declaim Shakespeare in the bathroom mirror for his own pleasure.

C'mon, get out there, play music, and make other people happy.

no problem, no offense taken. i take your point, you're correct in so far as music has always been about performance. it originated as a means of entertainment. i just think its evolving into a bit more than that. but yes you could be right maybe i do need to be a bit more ambitious.

pajodalton

HI LOOKING TO SELL OF THESE IF ANYONE LOOKING FOR

GREAT TOOL FOR A ONE MAN BAND.
http://www.buyandsell.ie/search/image_preview?pid=1279679&search_term=shadow+sh+075

Thanks

krd

The Roland SP-555 is nice. It's a real hardware sampler. It's a lot more fun than a DAW - but some things you can do with a DAW these days in terms of sampling are real pain to do on something like an SP-555


The big difference with this stuff (hardware) is it's more tactile. You're not clicking on a mouse etc - It's a lot harder to work with though. Which is part of the advantages as well as the drawbacks of this equipment.

I don't think Liam Howlett's done anything worthwhile since he abandoned his trusty Roland W-30. I'm not suggesting getting one. But Howlett did all his best tracks just with the W-30 and a turntable and some old vinyls. The limitations of the instrument shaped his sound.

Roland equipment is essentially made by a bunch of Japanese boffins - whose original intentions where to create equipment for Karoke bands - then the round eyes went and did all kinds of unpredictable stuff with it.

As though for things like getting EQ right on a sampler - forgettaboutit. You have no real control over the samplers electronics - and it will just add it's own magic to whatever you sample.

DAW's are great for lots of things - but they lack the physical feel of an instrument. But something like a Roland will just do it's own thing.

But as sampling goes - there's things you can do on Ableton in a few minutes that would be essentially nearly be impossible to do on an SP-555