Making music with hardware

  On 5/28/2010 at 10:41 PM, illway said:

  On 5/27/2010 at 4:25 AM, Brandi_B said:

I will get you some names and links, unless someone beats me to it. BUt just to let you know there are TONS of build it yourself (DIY) kits available for a very wide array of synth and drum machine type boxes. Should be up your alley. There's also tons of great hardware for people just starting out, and it's affordable. I recommend checking out the korg electribe series.

 

bbl with some more stuff

 

sound on sound magazines "synth secrets" is a must read.

 

As is honestly the nord lead 1 manual. Total intro to synthesis and presented in their awesomely laid out panel style. If you get a nord lead to go along with it, bonus, but that may be a bit pricey just getting into things, and being on a student budget.

 

Can you recommend any DIY kits?

http://www.paia.com/

http://www.ladyada.net/make/x0xb0x/

http://store.curiousinventor.com/voice-of-saturn-modular/voice-of-saturn-synth.html

http://www.doepfer.de/DIY_Synth_e.htm

Thanks a bunch

Get the demo version of fl studio and learn as much as you can through the pdf manual and any and all youtube videos. It's a great entry point. I would still be using it if I didn't have a mac now. If i remember correctly, the demo can do everything the full version can but the sound stops every few minutes.

FL Studio (Demo at top of page)

After I used that I bought Logic 8 for cheap thanks to an academic discount ($150 instead of $500).

  On 5/29/2010 at 8:28 PM, iamabe said:

Get the demo version of fl studio and learn as much as you can through the pdf manual and any and all youtube videos. It's a great entry point. I would still be using it if I didn't have a mac now. If i remember correctly, the demo can do everything the full version can but the sound stops every few minutes.

 

FL Studio (Demo at top of page)

 

After I used that I bought Logic 8 for cheap thanks to an academic discount ($150 instead of $500).

Nope, with demo you can do everything ecxcept saving projects. You can reender what you have made but just can't save the project. So it's pretty ok for learning. I worked just with demo for maybe 1.5 years.

Cool, any tutorials you guys recommend?

personally i wouldn't start with software. start with hardware. once you start with software its really tough to move to hardware as software simplifies everything. so you use fruity loops for a year then think "I'd like it add some hardware" but its a fuckign hassle so you buy one piece after another and fail to integrate them into your setup then you sell them. just start with hardware and stick with it. don't we spend enough time with computers already?

on the other hand you may find hardware so frustrating that you never make anything and give up.

I started out using both cheap hardware (again the Electribes are great for entry level) and software. Hardware gives you limitations which the user will gradually try to overcome, thus sparking creativity, whilst software gives you enough expandability to let you experiment with things that you may be able to do with higher up hardware.

I think the way my setup has gone is a good example of this. I started out with the Korg EA-1 and ER-1 as the heart of my setup, and am currently working with effectively the same thing but upgraded to the Elektron Monomachine and Machinedrum. VERY similar gear concepts (i.e. sequencer synth + drum machine) but miles apart in terms of what they can do. Don't let people fool you into software always being the best route, it really isn't in some cases.

For example, there is NOTHING out there VST wise that can compare to the Machinedrum on levels of sound quality, innovative sequencing and, perhaps most important of all, fun. However, a lot of the Monomachine's sound can be mimicked by hardware. The sequencing, on the other hand, is a little more tricky and less immediate than it is on the Mono. Software has its uses and its place - I'm definitely not anti-software as I use it all the time - but don't be put off using either hardware or software and definitely try experimenting with both.

hey whoever said analog is just a marketing ploi or whatever. that's bullshit. just for one example i own a mc202 which has an almost identical circuit board to the sh101. tried a few sh101 softsynth replicas and they sound absoulutely thin and boring compared to the real thing, you need to put on lots of EQ and effects (=effort) to make it sound similar to the real thing. try out a Sequential Circuits Pro-one and tell me you can get that sound with software, without any help of other components.

I went to the university of Delaware, too. The term IDM was coined there by a dude that worked at the computer lab while moderating the hyperreal archive in his spare time

  On 5/30/2010 at 7:26 AM, marf said:

I went to the university of Delaware, too. The term IDM was coined there by a dude that worked at the computer lab while moderating the hyperreal archive in his spare time

I'm still trying to decide whether you should give that dude a kiss or a slap

  On 5/30/2010 at 2:17 PM, soundwave said:

  On 5/30/2010 at 7:26 AM, marf said:

I went to the university of Delaware, too. The term IDM was coined there by a dude that worked at the computer lab while moderating the hyperreal archive in his spare time

 

I'm still trying to decide whether you should give that dude a kiss or a slap

Both.

what music do you prefer, the glitchy autechre kid606 IDM style or the ceephax juan atkins drexciya electronic music style?

for the former start with computers for the later stay away from PCs

for idm you want reaktor electribe PC etc

for proper electronic music you want real synths and studio equipment

there are two totally different traditions of thought at this site, and if you follow one set of assumptions you will end up making music in that style... so choose now which side of the fence :-D

it's like prostitution, nice woman starts at first for a bit of cash here and there then she ends up being 60 years old with 50,000 cocks to her name. thats where an electribe will get you!

It's just music though, don't make it a crusade :)

for mix n match loops try Fruityloops

for starting out and getting your heard around shit try Reason

for hardware an EMX-1 or a 2nd hand Monomachine with a Kaoss Pad 3 will should keep you occupied for a while

  On 5/30/2010 at 12:25 AM, Benedict Cumberbatch said:

personally i wouldn't start with software. start with hardware. once you start with software its really tough to move to hardware as software simplifies everything. so you use fruity loops for a year then think "I'd like it add some hardware" but its a fuckign hassle so you buy one piece after another and fail to integrate them into your setup then you sell them.

this is what happened to me. except i didn't sell them -- i was a stubborn bastard and stuck it out. i kind of limped along trying to integrate things; didn't go so well. then, one day, the hardware shit just grabbed me. i largely quit writing software trax for two years or so as i figured it out. then i got into software trax again... then, more knowingly, i started to record sh-101 blatts and use them in my software trax. this time it integrated

  On 5/30/2010 at 4:19 AM, Mcdergbit said:

hey whoever said analog is just a marketing ploi or whatever. that's bullshit. just for one example i own a mc202 which has an almost identical circuit board to the sh101. tried a few sh101 softsynth replicas and they sound absoulutely thin and boring compared to the real thing, you need to put on lots of EQ and effects (=effort) to make it sound similar to the real thing. try out a Sequential Circuits Pro-one and tell me you can get that sound with software, without any help of other components.

i just get annoyed when people imply that music made with analog equipment is more authentic than software/sample based tracks. Not saying you did that. I have a grudge against analog. also i have no money to buy one : (

  On 6/1/2010 at 2:45 AM, Hanratty said:

  On 5/30/2010 at 4:19 AM, Mcdergbit said:

hey whoever said analog is just a marketing ploi or whatever. that's bullshit. just for one example i own a mc202 which has an almost identical circuit board to the sh101. tried a few sh101 softsynth replicas and they sound absoulutely thin and boring compared to the real thing, you need to put on lots of EQ and effects (=effort) to make it sound similar to the real thing. try out a Sequential Circuits Pro-one and tell me you can get that sound with software, without any help of other components.

 

i just get annoyed when people imply that music made with analog equipment is more authentic than software/sample based tracks. Not saying you did that. I have a grudge against analog. also i have no money to buy one : (

it is a different music-making experience. i say i have different "approaches"... all software, all hardware, software + hardware, audio collage, etc.....

  On 6/1/2010 at 2:45 AM, Hanratty said:

  On 5/30/2010 at 4:19 AM, Mcdergbit said:

hey whoever said analog is just a marketing ploi or whatever. that's bullshit. just for one example i own a mc202 which has an almost identical circuit board to the sh101. tried a few sh101 softsynth replicas and they sound absoulutely thin and boring compared to the real thing, you need to put on lots of EQ and effects (=effort) to make it sound similar to the real thing. try out a Sequential Circuits Pro-one and tell me you can get that sound with software, without any help of other components.

 

 

i just get annoyed when people imply that music made with analog equipment is more authentic than software/sample based tracks. Not saying you did that. I have a grudge against analog. also i have no money to buy one : (

Yeah, it can be a hot topic often argued by people who are more infatuated with the hardware than by the results it gives. But to suggest that theres nothing in it is wrong for sure!

If you are ignoring the workflow thing (which is really important as well) and just looking at the results then the difference using hardware will make to your tracks are pretty small. Just being able to consistently structure tracks sonically, do great mixes every time etc is so much more important to how your stuff SOUNDS of course. But if you are able to do this then the use of hardware bits and bobs for a lot of people (myself included) are a way to make something that sounds good already sound great. Or in a lot of cases it sounds great from the first track laid down so you don't need nearly as much processing later down the line.

Its probably more down to the imperfectness of analog as much as anything else, happy accidents and tiny variations that humans seem to really like. If you look at the kicks on an old roland 606 they are slightly different every time, makes it sound a bit human! Suddenly the 4 to the floor kicks don't seem to sound so repetetive...

I dont think you need to worry about people who crusade for EITHER side, they're the ones who have missed the point somewhere along the line! but when there are a lot of good musicians saying 'there's something in it', theres probably something in it ;)

  On 6/1/2010 at 3:28 AM, welcome to the machine said:

  On 6/1/2010 at 2:45 AM, Hanratty said:

  On 5/30/2010 at 4:19 AM, Mcdergbit said:

hey whoever said analog is just a marketing ploi or whatever. that's bullshit. just for one example i own a mc202 which has an almost identical circuit board to the sh101. tried a few sh101 softsynth replicas and they sound absoulutely thin and boring compared to the real thing, you need to put on lots of EQ and effects (=effort) to make it sound similar to the real thing. try out a Sequential Circuits Pro-one and tell me you can get that sound with software, without any help of other components.

 

 

i just get annoyed when people imply that music made with analog equipment is more authentic than software/sample based tracks. Not saying you did that. I have a grudge against analog. also i have no money to buy one : (

 

Yeah, it can be a hot topic often argued by people who are more infatuated with the hardware than by the results it gives. But to suggest that theres nothing in it is wrong for sure!

 

If you are ignoring the workflow thing (which is really important as well) and just looking at the results then the difference using hardware will make to your tracks are pretty small. Just being able to consistently structure tracks sonically, do great mixes every time etc is so much more important to how your stuff SOUNDS of course. But if you are able to do this then the use of hardware bits and bobs for a lot of people (myself included) are a way to make something that sounds good already sound great. Or in a lot of cases it sounds great from the first track laid down so you don't need nearly as much processing later down the line.

 

Its probably more down to the imperfectness of analog as much as anything else, happy accidents and tiny variations that humans seem to really like. If you look at the kicks on an old roland 606 they are slightly different every time, makes it sound a bit human! Suddenly the 4 to the floor kicks don't seem to sound so repetetive...

 

I dont think you need to worry about people who crusade for EITHER side, they're the ones who have missed the point somewhere along the line! but when there are a lot of good musicians saying 'there's something in it', theres probably something in it ;)

you make good points, and i'm not on any crusade to enforce the proper way to make music, so please carry on with your analog synths. i'm sure they're very inspiring.

there is a certain zazz to hardware, but you have to use it or lose it. software isn't as good, but you can relax and take forever to get it right... that is how i feel, anyways.

  On 5/30/2010 at 12:25 AM, Benedict Cumberbatch said:

personally i wouldn't start with software. start with hardware.

I'm undecided about this. On the one hand, if you start with one good hardware synth you'll be forced to push it further to get sounds (as opposed to just downloading hundreds of different vsts & having them ferment on your harddrive) & probably learn more about sound designing. On the other hand, starting with software allows you to learn the basics & begin developing a sound without having to first spend hundreds of dollars. If you use software, it's all a matter of restraining yourself - just because you can use the virtual equivalent of an entire synth orchestra, doesn't mean you should.

Personally, I started off with hardware (making little ditties on cheap circuit bent keyboards), moved to software for a few years, & then switched back to mostly hardware (still using software for mixing/mastering).

Do a oscillik.

  On 5/31/2010 at 6:48 AM, chunky said:

what music do you prefer, the glitchy autechre kid606 IDM style or the ceephax juan atkins drexciya electronic music style?

for the former start with computers for the later stay away from PCs

Kid 606's studio:

  On 6/3/2010 at 3:08 PM, Rbrmyofr said:

  On 5/31/2010 at 6:48 AM, chunky said:

what music do you prefer, the glitchy autechre kid606 IDM style or the ceephax juan atkins drexciya electronic music style?

for the former start with computers for the later stay away from PCs

Kid 606's studio:

sorry im a bit stuck in the past

before analord, kid606 was kind of a symbol of the musical style of the day... glitchy laptop "idm"

aint really listened to his new stuff but im pretty sure he has the same mentality whatever machine you put in front of him

"nord" was the other defining things of these idm autechrefan types hehe and hes still got that. even autechre owns rolands and vintage synths but they still think on a completely different mentality

Get a 555 counter.

Wire it up on a breadboard so that it cycles between 0 and 1.

Put the output through a potentiometer so you can control volume.

Congratulations, you just made your first digital synth for 50 cents