Jump to content

Taupe Beats

  • Posts

  • Joined

Everything posted by Taupe Beats

  1. I personally don't find the Arturia sequencer approach to melody all that great. For me anyway, my mind isn't running fast enough to be able to quickly think about gate and velocity changes per-step when looking at 16 identical knobs. For live sequencing, ok sure. But once you get into tweaking steps, it's not as intuitive imo. From what I've seen of your rig, I'd recommend a Beatstep Pro. 2 mono melodic sequencers (where the channels can be changed easily onboard *snicker*), the same drum track as the Drumbrute, and the roller strip can be used for either melody or drum tracks. Individual CV/Gate outputs (with an extra Mod output for the velocity) for the melodic tracks. A whole lot more I'm not talking about.
  2. I have the 2S. Had the original Drumbrute (not the Impact). The 2S has some really cool parts and major frustrations. I am not huge on Arturia's oscillators. The envelopes are great and can be looped ARP-style. I wish they'd implemented the filter exactly like it works on the Microbrute (other than having the ability to have an open gate for external signals which is easier to do on the 2S). The Microbrute's (and assuming the original Minibrute, never used one) filter is a thing of beauty. They put the "Brute Factor" drive stage at the filter level rather than the master volume on the Minibrute 2S. So much better in the Microbrute, imo. Patchbay's cool, a lot of modulation potential (and there's 2 attentuators). And one of the dumbest things about the Minibrute 2S (and Microbrute, for that matter): You can't change the MIDI channel without the software. WTF is a synth doing putting a sequencer on it and then tethering it to one MIDI channel without having to stop everything and run software to change it? Still waiting to see if Arturia ever updates the firmware for that. Ridiculous. Overall, surprisingly high learning curve for a monosynth, that can give you a likely wider sound palate than most other monosynths. And it's big (but not nearly as big as a Matrixbrute so silver linings). Drumbrute Impact has the same sequencer as the original Drumbrute. By far the best part of it (and the same as the Beatstep Pro'd drum track). The Drumbrute's sounds were mainly underwhelming (The bass drums were ok, BD2 esp). The FM voice on the Impact looks cool but I'd still rather have the Volca Drum for that stuff. The individual outputs is a nice touch.
  3. With absolutely no evidence, I think that Soul Mass Transit System are Mak & Pasteman under a new name.
  4. Nymphes is polyphonic, btw I'd go for the Nymphes. True analog poly 6-voice is pretty nice. Good MIDI control and modulation.
  5. I hear this (lookin' at my rack of nothing but AMT8's). With that considered however, technology is about what's attainable rather than what's practical, for better or worse. One of the big debates with MIDI 2.0, has the 1.0 spec been around for so long with so much money invested into gear designed for it. I look at other types of tech and the willingness to abandon it after large monetary investments (home media formats, data port types, etc.), and feel confident MIDI 2.0 will arrive eventually.
  6. I'd personally say it's not quite "hitting with a hammer twice a day". I guess the point I'm making is that while I agree that there is stress run on it with each use, it's nowhere near the level of stress you're implying and that the devices are overall going to be a good piece of security in a rig. With the awareness of how long the item's been in use as they have a lifetime of ~10 years. I'm not saying it's the only piece of security you need. I could always run my own rig safer, no doubt, guessing this is the same for most. Where I think we disagree is that I would consider it a somewhat important piece for 99% of rigs (the 1% being professional studios with a more heavy-duty solution). In another subject, the Bastl Microgranny is a sneak wonderful sounding D/A. I really like the way it makes drum samples sound before you even start messing with parameters. Have a feeling it will get more of a reputation for this over time.
  7. Yes this is all true. The analogy is to consider them like bike helmets. You're gonna need it when it counts.
  8. This all sounds nice but I'd definitely not call it "easy" in any sense. This is all a ton of manual back work to code all that transposition that would end up being timely and/or expensive (or someone would be a saint and share their own work). And to the 2nd paragraph, I promise that's not true. There may not be a ton of outliers but I promise there are plenty of synths who use all the "standard" cc's for stuff that has nothing to do with the intended use. It needs to be a foundational change for future implementation first. Then the idea of retrofitting is more realistic. We have learned to be patient for MIDI 2.0 so I'm more than happy to wait and keep my fingers crossed that the new spec is greatness.
  9. Yeah I run a bunch of power strips to Furman M-8x2's, which go to another power strip and then to the wall. Easy on/easy off. The Furman's are designed to fall on the sword if there's a power surge. https://www.furmanpower.com/product/15a-standard-power-conditioner/
  10. Sorry, backwards compatibility was the term I was looking for, went blank in my previous post and had meant to comment on it. Backwards compatibility would be nothing short of mandatory for all the MIDI 1.0 spec gear that currently exists. I would anticipate limitations as far as what could be done to upgrade 1.0 gear into a 2.0 spec capabilities (if anything). I am *hoping* at the least that there will be a way to force 1.0 gear into a unique device identifier so the 16-channel limitation is removed. I'm not smart enough with MIDI to know the specifics on why Device ID's were limited to SysEx stuff. Your point on timing improvements is a great one. You may find this interview interesting. Update on MIDI 2.0 development:
  11. I think stricter enforcement of a current process is the weaker of potential solutions. I am hoping that MIDI 2.0 instead attempts something more unique to identify control signals, instead of the current sharing of 128 potential signals between all MIDI compatible gear. I've gotten the impression from what I've read in MIDI 2.0 is that the developers are on the same wavelength.
  12. edit: Sorry, I should have quoted the post. This is in response to @dcom's question to me. Taking the idea that someone goes and produces with the instruments/daw/whatever of their choice. And if the producer wanted to take the MIDI data which comprises that track, it could be exported to a standard file that could be loaded onto a different piece of gear than what was used to make that track, and all the data would still be playable to whatever instruments were assigned in that new environment. Now, you're going to tell me, "But Taupe Beats, that's exactly what standard MIDI files are designed to do!" While I understand this is the theoretical process, it is not a realistic one. Not even 7/10/74/71 are truly universal MIDI CC's, to use the most obvious examples. You get where I'm going... Like everyone else, I am eagerly awaiting to see what the true capabilities and functionalities of MIDI 2.0 will be. If they can solve these problems once and for all. I'm not trying to talk about how they'll do it (there's plenty of discussion of that all over the place and the speculation's pointless anyway). Just if it will be achieved. The tl:dr version is this: I see the Hapax like a purely MIDI take on a Pioneer DJ setup. That Pioneer DJ setup is now the industry standard. I don't think current MIDI can achieve what the Hapax aims to do. But I do think it's a noble and admirable idea and attempt, with hopes that future technology can achieve this goal.
  13. Valuable Rickroll opportunity wasted. I'm a bit torn on the Hapax. I love the concept (a MIDI sequencer that specializes in transitions, almost DJ-style). However with the limitations of MIDI bandwidth along with the amount of accompanying gear to achieve this stuff, I don't see it working that well in the real world. Hoping I'm wrong. It did give me this fantasy of universal MIDI file formats, so producers could do live sets like b2b dj sets with something like a Hapax. That would be amazing.
  14. That's a great idea but I'd def. want more than a stereo analog out. There's still way too much gear with analog-only connections. Sets of DB-25 connectors like on Mackie mixers would be perfect.
  15. Philip Baker Hall as Richard Nixon in Secret Honor is one of the great American acting performances. RIP
  16. Roland's gotta put out a new MX-1. It seems there's more requests made for it nearly by the day. I know this would never happen in 2022 but a rackmount summing-style usb mixer for Boutiques and AIRA stuff would rule. Allow for the ability to quickly allot outputs depending on what you want (so let's say, you could quickly switch presets from having several Boutiques output stereo to one that just outputs all the separate drums from the TR-8 individually). And a nice Scatter trick for the TR-8: Depth+On while a pattern is playing automatically triggers Scatter to play through the end of the pattern. edit: And with the E-4, it forces the USB stereo input to a mono signal before it passes to any effects. Boo!
  17. That "dad rock" line isn't inaccurate. In fact, "dad rock" status for IDM was achieved around 2005. But going forward, why focus on a name? Names aren't music. The best attitude about any musical community are in the early days before attempts to create niche sub-genres. There is absolutely nothing to dictate this division being an inevitability. Keep music as inclusive as possible.
  18. I could have sworn I saw somewhere that it could process a stereo input signal! Going back and indeed can't verify that anywhere. Damn. Thanks for the clarification!
  19. I want that Roland E-4. Stereo line input, vocal synthesis (vocoder, harmonizer), Scatter effect with full MIDI (Scatter effect 4 life, fight me), other effects, even has a looper on it. Nice and small.
  20. Too late to edit but I also want to give credit to AudioPilz. The Bad Gear series is great, funny, and typically accurate.
  21. Bobeats is the shittiest of the youtube gear reviewers, by far. It was his Volca Kick video ironically which convinced me. Anyone who wants to be taken seriously and puts "Worth the hype?" on a thumbnail can fuck ALL the way off. Nothing but sensationalism, front-running, ass-kissing, Elektron-overworship, shit-content, and not giving you any actual useful information. The entire "Should I buy this?" youtube gear reviewer scene can fuck off, except Loopop. He's the only one who actually cares about showing true functionality in his videos while successfully incorporating his own presentation style. So his videos can be useful to someone who actually goes and buys the thing (ie the audience these creators should actually be catering to). I could go on, Bobeats isn't the only one who can fuck off (Cuckoo is almost as bad, Great Value Luke Vibert).
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.