Are you moving from hardware to software, the other way around, or both?

[sheatheman]

I think I'm about 80% hardware for synths, maybe 10% for effects, 0% for sequencing. I love the flexibility of sequencing/editing in a DAW, and I love the convenience of software effects. Hardware is usually more fun to work with in the moment, but software is more fun when you want to fix something months down the line (which I often do). It's really nice to have both and I feel lucky that I can.

 

yeah, a healthy mix of both, that exact ratio in fact, is the way to go. WAY TO GO A/D!

[purlieu]

Spend the last couple of weeks just using my three new Volcas, a few pedals and recording on my four track, and I haven't had this much fun making music in as long as I can remember. So moving to hardware was definitely a good decision. At some point I'm sure I'll get back on the computer though.

[weakmassive]

Anyone made anything half decent just using phone apps?

Think so. Most of my stuff is Nanostudio on iPhone/iPad.

[sweepstakes]

 

I think I'm about 80% hardware for synths, maybe 10% for effects, 0% for sequencing. I love the flexibility of sequencing/editing in a DAW, and I love the convenience of software effects. Hardware is usually more fun to work with in the moment, but software is more fun when you want to fix something months down the line (which I often do). It's really nice to have both and I feel lucky that I can.

 

yeah, a healthy mix of both, that exact ratio in fact, is the way to go. WAY TO GO A/D!

 

Sequencing in a DAW strongly encourages certain choices, and not always the best ones. Having a timeline with copy/paste and generally infinite tracks, etc. It's great most of the time for how straightforward and seemingly unlimited it is, but there's something to be said for how hardware sequencers tend to make you rely on your ears and your sense of rhythm, both micro and macro. The DAW convenience factor is a big one, though.

 

I'd personally be dissatisfied if I wasn't at least 10% hardware sequencing, even if it was just for sketching melodies. Maybe after I make some less visual sequencers in Max I'll feel differently.

[Guest A/D]

Word. I love software sequencing because it encourages me to change things up. At the risk of sounding pretentious I like to "sculpt" things by adding multiple subtle layers with automation and changes and such. I haven't messed about with hardware sequencers much but it can't be easier than software for that stuff. I also have a good internal sense of rhythm but would much rather program it than play it.

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence Shea.

And like some wise people have said, taking your eyes off the screen while you listen makes a world of difference.

[sheatheman]

the only hardware sequencing i plan on doing is changing the order of how my hardware is laid out on my desk.

[Guest skibby]

ok, i think i figured out why im interested in having actual outboard gear:

 

I get tired of staring at the computer screen, no matter how useful and convenient the eyecandy earcandy is.

 

With real life gear, if I want a new window or to scroll, i can stand up and move around the room in real time and use my body to do things, it breaks the monotony and limits the internet addiction a little.

[sweepstakes]

Oh yeah, internet addiction too.

 

Also I get sick of staring at any screen sometimes.

 

These are non-issues if you're disciplined enough but, uh, I'm not.

[YEK]

just put a track up on soundcloud yesterday and decided to make more music the way i created it: radio + drum machine -> sampler-> ableton sequencing

check my sig, not amazing but a fun way to create

[b born droid]

Was banging around on a Roland 100M this afternoon. Sounded fucking majestic. Got more excited by that than I have with playing around on a laptop in a while.

[Audioblysk]

In the past month I have gotten a brand new dsi Pro 2 and an old kiwi-tech modded jx-3p with pg200 (before ver. 1.5 - I can use midi and the PG!) and have noticed a significant increase in my quality of sound and desire to mess with music more. Not to say I couldn't achieve the same results with software, I'd rather not, the instant interaction really makes it for me.

 

Now looking @ a RYTM so I can get my drums out of the computer. Software drums take work to be beefy, I don't like that

[Guest skibby]

this is a perfect thread because it makes no sense the more i think about it. but maybe there will be an upswing in the sense it makes for me.

[YEK]

going with a minimal sound mangling angle. this is lots of fun ///

 

[Guest cult fiction]

Huge respect for anybody who can sequence on hardware. I'm not talented enough to work like that, unless I have a piano roll where I can just endlessly tweak until it sounds good I'm useless.

 

I do find it waaaaay easier to get good sounds out of hardware even though my analog synths are pretty cheap and have DCOs

[YEK]

you just need to be confident with a multi tracker... that's all

[cloudbreaker]

@yek that setup looks like the best – when I got my mpc I was just doing stuff via am radio samples from a hand-cranked emergency radio. Arbitrary constraints are the best for creativity/inspiration, if not necessarily for the end output. Regardless, I think these phases are quite formative and will surely inform later more "professional" efforts. Kudos!

[lala]

50/50 hybrid? half the sequences are on HW half are in SW, triggers for shiz sent out via silentway/motu/Elektrons

 

Elektron A4/AR/MD

modular

x0xbox

jp8000

Silentway

 

Diva

lush 101

phoscyon

Aalto

Satin

[sweepstakes]

Arbitrary constraints are the best for creativity/inspiration, if not necessarily for the end output.

You qualified this with "necessarily", but I think constraints are good for end output too. Under constraints you find and try things you wouldn't otherwise. The audio quality ("fidelity") might not be what it would with standard tools but that rarely harms the music, at least for me.

[Guest skibby]