Jump to content
Time Tourist

New countdown, new release? [Aphex Twin Warp Store]

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

If this does end up being a new album I really hope he goes back to shredding sound on a laptop again. I love all the analog stuff but it's been forever since he's done anything digital. Would be nice to hear.

YESSSSS

 

Like imagine him making an entire album with only softsynths, software samplers and drum sample kits etc. He could take cutting edge vsts like Serum or Spire and just tear them inside out.

 

Edit: but knowing rdj and his love of machines im sure hed find that approach boring though lol

 

Yeah I mean really the last full on digital stuff he did as far as I know was Tuss stuff, and that ruled. It was also like 10ish years ago. I get he loves geeking out on gear and exploiting hardware to it's fullest potential, and he's done some really amazing stuff, but software has really taken some big leaps since RDJ/Come To Daddy EP/Windowlicker/Drukqs era. I just want to hear what he'd do with it.

 

 

I thought the Tuss stuff was still mostly analog?

 

It may be, I could be wrong about that. I think at least stuff like Deathfuck is almost surely digital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

If this does end up being a new album I really hope he goes back to shredding sound on a laptop again. I love all the analog stuff but it's been forever since he's done anything digital. Would be nice to hear.

YESSSSS

 

Like imagine him making an entire album with only softsynths, software samplers and drum sample kits etc. He could take cutting edge vsts like Serum or Spire and just tear them inside out.

 

Edit: but knowing rdj and his love of machines im sure hed find that approach boring though lol

 

Yeah I mean really the last full on digital stuff he did as far as I know was Tuss stuff, and that ruled. It was also like 10ish years ago. I get he loves geeking out on gear and exploiting hardware to it's fullest potential, and he's done some really amazing stuff, but software has really taken some big leaps since RDJ/Come To Daddy EP/Windowlicker/Drukqs era. I just want to hear what he'd do with it.

 

 

I thought the Tuss stuff was still mostly analog?

 

It may be, I could be wrong about that. I think at least stuff like Deathfuck is almost surely digital.

 

The beats maybe, but that synth is def his GX-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling we will never hear "computer music" from him again. His love of noodling with analogue gear and weird acoustics etc. win out. I love all of that stuff but I do long for his digital hyper intricate stuff.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent example of him not using analogue gear, and yet he took the opportunity to simulate analogue-produced music  :cerious:

 

 

good thing it very well may be the greatest song from the entire SC event. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent example of him not using analogue gear, and yet he took the opportunity to simulate analogue-produced music  :cerious:

 

 

good thing it very well may be the greatest song from the entire SC event. 

lol yeah that song rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see why he would not use computers for composing, effect modulation and so on.  Especially vst´s like the Eventide H3000 must be much handier and faster then the analog version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure that's all digital? The effects as well as all of the percussion is all digital but the 303 as well as the leads and pads sound very analogue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol. there ya go. I love 'pretend analog exmix'. I think Richard just enjoys making things difficult for himself in the studio.. and loves analogue sound and tape etc.. plus he is nostalgic as hell clearly. He wants to make tunes in a similar way that his heroes made tunes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see why he would not use computers for composing, effect modulation and so on.  Especially vst´s like the Eventide H3000 must be much handier and faster then the analog version.

Basically this, I'm not sure if he's still an analog elitist like he was (or pretended to be) 11 or 12 years ago but even then there were obvious advantages to at least some digital workflow. I don't own any hardware because of the price of admission as well as DAWs and plugins being so good these days, but I'm not going to criticize someone for using it because the workflow works for them. Whatever sounds good is good. But he may have just been taking the piss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do most folks on here think this will be a new album?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do most folks on here think this will be a new album?

 

Either that or his own Bleepstore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So do most folks on here think this will be a new album?

 

Either that or his own Bleepstore

 

 

 

Mmm. I hope it's something new, album or something. A bleep store would be a bit of an anti-climax. Hardly worth a countdown - unless it's selling something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its confirmed not to be shitty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

i dont see why he would not use computers for composing, effect modulation and so on.  Especially vst´s like the Eventide H3000 must be much handier and faster then the analog version.

Basically this, I'm not sure if he's still an analog elitist like he was (or pretended to be) 11 or 12 years ago but even then there were obvious advantages to at least some digital workflow. I don't own any hardware because of the price of admission as well as DAWs and plugins being so good these days, but I'm not going to criticize someone for using it because the workflow works for them. Whatever sounds good is good. But he may have just been taking the piss.

 

 

 

Yeah, if you have the money for all that stuff then more power to you. I think Richard is big on methodology, a big part of his music lately is probably trying to meet the challenge of manipulating different pieces of gear that have their own limitations and strengths. Supposedly the Cheetah gear he was working with was notoriously difficult master, and he said on SC that CCAI pt.2 was not easy at all to create. If that SYRO gear list is to believed, and I think it is, it's probably the unique presets and constant need to learn different gear that keeps him sharp as fuck and still evolving as a musician as opposed to someone that has just been churning out slightly different versions of the same album. Not that that's a bad approach either, some people like to refine a certain sound they're chasing. Richard, on the other hand, is one of the few people in music that can pursue styles that are completely different sounding with mastery. Can't wait for whatever this countdown brings, hopefully it's a new album and has elements of what we heard on the field day LP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an even RARER and MORE DIFFICULT to program synth called Newt, get ready.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an even RARER and MORE DIFFICULT to program synth called Newt, get ready.

 

newt ep confirmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all of the gear he uses is analogue, he has also used plenty of digital synthesizers/samplers in his set up...FM, wavetable and many others are digital as are most hardware samplers. I think a lot of people here get confused and think that all hardware is analogue. I've discussed this at length here before...but one typically does not use vst's when you have access to the collection of gear that Richard has in his arsenal, which is nothing short of a dream set up and one that most producers would kill for. You don't drive a Prius when you have Ferrari's, Lambourghini's, Porches, Benz's etc.. You just don't. A lot of people who post here have these massive misconceptions about gear, computers, electronic music production in general. Softsynths are synthesizers that are struggling (at best) to emulate real pieces of digital and analogue hardware...and none of them come close in sound quality. A soft version of an H3000 does not sound like it's $5000 hardware counterpart. When you are RDJ - there is almost nothing he can't achieve with his hardware set ups that he could with a computer....and it will sound infinitely better in quality as a result.

 

I've personally used and tested every one of the most coveted soft synths on the market in the past 15 years -including the newer ones like Serum. I also have about 10 pieces of hardware, some of it vintage. I don't care what it is, vst's sound relatively the same and they all lack a certain realness, soul, substance, organic quality that good hardware has, hell even most cheap hardware sounds somehow more substantial. Even digital hardware synthesizers, you would think a computer with a good soundcard/interface would be comparable but it's still somehow lacks something. Computer generated music always has sort sterile sheen over the whole production. I still use vst's myself but only out of substitution for what I can't afford in the hardware world but I put a lot of effort through effects and such to make it sound like it didn't come from a computer.

Edited by killabyte11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping the countdown is for a new digiital store with an abundance of properly mastered archive ttacks and previously unheard material.   Hopefully  Richard is going to follow through on releasing those 7 tapes of tracks he found ages ago, each with 20 + tracks.   That would make me happy.   Or it could be a new album or Melodies From Mars.  Maybe its everything!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure that's all digital? The effects as well as all of the percussion is all digital but the 303 as well as the leads and pads sound very analogue

All made with VST plugins, but mixed through an analog mixer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a cirklon is a computer tho innit, or an octatrack. you can plug in mice and monitors to some samplers/desks

 

 

so it's basically a boring story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all of the gear he uses is analogue, he has also used plenty of digital synthesizers/samplers in his set up...FM, wavetable and many others are digital as are most hardware samplers. I think a lot of people here get confused and think that all hardware is analogue. I've discussed this at length here before...but one typically does not use vst's when you have access to the collection of gear that Richard has in his arsenal, which is nothing short of a dream set up and one that most producers would kill for. You don't drive a Prius when you have Ferrari's, Lambourghini's, Porches, Benz's etc.. You just don't. A lot of people who post here have these massive misconceptions about gear, computers, electronic music production in general. Softsynths are synthesizers that are struggling (at best) to emulate real pieces of digital and analogue hardware...and none of them come close in sound quality. A soft version of an H3000 does not sound like it's $5000 hardware counterpart. When you are RDJ - there is almost nothing he can't achieve with his hardware set ups that he could with a computer....and it will sound infinitely better in quality as a result.

 

I've personally used and tested every one of the most coveted soft synths on the market in the past 15 years -including the newer ones like Serum. I also have about 10 pieces of hardware, some of it vintage. I don't care what it is, vst's sound relatively the same and they all lack a certain realness, soul, substance, organic quality that good hardware has, hell even most cheap hardware sounds somehow more substantial. Even digital hardware synthesizers, you would think a computer with a good soundcard/interface would be comparable but it's still somehow lacks something. Computer generated music always has sort sterile sheen over the whole production. I still use vst's myself but only out of substitution for what I can't afford in the hardware world but I put a lot of effort through effects and such to make it sound like it didn't come from a computer.

 

Spot on with many of the points here. And no trust me, I know very well with experience there is a big difference between the in-the-box sound and even cheap digital hardware synths. This is partially why I've been making certain stuff myself using my EMU rompler, ASR-10, and my Yamaha YS200. Even that super limited 4 op ys200 is light and day difference between basic patches on NI's FM8. Everything from its internal DAC, circuit noise, the hardware having a dedicated board, going back into your converter/pre, etc. It's just richer, has more dimension and texture and is thicker. No doubt about it. My thoughts of if he used all vsts for a project was not an analog vs. digital thing, it was more a in-the-box vs out-the-box thing. You might be right in one sense of the idea of the futility of using all vsts when you have the resources and skill richard has. But there is something to be said about the process of producing all itb. Looking at modern dance/electronic styles, there have been a wide range of great pro releases that use mostly itb production (and i know for a fact from a close friend whose a ghost producer there are hit dance singles all done itb (mixing as well). yes, it has it's "own sound", the squeaky clean digital character, but I think that particular sound shouldn't be looked down on just because it lacks a human feel. Cold and computer-ish and sterile can sometimes be cool in itself (see modern dnb, goa trance etc -- those styles would actually sound ridiculous if composed (mostly) via out the box via synths, drums machines and samplers with the exception of maybe the Virus TI, some crazy modulars, or more modern digital varieties). With the right techniques and mixing, it can sound quite warm on the surface, but still squeaky clean on the inside (esp when re-amping or running vsts through analog gear to give mojo). Which makes me wonder, does anyone know what kind of hardware/software rdj used on drukqs? Anyway, to me, it would just be interesting to see what he could accomplish going all or at least significantly itb, at least on the production end. Though I know i know it's 99% surely not to happen lol. 

 

I mean speaking of IDM, haven't both Ae and Squarepusher done releases that heavily utilized softsynths or am I just crazy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not all of the gear he uses is analogue, he has also used plenty of digital synthesizers/samplers in his set up...FM, wavetable and many others are digital as are most hardware samplers. I think a lot of people here get confused and think that all hardware is analogue. I've discussed this at length here before...but one typically does not use vst's when you have access to the collection of gear that Richard has in his arsenal, which is nothing short of a dream set up and one that most producers would kill for. You don't drive a Prius when you have Ferrari's, Lambourghini's, Porches, Benz's etc.. You just don't. A lot of people who post here have these massive misconceptions about gear, computers, electronic music production in general. Softsynths are synthesizers that are struggling (at best) to emulate real pieces of digital and analogue hardware...and none of them come close in sound quality. A soft version of an H3000 does not sound like it's $5000 hardware counterpart. When you are RDJ - there is almost nothing he can't achieve with his hardware set ups that he could with a computer....and it will sound infinitely better in quality as a result.

 

I've personally used and tested every one of the most coveted soft synths on the market in the past 15 years -including the newer ones like Serum. I also have about 10 pieces of hardware, some of it vintage. I don't care what it is, vst's sound relatively the same and they all lack a certain realness, soul, substance, organic quality that good hardware has, hell even most cheap hardware sounds somehow more substantial. Even digital hardware synthesizers, you would think a computer with a good soundcard/interface would be comparable but it's still somehow lacks something. Computer generated music always has sort sterile sheen over the whole production. I still use vst's myself but only out of substitution for what I can't afford in the hardware world but I put a lot of effort through effects and such to make it sound like it didn't come from a computer.

 

Spot on with many of the points here. And no trust me, I know very well with experience there is a big difference between the in-the-box sound and even cheap digital hardware synths. This is partially why I've been making certain stuff myself using my EMU rompler, ASR-10, and my Yamaha YS200. Even that super limited 4 op ys200 is light and day difference between basic patches on NI's FM8. Everything from its internal DAC, circuit noise, the hardware having a dedicated board, going back into your converter/pre, etc. It's just richer, has more dimension and texture and is thicker. No doubt about it. My thoughts of if he used all vsts for a project was not an analog vs. digital thing, it was more a in-the-box vs out-the-box thing. You might be right in one sense of the idea of the futility of using all vsts when you have the resources and skill richard has. But there is something to be said about the process of producing all itb. Looking at modern dance/electronic styles, there have been a wide range of great pro releases that use mostly itb production (and i know for a fact from a close friend whose a ghost producer there are hit dance singles all done itb (mixing as well). yes, it has it's "own sound", the squeaky clean digital character, but I think that particular sound shouldn't be looked down on just because it lacks a human feel. Cold and computer-ish and sterile can sometimes be cool in itself (see modern dnb, goa trance etc -- those styles would actually sound ridiculous if composed (mostly) via out the box via synths, drums machines and samplers with the exception of maybe the Virus TI, some crazy modulars, or more modern digital varieties). With the right techniques and mixing, it can sound quite warm on the surface, but still squeaky clean on the inside (esp when re-amping or running vsts through analog gear to give mojo). Which makes me wonder, does anyone know what kind of hardware/software rdj used on drukqs? Anyway, to me, it would just be interesting to see what he could accomplish going all or at least significantly itb, at least on the production end. Though I know i know it's 99% surely not to happen lol. 

 

I mean speaking of IDM, haven't both Ae and Squarepusher done releases that heavily utilized softsynths or am I just crazy?

 

 

He mentioned on SC using the tracker PlayerPro for Drukqs, probably with an assortment of breaks/samples/softsynths, some tracks being made on his laptop even.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all of the gear he uses is analogue, he has also used plenty of digital synthesizers/samplers in his set up...FM, wavetable and many others are digital as are most hardware samplers. I think a lot of people here get confused and think that all hardware is analogue. I've discussed this at length here before...but one typically does not use vst's when you have access to the collection of gear that Richard has in his arsenal, which is nothing short of a dream set up and one that most producers would kill for. You don't drive a Prius when you have Ferrari's, Lambourghini's, Porches, Benz's etc.. You just don't. A lot of people who post here have these massive misconceptions about gear, computers, electronic music production in general. Softsynths are synthesizers that are struggling (at best) to emulate real pieces of digital and analogue hardware...and none of them come close in sound quality. A soft version of an H3000 does not sound like it's $5000 hardware counterpart. When you are RDJ - there is almost nothing he can't achieve with his hardware set ups that he could with a computer....and it will sound infinitely better in quality as a result.

 

I've personally used and tested every one of the most coveted soft synths on the market in the past 15 years -including the newer ones like Serum. I also have about 10 pieces of hardware, some of it vintage. I don't care what it is, vst's sound relatively the same and they all lack a certain realness, soul, substance, organic quality that good hardware has, hell even most cheap hardware sounds somehow more substantial. Even digital hardware synthesizers, you would think a computer with a good soundcard/interface would be comparable but it's still somehow lacks something. Computer generated music always has sort sterile sheen over the whole production. I still use vst's myself but only out of substitution for what I can't afford in the hardware world but I put a lot of effort through effects and such to make it sound like it didn't come from a computer.

I understand this, and agree. Not really what I was getting at with my hope for him to return to producing on a laptop. I feel like his, and most producers, approach is naturally different when producing on a laptop vs hardware. Different setups take you down different avenues and results in different types of sounds and techniques. Personally a lot of my favorite aphex is stuff he's done on a laptop, and it seems he hasn't really done that in a while. I think it would be interesting to see what that approach would bring all these years later after his dive into mostly analog hardware production.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: I will say that you make a very good point here though: "When you are RDJ - there is almost nothing he can't achieve with his hardware set ups that he could with a computer....and it will sound infinitely better in quality as a result."

 

... though I think there's a difference between level of "achievement" and character. And trust me, I'm not proponent of softsynths over hardware or anything, probably the opposite (at least definitely so for outboard vs compressor plugins etc), but wouldn't you agree that the itb realm has kind of a monopoly over let's say, i don't know ... running a crazy serum patch through some even crazier delay/mod/verb vsts and like 10 iterations of those to create soundscapes. Sure, it's no match for hardware at everything, but isn't there value in some of the more high def cutting edge sound design that the softsynth domain just excels at? 

Edited by Lane Visitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, if he made Syro with all hardware...then I believe he could do anything with that set up.  A computer just makes these types of edits/ arrangements easier but I believe you get much more for your time when going the hardware route.  IMO if he would have made all computer albums like RDJ, Druqs with a hardware set up instead....they would have sounded that much better. 

 

As far as what you said about modern day drum & bass.  It was infinitely better in my opinion when it was made with hardware samplers connected to an Atari st for sequencing as it was for the first decade of it's evolution.  I followed D&B religiously from the mid 90's til around 05 which is when they started going ITB more and more...and in my experience, this is when that genre lost an awful lot of it's originality and started sounding much more samey, sterile etc..  Before that, almost 100% of D&B was made with little more than Emu e6400 or Akai S series sampler connected to an Atari for midi sequencing and over driven naturally, usually on a cheap Mackie desk with a rack of effects, eq, compressor between.

 

There may be things that are easier to achieve working in the box but in my experience this works both ways, there are many things that dedicated hardware machines do that you could emulate in the computer but you probably wouldn't because it would be such a pain and take way too long to set it up that way....while the hardware just does that task right out of the door in a very immediate way ...just sort of specializes at that task.  I'm not against computers at all, I use one myself.  When I started producing I couldn't afford much gear, so when the whole computer production revolution happened, I completely embraced it as it gave me the ability to create fully realized tracks with just my computer.  Over time I acquired more and more hardware but also continued to use vst's out of convenience and lack of gear but as time went on I found them to sound more and more sort of the same and lifeless.  I've continued trying every conceivable one to find the best sounding possible but the more old hardware I pick up, it just has a more lively/living sort of sound quality....even cheap rack effects, which most early dance music was made with have a character to them that software effects just don't have.  In a way, it comes down to that one word - character.  Not sure how else to describe it.  Just that everything made strictly in a computer environment sort of has this plasticky film over top of it.  Not to mention 95% of my all time favorite tracks were made with hardware. 

Edited by killabyte11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...