mosca Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 if i had to choose - microkorg serious paddage and bassage going on with that bad boy - pain in the arse to program but worth it. mo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 That's good advice iep. Damn good advice. But he's only got £150. Can't get much brand new for that from a music shop..... Gonna have to go second hand or online.... oh yeah absolutely, i rarely buy anything new. there is a thriving second hand market in electronic music gear here, so lets say if i buy an analogue synth like a juno60, i can try it out for a few weeks, and if i dont like it, just sell it for the same price that i bought it for - lots of gear (especially old/rare/vintage) doesn't lose its value over time, like those cute little DSP-based korg boxes (because motorola will have a newer, faster, cheaper and smaller DSP manufactured in two weeks, and an even better one in four weeks, etc). microprocessor-speeds (better yet, all intergrated circuit-speeds) still roughly evolve (transistor-count-wise) by Moore's Law. so gear that's made out of mostly discrete components or rare IC's (like the famous CEM chips) is always a good investment, providing you have access to a market to sell it on if you dont like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 @ ant acid... you clearly know your kit, so i'm sure you're aware that it always sounds better when using external digital kit to sum it through an analog desk into your soundcard, than to go completely native. ie.. yes they're both dsp, but i'd rather go ext than int... and mix through a decent desk. @ mo... i got an ms2000b a few months back, and i ain't finding the synthesis as powerful as i'd expect... yeas it's got some great sound capabilities, and yes it's a bitch to program... same engine in the mikro innit? i think my money may well have been better spent on a nord.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 i don't believe the hype about analogue mixing vs. digital summing. It's about the fact that channels on an analogue mixer aren't perfectly panned middle even when your pot is set dead middle. This very slight mis-panning gives a slight stereo effect making the mix from an analogue mixer sound slightly more lively. solution: offset your panning very slightly on your digital mixer and you achieve the same result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 we'll just have to agree to differ... i use a combination of both anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 it always sounds better to use external digital kit and sum it through an analog desk into your soundcard, than going completely native. eh?! if you use digital gear, and want to transfer it to something else in the digital domain (which is a computer in this case), you don't want extra D/A and A/D conversions in between, ofcourse. yeah sure, if you like 'the sound' of a particular (analogue or digital) desk - or any other piece of equipment for that matter - you can route it through there. but if you don't want to lose signal quality (although this 'loss' is perceived as good by some people, and this 'loss' is actually gain in the case of an analogue desk: analogue tables add, often multi-staged, transistor saturation, as you might know) you should stay in the digital domain and use digital connections. too bad that most low-end digital gear only has analogue connections, in combination with not-exactly-great A/D/D/A converters. then again, its all a matter of personal, subjective preference and not a matter of 'it always sounds better through analogue desks'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 i don't believe the hype about analogue mixing vs. digital summing. It's about the fact that channels on an analogue mixer aren't perfectly panned middle even when your pot is set dead middle. This very slight mis-panning gives a slight stereo effect making the mix from an analogue mixer sound slightly more lively. solution: offset your panning very slightly on your digital mixer and you achieve the same result. HAHAHA!!!! do you even know how an analogue mixer works?! HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE INSIDE OF ONE?! DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT A TRANSISTOR IS AND WHAT IT DOES?!?! HAHAH what a joke, 'mis-panning' !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 i know, i said.. through a decent desk.. and i'm talking about signal loss...but fuzzy random signal loss, as opposed to harsh square digital signal loss.. if you're careful, it can go a long way to (i hate the term)... 'warming' the sound...also, if you're working with cheap s/c and d/aa/d convertors, it can go a long way to getting rid of that 'all out of one box' sound that so many bedroom producers have these days. personal preference i guess, but as i said, i use a combination... plus it's more natural to tweak a desk with knobs than to mouse a gui in cubase or logic... (midi controllers aside... the guy's just starting) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 potentiometers are all very slightly different, that's the part I'm talking about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 anyway this is way beyond the point, if you can't make good music with crap gear, you sure ain't going to make it with the most exensive gear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 anyway this is way beyond the point, if you can't make good music with crap gear, you sure ain't going to make it with the most exensive gear wurd up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 i know, i said.. through a decent desk.. and i'm talking about signal loss...but fuzzy random signal loss, as opposed to harsh square digital signal loss.. if you're careful, it can go a long way to (i hate the term)... 'warming' the sound...also, if you're working with cheap s/c and d/aa/d convertors, it can go a long way to getting rid of that 'all out of one box' sound that so many bedroom producers have these days. personal preference i guess, but as i said, i use a combination... plus it's more natural to tweak a desk with knobs than to mouse a gui in cubase or logic... (midi controllers aside... the guy's just starting) yeah sure a SSL 900 Series desk or a custom-built Neve will 'alter' your signal - but they each have their own ways of altering the signal so you can't speak of 'warming'. it's like saying 'yeah everything sounds better and warmer through a Eminent and Smallstone chorus and phaser' - it all comes down to how you are going to use the sound and what your (SUBJECTIVE) taste is. getting rid of the native sound can be done in so many ways, it's foolish to dogmatically say that you should route it through a good analogue mixer. but what do i care, people here are spewing nonsense like its nobodies business. 99% percent of you 'analogue experts' who claim shit about warming and mis-panning (i'll remember that one, HAHAHA) probably have no clue as to how these analogue electronics actually work - what is actually going on in that shiny polished vintage gear of yours. i have no problem with people giving their opinions, but as soon as they start trying to come off as some kind of authority, telling other people to do this and do that, while they don't even have a CLUE about the jibberish that flows out of their mouths, they are starting to get on my nerves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 potentiometers are all very slightly different, that's the part I'm talking about a potentiometer = a potentiometer, whether it is used in combination with microprocessors or discrete components. anyway this is way beyond the point, if you can't make good music with crap gear, you sure ain't going to make it with the most exensive gear wurd up. ofcourse, what ant acid is saying is true - so why should anyone have to route their signals through expensive analogue mixers? so, i'll say it once again: its all subjective, its a matter of personal preference! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 personal preference i guess, but as i said, i use a combination... did you miss this bit? i also said "goes some way"... i have not at any point said this is my exclusive technique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 personal preference i guess, but as i said, i use a combination... did you miss this bit? no i didn't but i was more referrring to the post that you wrote before that - where you said that an analogue desk / digital combination 'always sounds better', but manyways, good to agree :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 the fact that a pot/slider has an infinite amount of settings between min and max, rather than mathematically stepped increments also is a great deal of help in a mix. IN MY OPINION, FOR MY PURPOSES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 a potentiometer = a potentiometer, whether it is used in combination with microprocessors or discrete components. yes but the zero point can be set to *precisely* dead middle with software, but not with an analogue desk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 most software mixers use 32bit float calculations, coupled with interpolation so the steps are not possible to perceive :grin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 whereas the steps may be impossible to percieve, sometimes... (just an aesthetic thing)..sometimes i find it almost impossible to get the proportions of two channels exactly how i want them in relation to each other via digital mixing... even down to increment of .01 .. too loud... decrement of 0.01.. too quiet.. in a situ like that, i find it much easier to sum through thhe desk. more hands on and more natural, for me. i'd also like to re-state the point that I USE A COMBINATON. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 well that's an interesting (but very offtopic discussion): outboard digital mixers also use 16 or 32 bit floating point precision: so when you turn a pot on a digital mixer, the position has to be tracked by a processor which works with those very precise floating point calculations. but dont you have the same kind of 'inaccuracy' with digital mixers then? after all, the position of the potmeter is tweaked by your fingers and, in practical use, will never be in the absolute middle either. true, there is ofcourse a certain 'flux' when using analogue pots - but the effect that this instability has on the timbre of the sound thats feeding through the mixer is way stronger than on the phase, which could only be heard when you have extremely good ears and a ultra-high end pair of electrostatic headphones or something. because this flux, this instability, manifests itself in things like the (over)drive of the output buffer of the transistors in the EQ circuits, the distortion of the condensators in combination with the semiconductors (because condensators don't have non-linear distortion on their own), whether there are electrolyte condensators or polyprpylene condensators are being used, etc - the sum of all those distortions, fluxes, saturations and overdrives is what gives analogue mixers their character.. not the precision of the pots and the resulting miniscule changes in phase.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 U WOT? :grin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 U WOT? :grin: eh?! what kinda random response is that..? :grin: i think you better go back to your silly myspace and internet drama threads. that way, you'll get alot more of that attention you seek so desperately - making wild claims about 'analogue vs digital' won't put you in the spotlights as much as gossiping over lost boyfriends and 'electronic music superstars', 'kara'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest taxman Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 i don't like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 U WOT? :grin: eh?! what kinda random response is that..? :grin: i think you better go back to your silly myspace and internet drama threads. that way, you'll get alot more of that attention you seek so desperately - making wild claims about 'analogue vs digital' won't put you in the spotlights as much as gossiping over lost boyfriends and 'electronic music superstars', 'kara'. sexist myspaceogynist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ant Acid Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 i work in professional studios(i'm an engineer) and have a good knowledge of what is useful in all sorts of music productions. your post made very little sense, i think you're talking out of your arse :laughing: end of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.