How Many People Here Are Edging Back into Hardware?

[Anderton]

You have the computer, the plug-ins, you've mixed in the box...but are you starting to use some of your hardware more than you used to? Particularly Cubase owners, as SX and Cubase 4 make it easier to interface external analog gear with the host program.

 

Or maybe you've dusted off that synth and are playing directly into the audio ins instead of using soft synths?

 

I'm not so much interested in people who continue to use hardware, but those who used hardware, got into software, and are now moving back into using hardware more.

[Ed A.]

Every time I'm tempted to go back to hardware, I remind myself of the problems I've had with hardware in the past. Namely, the space the stuff took up, the lack of reliability, the setup time, theft, the cost (both initial and continuing maintenance), and noise/ground loops/distortion problems. I realized how much easier it is now for me to use a MacBook Pro with Logic Pro, where I can control everything from the screen and a simple MIDI controller. For years, I used stacks of hardware synths, mixers, recorders, effects and bundles of cables that I had cluttering my studio, but got rid of it all. I seem to be more focused now doing things exclusively with software and I don't think I'll be going back to using hardware.

[Jotown]

I have always used both. Good hardware on the front end (Pre-amp, compressor, converters) and on important things like the lead vocal I would always process through a hardware compressor. I have also always used some kind of hardware verb as I haven't been that happy with plugin verbs or the way they tax the processor.

 

I think my old school/new school approach is pretty typical of people who have access to good hardware. Best of both worlds.

[where02190]

Other than storage, we've always been hardware here. It doesn't take up that much space, and is very reliable, as we keep all our gear well maintained.

 

Ain't nothing like the real thing.

[mobobog]

It happend to my with synths.

 

I had a Korg 01/Wfd, then i bought reason and i thought "MAN this is the thing, they should receive a nobel prize" and I sold my 01 for a very cheap price.

 

I got cubase SX 2 and reason...enjoying it so much, then annoying me... I have had luck, and i have had a stable system without crashes and any system inestabilities. I studied computer engineering in the college so I know how to configure PC's. But then, even this software bundle does anything i want and more, i just started getting bored...

 

3 years (or so) after I sold my 01 (i get so freaking tired of the korg sound anyway ) i bought a micron just for the sake of having hardware, i didnt have that much money to spend so i looked for the cheapest synth available. It was a bad move in the sense that even the micron sounds terrific! it isnt a synth for "hardware enjoyment", its one knob interface is a pain in the ass. Its very manageable, it has lots of shortcuts to make things happend even with one know, but i haven had that much use because of that.

 

When i first got into software i thought that software and hardware controller interfaces were the thing...now i am looking to buy a synth like an ASB boxes or something from clavia, and I also want a workstation i looking for what roland and yamaha have the next namm...

 

Iwant knobs and buttons!!!

[Mike Martin]

Great thread Craig,

 

I go back and forth. As a keyboardist and up until this year mostly worked for keyboard manufacturers (Kurzweil and Yamaha), I've primarily lived in the hardware world. I have a pretty extensive collection of synth modules and some external processing too.

 

There are definitely hassles with the hardware world. Specifically on some synths I have to load a file to get the sounds that go with a particular project. Multiply this by a few pieces of gear and sometimes the time involved to get a project started is just enough to use up all of the time that I have available at the moment.

 

No question software instruments and effects make all of this much, easier. You can get into a project and start writing faster than ever before and of course if you have to come back to it, everything comes up when you load a project. Even this system however may take some time debugging and learning the limitations of a given computer system.

 

Unfortunately, aside from a few gems there are many, many things that I'm able to get out of hardware that I haven't been able to get out of software. So I live in a world where I try to use the best of both. I'm using Cubase SX 3 primarily. As you mention it integrates with external gear very nicely. I hope other applications such as Sonar will take this approach soon.

[blue2blue]

Natural born contrarian, I've moved the opposite of a lot of folks, from OTB to ITB.

 

In 1996 I pushed my 2-ADAT/BRC project studio onto the hard drive of my computer, giving me, effectively. an 8 channel interface for the computer. (I still used the ADATs as ADATs, as well, for some of my continuing clients and projects.)

 

I'd already had my MIDI and ADATs synched since soon after I picked up the first ADAT. I folded the MIDI in at mixtime as was the custom for most tape & MIDI guys. I mixed through an analog board, using a slug of fx boxes and a motley array of affordable compressors. (There was a stereo 5 band para EQ in there from a then less familiar company called Behringer. It wasn't nearly as cheap as their later stuff... but it was arguably every bit as sucky. I actually found myself using board EQ and the software EQ of the era more.)

 

It was easiest to just keep on that path when I switched storage media to HDD.

 

And that was great for around four or five years... but when the ADATs died, one after the other, about six months apart around the time when 24 bit interfaces were just becoming affordable, I decided to dip into ITB waters. Well... plunge.

 

It took me a while to adjust, to be sure. But once I did, it felt good and I found ways to get the kind of results I was looking for.

 

I've fooled a little with OTB stem summing and it's amusing in a nostalgic way... but I've become completely addicted to the control I get ITB.

 

And, frankly, at the level my analog hardware is... the quality tradeoff is not at all one-way. I'm satisfied with the quality I get, vis a vis what I got mixing OTB.

 

With regard to tape... I've owned 10 reel machines and literally countless cassettes. (Not counting the ADATs and a couple DATs.) It's really hard to imagine I'd ever put another dime into tape... unless it was some Alzheimer's thing and I just forget who I am and where I was coming from. Could happen, I suppose, heaven forfend.

[philbo]

I've pretty well abandoned midi hardware, for the most part.

 

Once in a while, when I can't borrow a real drum kit, and the client allows it, I'll track drums in Midi, and use a sampler plug-in in Tracktion to get a drum track.

 

Other than that, I've gone to real hardware - actual piano, actual guitar, actual bass, actual percussion, etc.

[MikeRivers]

 

Originally posted by Anderton You have the computer, the plug-ins, you've mixed in the box...

I do? I use the computer as a recorder, but I never left the hardware processors and console behind. It's so much easier to use and absolutely reliable. I can run a plug-in if it's something that I don't have an external processor to handle, or I can submix some tracks "in the box" but I'd never give up my hardware. So no need to "edge back" to it.

 

It's interesting, though, to hear about people rediscovering hardware that they haven't turned on in years, but sadly, so many of them have had to sell something to buy their next plug-in and nobody buys vintage software.

[Rabid]

I bounce between the two like a rubber ball. A few years ago I went totally software because it is so easy to pull up presets and lay out a mix. I got tired of crashes, bug, copy protection and watching the CPU gague and went back to hardware for a while. Three ROMpler keyboards and a rack with 4 ROMplers, a sampler, and 5 VA's. No problem with CPU overload but set up for a new song is much slower.

 

For a while I settled in on a happy medium. To start a project I use one good ROMpler with the built in sequencer. Once the parts are built I move the song to software. With the newest computers I am almost back to totally software again. I'm finding a big difference between the P4 1.7 I was using three years ago and my latest computer, a MacBook Pro with core 2 duo 2.33 Ghz. Thislaptop has me thinking about going totally software again. Now I am much more picky about what goes on my computer. No Pace, no iLock, no dongles. No inneficient SynthEdit synths. That has done wonders for system stability.

 

To me, what is still missing from the software only side is a good controller with the quality found on modern ROMplers. I want at least 76 keys on a quality board. Not a piece of junk that is the result of a manufacturer trying to market 88 weighted keys for under $400.

 

Robert

[nat whilk II]

Software has become so relatively cheap, that it's getting hard to jump back into hardware on that issue alone.

 

But an instrument will always trump a computer in a box. I'd much rather see instruments incorporate computer capabilities, rather than computers take over instruments.

 

Add to that the stability of dedicated hardware - even a rock-solid computer setup will still have to run the traps of upgrades, bug-fixes, OS upgrades/sidegrades/obsolescence.

 

So I'm always ready to go back to hardware anytime if it's a bona fide instrument.

 

So what has you thinking these thoughts, Craig? Something you saw across the big water?

 

nat whilk ii

[Bruce Swedien]

 

Originally posted by Anderton You have the computer, the plug-ins, you've mixed in the box...but are you starting to use some of your hardware more than you used to? Particularly Cubase owners, as SX and Cubase 4 make it easier to interface external analog gear with the host program. Or maybe you've dusted off that synth and are playing directly into the audio ins instead of using soft synths? I'm not so much interested in people who continue to use hardware, but those who used hardware, got into software, and are now moving back into using hardware more.

 

 

Craigula......

 

How about one of us who tippy-toed into software, found a couple of useful items, and then ran like a Banshee back to hardware.... Would you find his story interesting?

 

Signed.....

 

The Phantom Viking King!!!

[MorePaul]

Bruce - I think you are abt 7 weeks late on the holiday

 

 

May I suggest

 

Craigula (I like that BTW) --> Cranta (or the Crinch)

Instead of "run like a banshee" -- I would go with "Run like a Xerox making intimate photocopies at the office X-mas Party)

 

and

 

Phantom Viking -->Drunken Laplander

 

 

 

----------------------

 

I'm with ya -- I mean I wouldn't consider myself really a recording-centric guy in the slightest

 

But when I've though "OK, I guess I should, at least, understand the new tools" and have explored other guys' set-ups...I just....

 

 

[tucktronix]

At home, I use both. I was primarily a h/w user, but things have changed ever since I got Reason 3.0 and Tracktion 2. A Yamaha S80 and EX7 are used for the pianos, synth and guitar sounds, Reason(rewired into Tracktion with a plugin or two) is used for everything else. Just love the sound and feel of the S80 and probably won't go with a VSTi(for pianos). For live gigs... all hardware.

[joel Oporto]

I've always been both hardware and software, ever since I got my MS-DOS based Voyetra SP Gold back in 89' There are still points where what I want from hardware have not materialized and vis a vis from software hasn't either.

 

For midi, I've always had a basic keyboard to use for initial sequencing sounds, roland S-50 + M3r, korg X3 +SC 88pro, JV1000, korg N364, and for the longest time of 6yrs and counting, the roland XP80.

 

For the audio stuff, I've always relied in ITB because I practically don't have hardware that are any much better than the plugins and software. But when I do go to a big studio, I always try to utilize the hardware(might as well use some of those hardware you pay for in the studio).

 

Ever since I first got my cubase VST 3.28, I've always pined for a keyboard like a trinity or XP50 that had on board, a 2-in 4-out midi interface and a a PC/mac like sequencing program (with matching LCD display). The midi interface certainly costs only a fraction of the keyboard so I've always wondered about that.

 

But then computers became faster, some of my synths developed ailments, more, better soft synths and soft samplers appeared and I increasingly relied on them more, leaving only 1 keyboard left to use(well once in a while I do add another module or so).

So depending on the project I go ITB or OTB, but mostly ITB.

 

One thing for certain though, the softwares still needs a lot more tactile control that can't compete with real knobs or sliders.

 

What would make me go OTB again?

Well, a full-blown mixer, (say for example, a cheapie 24.8 mackie) but 24/192 FW, with all controls wired into the computer or the mixer having a computer in it already. For starters, I can choose when adjusting the EQ on the mackie to use the actual EQ of the mackie or assign my favourite EQ plugin or port out an insert from your hardware (both in laying tracks or when mixing). That means you can assign computer tracks to the mixer channels when mixing (your 24 mixer inputs can be assigned as your 24 outputs from the computer, not your usual 24-in, stereo-out FW mixer) and not have to wire outs from an audio interface to the mixer. Instead of cheap on-board DSP effects chips, you can toggle sends either to your fave plugin or to your fave external hardware. A similar compressor section could be added in the mixer channel (like those high end neve or ssl boards) that functions the same way as the EQ section.

All these in a project studio level affordable package!!

 

Am I asking too much?

 

Or maybe just a a really good 24-in or 24-out Fireface quality FW mixer that I can also use as a summing mixer.

[blue2blue]

I'd forgotten Voyetra... that was the first sequencer I used on my PC, around the same time, in DOS... it was all quite primitive, as I recall -- but kind of thrilling, nonetheless. A little later that same year ('89), I got a multitrimbral synth, though, and things started coming alive. On the advice of some Mac music pals I got Mastertracks Pro and it was a big step in the right direction. (But they didn't make the audio bend in the road. Ciao, the Ferrari.)

 

I can't remember the name of the sequencer I used on an Apple II in the early 80s. The first sequencers I used were the voltage controlled variety. Ah... now that was hardware.

[Lee Knight]

The lure of ITB is strong. It's there at the click of a pull down menu. But I have been going outside a lot more. I produced an album where we made a pact... if we wanted a certain sound, we had to do it the real way. A surf organ? We got a Farfisa (which has turned into an addiction for this guy who's picking up a Vox Jaguar soon). If we wanted an accordian... you get the idea. Piano's been a hard one, but I'm currently in the market for a Craig's List upright piano special. Upright bass, banjo, on and on.

 

I'm also picking up a Little Labs Red Eye which is basically a Reamp with a high quality DI built in. I want to send out stuff to all the grungy, skanky pedals I've got laying around. I am definately wanting to go out there in the real world more and more. It just adds distiction.

 

How about sending out to my RNC. I never do it. I've got to... the bass sounds I've been getting are scary through it but that's done during DI tracking. But I never use it for lead vox compression unless it's tracked that way, which is rare. I will.

 

So yes, I guess I'm edging back into hardware.

[Anderton]

 

 

No, something I'm seeing mostly because of editing EQ. A lot of the really top cats are being very selective about when they use software and when they use hardware.

 

The problem, of course, is integrating the two but it seems Yamaha is ahead of the curve on that one with Cubase and their "Studio Connections" thing.

[Hard Truth]

I've moved to working with hardware more, and software less, for making music, but the hardware I've been using more has been guitars.

[monstermaker]

I've never abandoned hardware. Sonar is where it all ends up but I've never cared much for soft synths.

[Geoff Grace]

I bought a Receptor. Does that count?

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Corso2]

I'm seriously considering adding a 2" 16-track and a 1/2" 2-track to my setup, which is DAW based....both to hybridize my system for the choices that provides, and to have the option to be creative within the linear limits in which most of my favorite records were made.

 

The prices on the machines are falling, and dude, they just sound good.

[Dave Bryce]

I'm in the process of redoing my studio, and I'm basically going right up the middle.

 

I got a new Tascam DM3200 (with FW interface) to use as the front end of DP. My G5 has a UAD-1 and a Powercore in it (which I mostly use for dynamics and EQ and the occasional reverb). The DM3200 has TC reverbs in it as well...but I'll also hook up my tube preamps, Manley Vari-Mu, PCM90 and a few other boxes I don't want to live without.

 

I'm also struggling with routing - whether to continue to use hardware mixers to submix my synths and go analog into the DM3200, or take them all individually into MOTU i/o boxes and let the software do the routing. Honestly, I'm leaning towards the submixers - the idea of having to mess with software routing when I just wanna play my keyboards isn't terribly appealing.

 

As far as software synths go, my preference is towards hardware. I have a few softsynths that I use pretty regularly (Ivory, Korg Legacy), but I really prefer the real thing...especially when it comes to analog synths. All my first and second call synths are real analog - I'm just not a VA kind of guy.

 

dB

[Dave Bryce]

 

Originally posted by Geoff Grace I bought a Receptor. Does that count?

I'm considering one for Ivory and a few other things. How're you liking it?

 

Hey, don't you have to get all PC versions of the Mac software that you already have? Receptor doesn't run Mac plugs, does it?

 

dB

[alphajerk]

i need a killer 88key weighted controller but everyone i look at everyone reviews them as crap. why cant someone make something good?