It was nice to get together with a friend and just jam for a while. I have been so involved with the technological aspects of music I forgot perhaps the joy of playing it without a laptop. Believe me, I have not abandoned by technological roots and I was using Moog guitar but the core of ant music should be about being a musician right?
And yet, I also desire to return to FireGiver that has been supplanted by Moog Guitar. FireGiver will be taking a move towards automation with much less pure improvisation. I think I will begin with working on more exacting control of Live's Operator and Reaktor Prism. I will eventually use Live's new automation controls to tame the feedback of Prism.
So, I guess at this point I feel bifurcated between musician and sound designer but I am hoping for a happy coexistence.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Analogue Man and Rack Effects
I am continuing to enjoy reading "Analogue Man's Guide to Vintage Effects". There is some really good information in this book but to be honest I don't have all that much interest in old analogue effects. I have some mid to high end effects that I like just fine and a few low end EH boxes because they do something unique.
Analogue Man believes that rack mount effects are all terrible. We will have to agree to disagree here but I do like analogue electronics, I have a full line of foogers in addition to my digital effects.
IMHO analogue be it effects or synths are different animals. I think the mistake some make is to believe that you have to have only one or the other. I like analogue for different reasons. It's like saying you can't like both acoustic and electric guitars. Not true. Again, they are just different animals.
Analogue tends to have a certain mysterious element to it. If I use a digital effect it just rubs a program and you more or less know what you are getting which can be very useful. With analogue, I twist knobs and sometimes strange sounds come out. Anyone who has used FM on a Voyager will know what I mean but also freq box foogers and others. There is a high "What the hell was that" factor. So, analogue lends itself to experimentation.
Another complaint of digital is the interface on rack mounts. Ok, point scored. Yes, it's not all that easy to program these beasties but they are also not on trick ponies. Some, like Eventide, have tried to tame the beast with smaller boxes that do a lot but have smaller parameter spaces. On the flexibility issue the digital beasties win. If your just a wannabe guitar player who thinks he/ she can sound like x by buying a pedal they use, then sure, go buy the pedal. You won't sound anything like your guitar hero but sophistication would be wasted with anything more than a "louder" or "grungier" button.
So, on the which sounds better battle - neither. They both serve a purpose.
Analogue effects are more experimental, digital are more flexible. Again, it depends on what you want and that can even vary from song to song. Music is never black and white which is why I love it.
Analogue Man believes that rack mount effects are all terrible. We will have to agree to disagree here but I do like analogue electronics, I have a full line of foogers in addition to my digital effects.
IMHO analogue be it effects or synths are different animals. I think the mistake some make is to believe that you have to have only one or the other. I like analogue for different reasons. It's like saying you can't like both acoustic and electric guitars. Not true. Again, they are just different animals.
Analogue tends to have a certain mysterious element to it. If I use a digital effect it just rubs a program and you more or less know what you are getting which can be very useful. With analogue, I twist knobs and sometimes strange sounds come out. Anyone who has used FM on a Voyager will know what I mean but also freq box foogers and others. There is a high "What the hell was that" factor. So, analogue lends itself to experimentation.
Another complaint of digital is the interface on rack mounts. Ok, point scored. Yes, it's not all that easy to program these beasties but they are also not on trick ponies. Some, like Eventide, have tried to tame the beast with smaller boxes that do a lot but have smaller parameter spaces. On the flexibility issue the digital beasties win. If your just a wannabe guitar player who thinks he/ she can sound like x by buying a pedal they use, then sure, go buy the pedal. You won't sound anything like your guitar hero but sophistication would be wasted with anything more than a "louder" or "grungier" button.
So, on the which sounds better battle - neither. They both serve a purpose.
Analogue effects are more experimental, digital are more flexible. Again, it depends on what you want and that can even vary from song to song. Music is never black and white which is why I love it.
Saturday, February 9, 2013
More Wob Wob Wob
I am sure that most people remember the Saturday Night Live skit with Christopher Walken asking for more and more cowbell. Lately, I feel like him. I was researching some musical ideas this morning and last night and I already have 3 more pieces of gear I would like much like the comical call for more cowbell. Then I started thinking about those early pioneers of electronic music who either spent days slicing tapes, punching cards to run a computer program or using rudimentary oscillators to make electronic music that in many ways is far more creative than anything today my own work included.
I know I tend to pick on dub step as a genre but it seems to me it's based on a single sound used in cliched variations of wob wob wob to crank out dance music for crazed drug addled youth at raves. Ok, sure I guess I sound like a grumpy old man and yes, I am showing my age. But I think of Alvin Lucier's "Dripsody" or Karlheinz Stockhausen's "Hymnen" which are wonderful collages of sound pieced together by by artists who would have dreamed of having the tools I have to work with.
About a week ago I started thinking about cross overs. I built one not by buying new gear but using Live's instrument racks and EQ8 and a few soft synths and hardware I already have. I loved the results. So much so I started a new project called the mirror project. Mirrors help us to see ourselves. We see the faces of many people every day but we only see ourselves in mirrors. Musically I think I have become so consumed by looking for the next best cowbell that I failed to realize the magic of sound that those early artists knew so much about.
So, I look in the mirror and realize that I don't need more gear or cowbell but it's time to start really listening and thinking about sound and music and like Alice in the Carol's tale go through the looking glass and rediscover the magic of sound free of the burden of worrying about new gear. The old gear still has many secrets to be revealed just behind the looking glass.
I know I tend to pick on dub step as a genre but it seems to me it's based on a single sound used in cliched variations of wob wob wob to crank out dance music for crazed drug addled youth at raves. Ok, sure I guess I sound like a grumpy old man and yes, I am showing my age. But I think of Alvin Lucier's "Dripsody" or Karlheinz Stockhausen's "Hymnen" which are wonderful collages of sound pieced together by by artists who would have dreamed of having the tools I have to work with.
About a week ago I started thinking about cross overs. I built one not by buying new gear but using Live's instrument racks and EQ8 and a few soft synths and hardware I already have. I loved the results. So much so I started a new project called the mirror project. Mirrors help us to see ourselves. We see the faces of many people every day but we only see ourselves in mirrors. Musically I think I have become so consumed by looking for the next best cowbell that I failed to realize the magic of sound that those early artists knew so much about.
So, I look in the mirror and realize that I don't need more gear or cowbell but it's time to start really listening and thinking about sound and music and like Alice in the Carol's tale go through the looking glass and rediscover the magic of sound free of the burden of worrying about new gear. The old gear still has many secrets to be revealed just behind the looking glass.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Vacation 2013
As I am feeling the winters chill I am packing up some gear for a long overdue vacation. You might see a flurry of blogs from me as I have a lot of drafts that never made it to being published. I also hope to connect with a friend on what will hopefully be a collaboration at the next Electro Music Festival.
As NAMM news rolls in I will publish a blog of my impressions. At the moment I see only a few bright lights but we shall see. I am having my own personal NAMM by reintroducing myself to my own gear especially going deeper with foogers. This may lead to building a full blown modular but not one of these generalized ones but a specialized audio processor. I am going to start an initial experiment using Live's effects chaining. As of late my Moog Guitar explorations have opened my spectral ears again. What I want to do is side chain by Moog Guitar to my Voyager. The goal being to create these massive organic swells using the Moog Guitar's unique envelope as the breathe (sort of speak). The first block of an effects chain would be a crossover similar to the first part of a vocoder and then chaining different effects to each channel. The idea being to get effects to function as one and to be more responsive to the spectral dynamics of Moog Guitar and other instruments. At some point my MP 201, CP 251 and Voyager expander will come into play and as I said, even a modular in the future.
I also want to continue to use not only Moog Guitar but other sampled and perhaps real instruments in the future including a gong. Again, the idea being to channel the frequency spectrum to different effects,
I also want to work on a set of Alchemy and Absynth patches based on processed Moog Guitar.
So anyway, I hope I can at least move a few of these projects forward a bit over vacation.
More to cone...
As NAMM news rolls in I will publish a blog of my impressions. At the moment I see only a few bright lights but we shall see. I am having my own personal NAMM by reintroducing myself to my own gear especially going deeper with foogers. This may lead to building a full blown modular but not one of these generalized ones but a specialized audio processor. I am going to start an initial experiment using Live's effects chaining. As of late my Moog Guitar explorations have opened my spectral ears again. What I want to do is side chain by Moog Guitar to my Voyager. The goal being to create these massive organic swells using the Moog Guitar's unique envelope as the breathe (sort of speak). The first block of an effects chain would be a crossover similar to the first part of a vocoder and then chaining different effects to each channel. The idea being to get effects to function as one and to be more responsive to the spectral dynamics of Moog Guitar and other instruments. At some point my MP 201, CP 251 and Voyager expander will come into play and as I said, even a modular in the future.
I also want to continue to use not only Moog Guitar but other sampled and perhaps real instruments in the future including a gong. Again, the idea being to channel the frequency spectrum to different effects,
I also want to work on a set of Alchemy and Absynth patches based on processed Moog Guitar.
So anyway, I hope I can at least move a few of these projects forward a bit over vacation.
More to cone...
Friday, January 25, 2013
NAMM 2013 - Eventide H9
Ok, I just looked at what I could find on the Eventide H9. I love Eventide products but given I have a few of their products it would make no sense for me to get an H9.
On the plus side, I love the idea that you can edit parameters on the IPad. I just wish they would right an app for their other boxes. However, it seems they are doing this because they have miniaturized the box now with a micro LED and XYZ buttons and a big knob. I guess some like this style and it is a further development of the X and Y knobs on their other boxes. I understand why they did this but at least with the other boxes when you move a knob the LED indicates the parameter being changed. So, unless you want to be driven crazy by the tinisized form you have to have an IPad?
They also combine select algorithms from the other boxes with an option to buy more. Nice marketing. You know that people will end up spending more on algorithms than if they bought all the current boxes. Well, I can't really say that without seeing The price but that is my guess.
What I would have liked is a rack mount unit with all the algorithms from the current boxes, large display, 3 hot knobs, added algorithms from their rack mount effects, MIDI, USB and IPad access and multi pedal plugs. CV control would really have been a plus.
So, I know many are going to love the H9 and in terms of sound the Eventide algorithms are great but I just don't see this one as a real innovation, just smart marketing.
On the plus side, I love the idea that you can edit parameters on the IPad. I just wish they would right an app for their other boxes. However, it seems they are doing this because they have miniaturized the box now with a micro LED and XYZ buttons and a big knob. I guess some like this style and it is a further development of the X and Y knobs on their other boxes. I understand why they did this but at least with the other boxes when you move a knob the LED indicates the parameter being changed. So, unless you want to be driven crazy by the tinisized form you have to have an IPad?
They also combine select algorithms from the other boxes with an option to buy more. Nice marketing. You know that people will end up spending more on algorithms than if they bought all the current boxes. Well, I can't really say that without seeing The price but that is my guess.
What I would have liked is a rack mount unit with all the algorithms from the current boxes, large display, 3 hot knobs, added algorithms from their rack mount effects, MIDI, USB and IPad access and multi pedal plugs. CV control would really have been a plus.
So, I know many are going to love the H9 and in terms of sound the Eventide algorithms are great but I just don't see this one as a real innovation, just smart marketing.
Saturday, January 19, 2013
Whats Old Is New Again
Over several weeks I have been using Tom Hughes' "Analogue Guide to Vintage Effects" as a coffee table book. It's out of print but if you are able to procure a copy I highly recommend it. What's fascinating to me is the market for effects from companies that have long since closed their doors. Some effects fetch prices in the 100s! The truth is I don't have any and I don't plan on buying ant in the future. Well, that may not be totally true. I would buy a spring reverb but more for experimental reasons than nostalgia. I have stomp boxes and rack mount effects and some emulate vintage but I have an interest in nostalgia more from a historical perspective.
So why did some effects do so well and others fail. I have three reasons in order of importance:
1. The circuit construction
2. Good Marketing
3. Features
Most effects sound good because of the circuit design but things get dicey because there are often many versions of the same effect and sometimes under different names. It's really why some effects may be hard to duplicate unless you totally simulate a circuit and that may be difficult and CPU intensive.
Some popularity is pure hype and marketing as well. Sometimes it might have to do with a big name store carrying an effect or perhaps a popular artist might like it and everyone thinks if they get that effect they can sound like their musical heroes.
Old school stomp boxes also tended not to be feature rich although an exception may be Mu Tron for example.
A few special cases are also worthy of mentioning: Spring and Plate reverb, tube distortion/overdrive and tape delay. For various reasons emulating any of these is not a simple task. In my opinion most synth effects that have any of these effects do a lousy job. If you have a killer synth it's probably munching on CPU and a good emulation crushes many CPUs. Companies making synths also want to concentrate on the synth so effects are after thoughts. Distortion, especially the soft clipping of tubes, is hard to emulate. I don't have vintage tubes but I do have an EH "Tube EQ" with dual 12AX7s.
In my opinion here us where dedicated boxes like the Strymon "El Capistan" tape delay also shine as do some rack mount devices.
A final special case - reverb. In my opinion the most important effects are:
1. EQ
2. Compression
3. Reverb
Ok, in the end these are really mastering/Mixing tools rather than effects but to be, perhaps with the exception of delay, the rest are window dressing. A bit of ear candy but non essential.
So, that's my take on effects old and new. Hope you enjoyed it.
So why did some effects do so well and others fail. I have three reasons in order of importance:
1. The circuit construction
2. Good Marketing
3. Features
Most effects sound good because of the circuit design but things get dicey because there are often many versions of the same effect and sometimes under different names. It's really why some effects may be hard to duplicate unless you totally simulate a circuit and that may be difficult and CPU intensive.
Some popularity is pure hype and marketing as well. Sometimes it might have to do with a big name store carrying an effect or perhaps a popular artist might like it and everyone thinks if they get that effect they can sound like their musical heroes.
Old school stomp boxes also tended not to be feature rich although an exception may be Mu Tron for example.
A few special cases are also worthy of mentioning: Spring and Plate reverb, tube distortion/overdrive and tape delay. For various reasons emulating any of these is not a simple task. In my opinion most synth effects that have any of these effects do a lousy job. If you have a killer synth it's probably munching on CPU and a good emulation crushes many CPUs. Companies making synths also want to concentrate on the synth so effects are after thoughts. Distortion, especially the soft clipping of tubes, is hard to emulate. I don't have vintage tubes but I do have an EH "Tube EQ" with dual 12AX7s.
In my opinion here us where dedicated boxes like the Strymon "El Capistan" tape delay also shine as do some rack mount devices.
A final special case - reverb. In my opinion the most important effects are:
1. EQ
2. Compression
3. Reverb
Ok, in the end these are really mastering/Mixing tools rather than effects but to be, perhaps with the exception of delay, the rest are window dressing. A bit of ear candy but non essential.
So, that's my take on effects old and new. Hope you enjoyed it.
Whats Old Is New Again
Over several weeks I have been using Tom Hughes' "Analogue Guide to Vintage Effects" as a coffee table book. It's out of print but if you are able to procure a copy I highly recommend it. What's fascinating to me is the market for effects from companies that have long since closed their doors. Some effects fetch prices in the 100s! The truth is I don't have any and I don't plan on buying ant in the future. Well, that may not be totally true. I would buy a spring reverb but more for experimental reasons than nostalgia. I have stomp boxes and rack mount effects and some emulate vintage but I have an interest in nostalgia more from a historical perspective.
So why did some effects do so well and others fail. I have three reasons in order of importance:
1. The circuit construction
2. Good Marketing
3. Features
Most effects sound good because of the circuit design but things get dicey because there are often many versions of the same effect and sometimes under different names. It's really why some effects may be hard to duplicate unless you totally simulate a circuit and that may be difficult and CPU intensive.
Some popularity is pure hype and marketing as well. Sometimes it might have to do with a big name store carrying an effect or perhaps a popular artist might like it and everyone thinks if they get that effect they can sound like their musical heroes.
Old school stomp boxes also tended not to be feature rich although an exception may be Mu Tron for example.
A few special cases are also worthy of mentioning: Spring and Plate reverb, tube distortion/overdrive and tape delay. For various reasons emulating any of these is not a simple task. In my opinion most synth effects that have any of these effects do a lousy job. If you have a killer synth it's probably munching on CPU and a good emulation crushes many CPUs. Companies making synths also want to concentrate on the synth so effects are after thoughts. Distortion, especially the soft clipping of tubes, is hard to emulate. I don't have vintage tubes but I do have an EH "Tube EQ" with dual 12AX7s.
In my opinion here us where dedicated boxes like the Strymon "El Capistan" tape delay also shine as do some rack mount devices.
A final special case - reverb. In my opinion the most important effects are:
1. EQ
2. Compression
3. Reverb
Ok, in the end these are really mastering/Mixing tools rather than effects but to be, perhaps with the exception of delay, the rest are window dressing. A bit of ear candy but non essential.
So, that's my take on effects old and new. Hope you enjoyed it.
So why did some effects do so well and others fail. I have three reasons in order of importance:
1. The circuit construction
2. Good Marketing
3. Features
Most effects sound good because of the circuit design but things get dicey because there are often many versions of the same effect and sometimes under different names. It's really why some effects may be hard to duplicate unless you totally simulate a circuit and that may be difficult and CPU intensive.
Some popularity is pure hype and marketing as well. Sometimes it might have to do with a big name store carrying an effect or perhaps a popular artist might like it and everyone thinks if they get that effect they can sound like their musical heroes.
Old school stomp boxes also tended not to be feature rich although an exception may be Mu Tron for example.
A few special cases are also worthy of mentioning: Spring and Plate reverb, tube distortion/overdrive and tape delay. For various reasons emulating any of these is not a simple task. In my opinion most synth effects that have any of these effects do a lousy job. If you have a killer synth it's probably munching on CPU and a good emulation crushes many CPUs. Companies making synths also want to concentrate on the synth so effects are after thoughts. Distortion, especially the soft clipping of tubes, is hard to emulate. I don't have vintage tubes but I do have an EH "Tube EQ" with dual 12AX7s.
In my opinion here us where dedicated boxes like the Strymon "El Capistan" tape delay also shine as do some rack mount devices.
A final special case - reverb. In my opinion the most important effects are:
1. EQ
2. Compression
3. Reverb
Ok, in the end these are really mastering/Mixing tools rather than effects but to be, perhaps with the exception of delay, the rest are window dressing. A bit of ear candy but non essential.
So, that's my take on effects old and new. Hope you enjoyed it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)