|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: haroonharoon Date: Apr 29, 2008 20:38
I use Recycle to chop my drums / samples, and then put tracks together
in Reason. Some of the software effects (delays, reverbs, compressors,
distortion) are really awesome. I like Reason for the most part. The
sequencer is pretty damn easy to use too; on the downside, it can't
sequence external MIDI devices.
When I want to lay down vocals or use an external instrument on a track
(like say a bass guitar) I rewire Garageband into Reason. Works pretty
well. Once you learn how to cheat it a bit Garageband is pretty
versatile (it's based on the Logic engine after all). I found a hack
that will let Garageband send MIDI out to other devices, but it's very
clumsy and buggy; plus Garageband's sequencer simply isn't designed for
that.
The one thing that bothers me about Reason is the workflow. Back when
I had my incredibly minimal Roland MS-1 I would be listening to a
record, hear something interesting, sample it, and play around...
|
| Show full article (2.97Kb) |
|
| | 16 Comments |
|
|
Author: T. TauriT. Tauri Date: Apr 29, 2008 21:41
On Apr 29, 11:38Â pm, haroon comcast.net> wrote:
> Ideas?
It's a dilemma... It's totally true there's nothing faster than a
hardware sampler for workflow when you're writing. On the other hand,
you pay for it on the back end in terms of recallability, the need to
track to your recording/mixing software, some other stuff.
Also depends on how you're working in Reason already, I think. Like:
how many sampler instances are you using? Will a fixed number of
channels inhibit you? Can you get along with using a hardware
sampler's internal processing for EQ/fx? Or would you, say, need a
mixing board of some kind for the EQing? Do you need more than stereo
outputs? If so, will there be enough?
Over at Gearslutz.com, Mike Dean has said that he's been told by
Native Instruments that they're working on a softsampler that actually
samples... How likely that is, though, and whether it'd materialize
any time soon... I have my doubts.
|
| Show full article (1.30Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: haroonharoon Date: Apr 29, 2008 23:04
On 2008-04-30 00:41:50 -0400, "T. Tauri" worldnet.att.net> said:
> It's a dilemma... It's totally true there's nothing faster than a
> hardware sampler for workflow when you're writing. On the other hand,
> you pay for it on the back end in terms of recallability, the need to
> track to your recording/mixing software, some other stuff.
This is the conclusion I think I've come to.
I should work out the basics of a track strictly on a hardware sampler.
That would include the drums and the samples. If the idea turns out
to be a winner and I actually want to use it in a track, then I export
the major pieces I put together on the MPC to Reason as loops and run
them through Dr. Rex. That might not even be necessary. I could just
lay the track down piece by piece from the MPC in Logic or another DAW,
then apply effects as needed (compression, EQing, whatever).
Or
I just get a basic sampler like the MPC-500 and use it for nothing more
than idea generation. Export nothing from it to Reason in the method
mentioned above. In some rare occasions I might get a song that sounds
good right out of the MPC.
|
| Show full article (3.00Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: suntzusuntzu Date: Apr 30, 2008 00:29
haroon wrote:
> I use Recycle to chop my drums / samples, and then put tracks together
> in Reason. Some of the software effects (delays, reverbs, compressors,
> distortion) are really awesome. I like Reason for the most part. The
> sequencer is pretty damn easy to use too; on the downside, it can't
> sequence external MIDI devices.
>
> When I want to lay down vocals or use an external instrument on a track
> (like say a bass guitar) I rewire Garageband into Reason. Works pretty
> well. Once you learn how to cheat it a bit Garageband is pretty
> versatile (it's based on the Logic engine after all). I found a hack
> that will let Garageband send MIDI out to other devices, but it's very
> clumsy and buggy; plus Garageband's sequencer simply isn't designed for
> that.
>
> The one thing that bothers me about Reason is the workflow. Back when I
> had my incredibly minimal Roland MS-1 I would be listening to a record,
> hear something interesting, sample it, and play around with it
> instantly. Within a minute I had an idea of whether or not something
> would work -- and I never left the area of my turntables to do it. With ...
|
| Show full article (5.37Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: suntzusuntzu Date: Apr 30, 2008 00:34
haroon wrote:
> If I move to hardware I loose some of the luxuries I have in Reason. On
> the other hand, not having those luxuries as a crutch could force me to
> step up my game.
>
this depends on how much free time you have. if you're working a full
time job, that tends to not be so true. in my case, even when i wasn't
working, and was just looking for a job (which is like 20 hrs a week of
work, at the most), it wasn't so true.
if you're not naturally lazy though, you might be right.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: T. TauriT. Tauri Date: Apr 30, 2008 05:07
On Apr 30, 2:04Â am, haroon comcast.net> wrote:>
> If I wanted to do what I do in Reason on real hardware I'd have 50
> pounds of patch chords around my neck half the time. Â It's usual for me
> to have a Reason mixer filled up with nothing but drum channels simply
> because I want different effects and EQing on each drum.
Yeah, it's important to be prepared for losing that flexibility. On
the other hand, individual elements probably have more balls and need
less processing in hardware (some samplers probably better than others
in this respect).
I went over to softsamplers though, 'cause I *always* struggling with
the limits on outputs and what I could individually process (Trevor
Horn influence), but I end up using even more tracks in software to
compensate for the lack of flavor that hardware gave.
> What are you / were you using? Â
|
| Show full article (1.49Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: haroonharoon Date: Apr 30, 2008 06:42
On 2008-04-30 03:29:53 -0400, suntzu
removethispart.freeshell.andthistoo.org> said:
> have you tried ableton?
>
> ableton's great, because it can be a very versatile/configurable loop
> pedal, a very versatile/configurable sampler, or any number things in
> between. and it does a bunch of other stuff too. many things can be
> tweaked, it can use vst instruments, you can rewire reason and rebirth
> to it, it's great at recording from audio inputs on the fly. i think
> it's pretty equally suited to DJing and production (not scratch DJing
> though, unless it does some stuff i don't know about).
I haven't tried it, but from what I know of it I just can't see myself
working with it for productions except to use it as a recording tool /
sequencer. In that arena I'm probably going to dump Garageband and get
Logic. A friend of mine can get deep discounts through Apple for
software. I'm already comfortable with Apple's pro application
interface from dealing with Final Cut.
|
| Show full article (1.94Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: suntzusuntzu Date: Apr 30, 2008 08:43
haroon wrote:
> On 2008-04-30 03:29:53 -0400, suntzu
> removethispart.freeshell.andthistoo.org> said:
> >> have you tried ableton?
>>
>> ableton's great, because it can be a very versatile/configurable loop
>> pedal, a very versatile/configurable sampler, or any number things in
>> between. and it does a bunch of other stuff too. many things can be
>> tweaked, it can use vst instruments, you can rewire reason and rebirth
>> to it, it's great at recording from audio inputs on the fly. i think
>> it's pretty equally suited to DJing and production (not scratch DJing
>> though, unless it does some stuff i don't know about).
>
> I haven't tried it, but from what I know of it I just can't see myself
> working with it for productions except to use it as a recording tool /
> sequencer. In that arena I'm probably going to dump Garageband and get
> Logic. A friend of mine can get deep discounts through Apple for
> software. I'm already comfortable with Apple's pro application
> interface from dealing with Final Cut. ...
|
| Show full article (4.64Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: suntzusuntzu Date: Apr 30, 2008 08:51
haroon wrote:
> On 2008-04-30 03:29:53 -0400, suntzu
> removethispart.freeshell.andthistoo.org> said:
> >> have you tried ableton?
>>
>> ableton's great, because it can be a very versatile/configurable loop
>> pedal, a very versatile/configurable sampler, or any number things in
>> between. and it does a bunch of other stuff too. many things can be
>> tweaked, it can use vst instruments, you can rewire reason and rebirth
>> to it, it's great at recording from audio inputs on the fly. i think
>> it's pretty equally suited to DJing and production (not scratch DJing
>> though, unless it does some stuff i don't know about).
>
> I haven't tried it, but from what I know of it I just can't see myself
> working with it for productions except to use it as a recording tool /
> sequencer. In that arena I'm probably going to dump Garageband and get
> Logic. A friend of mine can get deep discounts through Apple for
> software. I'm already comfortable with Apple's pro application
> interface from dealing with Final Cut. ...
|
| Show full article (2.48Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: haroonharoon Date: Apr 30, 2008 10:35
On 2008-04-30 11:51:56 -0400, suntzu
removethispart.freeshell.andthistoo.org> said:
> also, i think that's one area where ableton's a bit lacking: if you're
> looking for a multi-track sequencer for sounds you've already recorded,
> i think logic or acid would probably be much better tools. ableton's
> sequencer is perfectly fine for stuff you've already worked on in
> ableton, but i don't think i'd import stuff into ableton just to use
> ableton's sequencer. acid just struck me as much more suitable for
> that task the few times i used it (never used logic).
I'm a few minutes away from giving my friend the cash to get Logic for
me. I wanted to demo Ableton but every version I find floating around
seems messed up. I need the Mac version . . .
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
