Yoozer

If you'd have told us this, I wouldn't have to say it . Define "effects". The range of sounds that fall under that umbrella is as huge as the first Xbox. http://freesound.iua.upf.edu/ Well, he was right about that. As for his opinions about Reaper - it could be very well that he had tried it and didn't like it. Each piece of audio software is made according to a certain philosophy, and your own philosophy has to gel with that to get the most out of it.

Sigh. http://www.ocremix.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29 Nobody ever reads the guides Of course it can. See those squiggly colored things? http://www.cockos.com/reaper/feat-ss.php Those are audio tracks. If you record it in the program itself or with something else (even Windows sound recorder could do it) - that doesn't even matter that much. Point is that your audio interface should be of decent quality. Try everything. I found Reaper rather tough to use, but your mileage may vary. If you're looking for something else that's cheap, consider EnergyXT, too.

There are no rules for this and you can't know without trying. Music's the path of a million mistakes - but you have to take the first step. Do. Don't ask. Don't ask if it's appropriate, don't ask if it's the right way; people'll tell you after you put up a song, and then you ask for specifics. If they'll tell you, try them out - but, believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense as the Buddha says. Some of those mistakes you're going to make are happy ones; unexpected, but you'll like the effect. Sometimes it's 2 weeks of balls against the wall and then you finally figured out how you had to do it. Sometimes it's 3 days of trying to figure it out and then going "oh, that's it?" In the meantime, you'll learn.

Uh, no offense intended, but these kinds of things can be solved in utterly basic ways - mostly by punching the words you need into Google, such as "soundfont plugin". http://www.kvraudio.com/get/769.html Next time, please make the effort to search the forum or Google or keep all your questions in a single thread (which gives it more educational value since it documents your learning process). Much better than going all helpdesk-machine-gun style. A soundfont is nothing more than a whole bunch of samples plus the logic behind them in a single file. This logic tells the range of the sample over the keyboard (for instance, drums only span a single key, while a synth sound may span several keys), and the velocity range (hit the key harder than a certain treshold, and you'll hear a different sound). Higher quality - not necessarily. Free, generally yes. Easier: yes, but also more limited. Samples and VSTs have nothing to do with eachother; the word VST just means that the piece of software requires a host (FL Studio, Cubase, etc.) to work in. A VST may employ several sound-generating techniques - of which samples are just one particular kind. Most free VSTs use physical modeling (sampling well and programming effectively is somewhat of a dark art).

You can use the LM7 drum sampler which has an electronic drum kit (TR909) which you can use for the snare. Since Tonic (Cubase's own filter plugin) only comes with the full SX3 or Cubase 4, you have to use something else like http://www.kvraudio.com/get/890.html (or pick anything).

You're invited to read the stories about certain Presonus stuff, the first generation of drivers for TC Electronic "Konnekt" gear, and the Access Virus TI which was rather unusable during its entire 1.x software, either not working, freezing, stuttering or crashing. People who write these things are humans. Humans are fallible. Companies who want them written hire people, and companies who do "this kind of thing" for the first time do not have the experience. Yes, you can hire experienced developers, but usually this is a small team of veteran systems architects. It stands or falls with exactly one thing, and that's until which extent a company is willing to go to support the product during its lifetime. A systems builder does not influence that kind of stuff, unless they're big enough. Of course, but from that POV, everything sucks. Hard. Really. Electronic musicians get absolutely shafted on the computer side of things. We still have to suffer with MIDI (instead of switching to something better with a far bigger bandwidth, actual timestamping for sub-millisecond accuracy, and a single Ethernet cable) and the fact that you can only use a single ASIO device in Windows is absolutely ridiculous, and we get screwed in the ass with the most ridiculous pricing and dongles schemes. We're all criminals, even if we have dongles and serials and the receipt. Plus, if a softsynth is older than say, 3 years, you're kindly advised (read: forced) to upgrade. Product no longer supported? WHOOSH, it disappears. They don't even open up the codebase; it just stays locked in a single piece of legacy you can't tear apart. KVRAudio is littered with the skeletons of dead .dll and .hqx files. Yes, but: - it handles ASIO better (in the sense that you can use more than just one device simultaneously) - it's got CoreAudio which is good - it has a great MIDI routing/visualisation tool built right in - Logic works nicely with hardware (downside: AMT8 and Unitor 8 no longer are sold new, but MOTU does just fine the Apple folks told me) - it can deal with Firewire daisy-chaining The programming language has little to nothing to do with the entire thing, except for the fact that you need low-level performance for near-realtime DSP tasks. edit: I build my systems from the parts I pick myself. I don't want off-the-shelf complete stuff because usually corners have been cut at points I deem rather vital (coincidentally, much of the same ones as listed in the PDF). However, I also do my own support, and with computers (which are outdated every 3 years or so, thanks to Moore) you eventually run into something called "the law of diminishing returns". Ergo, a custom-built PC that costs 2000 euros may be a lot better than one that costs 1000 euros, but one that costs 3000 euros isn't better -that- much, and one that costs more than that is getting to the point of ridiculousness.

Noise level : obvious. Watercooling kit: costs say, 200 bucks. Problem solved. Compatibility : obvious, but depends heavily on the manufacturers. For Firewire, the chipset, for USB, a separate PCI card. Support: why do you need "lifetime" if the "lifetime" of a computer is 3 years max? Stability: yeah, uh, duh. Badly written drivers still suck; I don't really see them writing their own. Performance: disabling and "tweaking" stuff does actually more bad than good and there's an entire list of myths. This only requires them to make an image of a tweaked XP SP2 install. Ease of use: it's called backing up your data and imaging your OS. Fine - if you don't want to pick parts and do the work yourself, just get a Mac.

http://www.ocremix.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29 I can kind of understand this because the site is absolutely retarded. Pretty much every other sequencer has a comparison chart, the only one to be found at the Cakewalk site compares it to ProTools M-Powered. Anyway, according to http://arstechnica.com/reviews/apps/sonar-7-studio-edition-review.ars the differences between Studio and Producer (confusing stupid names) is that Producer costs more and comes with more plugins. As for hardware, the only stuff you need to worry about are: - good speakers (not those small 2.1 PC soundsets) - good soundcard with ASIO (this is not a gaming soundcard like an X-Fi or Xonar) - good controller keyboard (this is your remote control; it doesn't make sound by itself) - a sufficiently fast computer. That's why there's the Guides forum . So, answer the following: - what do you want to make ("remixing" is not a genre, it is making music in general. If it was a genre, everything on this site would sound the same) - what do you already have - what are you willing to spend (as an exact number) - what's your experience - and maybe "why Sonar", and what have you compared it with and rejected

Due to all kinds of nasty copyrights and trademarks, the usual names aren't used. However, you'll generally find a large selection in any guitar effect simulator. If he bought it legally and gave it to you - well, Native Instruments allows license transfers. If he doesn't have one either, it's illegal. $299. Do check out the demo, though. Excellent .

1) what do you already have/use/what's wrong with it? 2) which guitar stompboxes (hardware) do work for punk, then? 3) find their software equivalents 4) pay if you have to ( http://www.amplitube.com/Main.html?metal/index.php or http://www.native-instruments.com/index.php?id=guitarline&L=1 ) 5) rock out

This was made in the 80s This looks like it was made in the 80s

How could you ever live without a computer to record it? You'd write it down or record it on tape. How could you ever live without paper to write it down or tape to record it on? You'd memorize it. It's a tool. That's it. Arpeggiators are tools, the Korg Karma is a tool, a stepsequencer is a tool, but it's a fact that they make you think and act with music differently. Ways you'd generally not think about music because it'd be so far out of your regular imagination that you wouldn't consider it, or not part of your technical possibilities. I dunno. Make music? Do you use a sequencer, y/n? Friends. A poor substitute for Eno's "Oblique Strategies" Friends aren't the problem. Non-musician friends are .

You can get a hell of a synth (it's got several amazing function generators) with some really sweet-ass digital effects (KSP) with a drawbar (B3) emulator and some pretty great samples for 2000 bucks instead of the 4000 it used to cost. You're not getting it. The largest part of the people who buy what we call "synthesizers" don't buy 'm for the fact that they have filters and envelopes. They don't buy 'm for the knobs. They don't buy 'm for the sampler. They buy those things because they have the best quality keyboard and the best quality of sounds in the lineup, and because all they really need is a good piano and organ, and a load of other usable sounds. Since this Kurz does that kind of stuff pretty well and it used to cost a lot more, it's a good option if you were looking around anyway. Fuck that, anyone want a $8500 keyboard? But that's where synthesizers kind of top - guitars go straight on to the 20K and beyond territory. Here you're being stupid. And here you're being correct.

Because you are physically limited - you have only 2 hands and it's pretty damn hard to even learn to use them completely independently because one of 'm usually wants to mimic what the other's doing. Also, your imagination is constrained by muscle memory and "what sounds good". You'll subconsciously avoid certain progressions.

1: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ 2: Generate > Tone (frequency 100 hz, duration 10 ms) 3: load in http://vemberaudio.se/shortcircuit.php 4: use pitch envelope to create the "boom" sound. Alternatively: find a TR808 bassdrum here and load it up in LM7 or whatever Cubase has included standard as a drum sampler. This is how it was done usually in drum and bass; put that bassdrum in a sampler, pitch it down, and presto. Alternatively: http://www.e-phonic.com/plugins/drumatic3.php if you can't find 808 samples.

Sound travels and is transmitted in several ways. Whatever you're going to build, make sure it's separated from the floor, otherwise the rest of the wall's going to resonate with it and your proofing is useless. Dry wall is useful as mass. More mass = harder to make it resonate because it costs more energy. Rockwool is useful because it dampens; the vibrations lose their energy pretty fast. Foam is useful for damping higher frequencies, but not for lower ones, and if you have surround, you have a sub, which will be the hardest to dampen properly. Could you make a sketch of your room, and do you have the freedom to move anything around?

I had the chance to play with this for a while at the Messe. Absolutely mad fun, and worth buying a DS for. While it's not a substitute for hardware, it is probably the best ultra-portable solution. It makes all those Palm and Pocket PC software packages look rather clumsy.

Everyone knows nobody's going to post anything and will instead just ask "which plugin should I buy (that's enough already) to make that sound, oh yeah, forget about me ever providing an mp3 snippet or example, just GUESS lol" so yeah, thread.

Seeing what it can do with this material - (sorry for the sound quality, my camera isn't that great) - yes.

There's also Rob Papen's RG - http://www.kvraudio.com/news/8868.html - which is supposed to clock in around $169. It's rather basic in terms of choice of guitars, but there's a full synth section and getting a nice pattern can be done really fast.

Or he's just a talentless git with too much cash and not enough skill.

They entertain you. They choose to put a pricetag on it, and studios, directors, and the populace buying the DVD or seeing the movie chooses to pay that price. Yes. Actually - the artist doing the work is rich. The people who invented the rest of the scheme are wealthy. So what do you do? Download Britney's music? That says more about your taste than anything else, really. *their As a musician, I would already be satisfied if I could make a living doing what I do. You have a completely distorted idea of what most musicians have to put up with. We live in a society that puts entertainment above all else. Blame society, not its consequences.

If you play it back at the same speed there's no difference in quality at all. You'll run into quality issues when you transpose them up or down. I'd save up for a new motherboard .

what God forbid that a programmer wants to receive money for services rendered. No, seriously. There's research involved that costs money and that doesn't gain anyone a bit for the first 3 years, and then it's a matter of hoping that the product will be a success so the company can continue. They're not capable of doing that because you plus thousands of others just download their stuff for free anyway, and if they'd ask cash you'd call 'm douchebags and happily run off with the torrent of their work.

You are correct, he's got an accent. It would be interesting to see how it would treat complete tracks. Sometimes you don't want perfect results, you want weirding-out tools that demolish the crap out of your original in novel ways.