MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

What outboard would you consider essential
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Production Techniques Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 [all]
Author What outboard would you consider essential
felixer
well fx wise there is a ton of useful stuff on ebay. i've gotten my yamaha, tc and lex there. beyond that i think any kind of mixingboard is good.
some swear at using a compressor. but methinks it's fairly useless for synths. beyond the mastering stage i never use one. always on bassguitars and vocals, but never on synths ... for berlin school type of leads an echo is essential.
as a whole methinks outboard is not that essential for synths, as you can do so much on the thing itself ...
Muzone
mousegarden wrote:
......I'm more interested in getting sounds at source, from my synths, and the piano.


Just like a good mix needs less mastering, I've found if you focus on working on the source sound you certainly need less porcessing to make it "interesting".

I used to see FX as some kind of magic voodoo that would make my mediocre sounds somehow more exciting and went in big on pedals, then gradually realised I was listening to the pedal not the synth (which isn't entirely a 'bad thing')

Once it sunk in that almost anything through a "blue box" would sound blue boxy I went back to concentrating on source sounds and trimmed back the pedal collection to a few funky delays/verbs that would be either fun to tweak real time or enhance the sound rather than taking it over.

I also discovered that (for me) all the really interesting FX (as in totally transform a sound) were VST anyway (such as those from Glitch machines, Audiority and Freakshow Industries) - anyway, it's all good as long as you enjoy it wink
mousegarden
Muzone wrote:
mousegarden wrote:
......I'm more interested in getting sounds at source, from my synths, and the piano.


Just like a good mix needs less mastering, I've found if you focus on working on the source sound you certainly need less porcessing to make it "interesting".

I used to see FX as some kind of magic voodoo that would make my mediocre sounds somehow more exciting and went in big on pedals, then gradually realised I was listening to the pedal not the synth (which isn't entirely a 'bad thing')

Once it sunk in that almost anything through a "blue box" would sound blue boxy I went back to concentrating on source sounds and trimmed back the pedal collection to a few funky delays/verbs that would be either fun to tweak real time or enhance the sound rather than taking it over.

I also discovered that (for me) all the really interesting FX (as in totally transform a sound) were VST anyway (such as those from Glitch machines, Audiority and Freakshow Industries) - anyway, it's all good as long as you enjoy it wink


I agree, ad I'm also applying FX more at the mixing/mastering stage, using plugins.
Reaktor FX chains, and Vintageverb are about it.
Instead of using an effect to radically alter a synth sound, I'd rather use effects now, just to add an overal atmosphere to an entire mix.
synthpriest
Eventide DSP4000.
slowpilgrim
A pair of high quality monitors is going to do more for a mix than any analog outboard gear... does that count?
felixer
slowpilgrim wrote:
A pair of high quality monitors is going to do more for a mix than any analog outboard gea
r... does that count?

well, since you can't buy 'good ears' (and the brain attached to that) good monitors and a good acoustic certainly help in getting a good mix. but it is attitude too: i once saw a few guys do a mix at the sae. they started with the bassdrum alone. then after a lot of discussion they went on to the snare (track2) and the whole thing repeated itself. needless to say that they didn't get anything like a good mix, because they ran out of time. that is prob the most stupid way to do it. i always have all the tracks i'm ging to use on. maybe softer but always so that i can hear what's going on. and i always only record sounds that are good. no 'fix-it-in-the-mix'. because that doesn't work. it never has and never will ... so when i'm done recording the mix is 80-90% there ... i also never put a seperate monitor mix for the musicians. they listen to what i hear. the only exception is very loud gitarists who do not need their own sound in the mix.
JediDJ
Eventide FX like Orville can do some magic even to an ordinary blink or clap.
Some Roland tape delays can bring you to real dope territory much faster.

I also think that quality of monitors is not the thing that you actually need in the first place in electronic music.

Simon Posford did just well on a pair of Mackies.

You need a good vibe and inspiration.

After all you are not doing a kinda job like Pensado.
Autotuning and refining a pop songs. )
gruebleengourd
For electronic music where much of the mixing takes place while composing, I find that overly treated rooms (ie dead) are much less practical as you cannot hear anything properly unless you are in the monitor sweet spot. It's better to "know" your room and your monitoring shortcomings and be able to hear from where you're playing keys or twiddling knobs, then having a perfect mix environment.

This is doubly the case when there may be more than one person in the studio contributing to the recording.

If you're doing a final mix after the recording, then the above doesn't really apply.

As for essential outboard. I'd wouldn't want to work without a mixer with decen subgroup options, a patchbay and a variety of efx. I use a lot of ITB efx later on in the mix, but I don't feel you really can get the same depth of result without hands on the faders, live tweaking aux, and feedback back loops in the mixer.
felixer
JediDJ wrote:

I also think that quality of monitors is not the thing that you actually need in the first place in electronic music.

Simon Posford did just well on a pair of Mackies.

You need a good vibe and inspiration.
)

silly notion. you always need good monitors. you prob never heard some and your mixes don't translate well to other systems.
never heard of posford ... and yes good vibe and inspiration are essential too ...
JediDJ
Simon Posford is an originator of Shpongle and Hallucinogen.
Psy ambient and psy trance projects.
No matter.
Simon Posford is not alone.

You missed my point.
You don't need Focals and Barefoots to make groovey electronic music, even with correct low end.
Lots of examples of guys used mediocre speakers and got right results.
Of course mastering studios count. They may correct some errors in the final stage.

Way Out West, Ferry Corsten, Digweed, actually all early 90s prog house scene, most of the UK Jungle DnB productions, like Goldie.
And many many more. I think no need to mention all of them.
It doesn't matter.
Early Detroit tech, early Juno Reactor.
They used mostly something like Alesis Monitor One, maybe NS10s, Mackies, KRKs, cheap Dynaudios.
And I think that was a golden era of electronic music.

Certainly it has nothing to do with monitoring.

Especially in low end rooms, the profit of using expensive monitors is next to nothing. They won't reveal their potential.
slumberjack
JediDJ wrote:
Simon Posford is an originator of Shpongle and Hallucinogen.
Psy ambient and psy trance projects.
No matter.
Simon Posford is not alone.

You missed my point.
You don't need Focals and Barefoots to make groovey electronic music, even with correct low end.
Lots of examples of guys used mediocre speakers and got right results.
Of course mastering studios count. They may correct some errors in the final stage.

Way Out West, Ferry Corsten, Digweed, actually all early 90s prog house scene, most of the UK Jungle DnB productions, like Goldie.
And many many more. I think no need to mention all of them.
It doesn't matter.
Early Detroit tech, early Juno Reactor.
They used mostly something like Alesis Monitor One, maybe NS10s, Mackies, KRKs, cheap Dynaudios.
And I think that was a golden era of electronic music.

Certainly it has nothing to do with monitoring.

Especially in low end rooms, the profit of using expensive monitors is next to nothing. They won't reveal their potential.


as i can only speak for myself, after i got better monitors i was like 'why did i spend so much cash on gear, all i needed would have been better speakers' - i remember me saying this to people. and now i want good eq's.

where i think i can speak for others too is when you are talking about those artists. for musician trying to emerge today it's crucial that they have their mixes done pretty good. maybe even better then some of the ancient masters may ever will - only to get a change for a release on a mediocre label. not that it would be that super important because mastering can fix a lot but only to cut through the millions of people trying to get something out of their creativity and "living the dream" like themself/us/you...so referencing to people from the late 80ies/early 90ies is imho impossible.

sure it's not the monitor only, but those geniouses who mix without any further knowledge on ns10's their breaktough release should be pretty rare.
MindMachine
gruebleengourd wrote:
For electronic music where much of the mixing takes place while composing, I find that overly treated rooms (ie dead) are much less practical as you cannot hear anything properly unless you are in the monitor sweet spot.


That I agree with as that is how I operate.

And agree with Morley: nice mixer and an H3000 (and eventually a better reverb).
JediDJ
Without acoustic treatment, in some situations,
there's NOTHING NEEDED except NS10s. Trust me.
Because in a room full of furniture or brick, concrete walls,
under 90hz there will be a dance of a devil on a spectrum analyzer.

And acoustic treatment can cost muuuuuuch more than a pair of excellent monitors.
I've been in that awful untreated rooms where big Westlakes or K&H were standing.
Profit of having such a speakers in such rooms were next to nothing.

So..... precise control costs money.

Maybe at some point is better to get Stax electrostatic headphones.
They are very linear and exclude room acoustic from a signal path wink
felixer
JediDJ wrote:
Especially in low end rooms, the profit of using expensive monitors is next to nothing. They won't reveal their potential.

this is very true! and expensive doesn't mean it's good! i'm amazed at what some of these sets cost. and btw there is a lot of difference between an ns10 and a monitorone, anyone should be able to hear that.
and acoustic treatment doesn't need to be expensive, if you know what you are doing ...
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Production Techniques Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 [all]
Page 4 of 4
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group