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

Recording, workflow, i cant find the rhytm/path.. help!
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author Recording, workflow, i cant find the rhytm/path.. help!
r3x
Originally made another post, but i figured it actually fits better here, seeing as the solution is tied to eurorack and not in general, and methods may vary due to that.

So very briefly, the kind of music i am making is this:

https://soundcloud.com/user-109196194

If you dont care to listen, its .. hmm well hard to explain the style i suppose, a sort of ambient, but melodic downbeat pop, with air undertones in some cases, and just.. well - go listen might be easier.

But my issue is the workflow - heres what i have tried so far;


Only eurorack - had two sequencers, and nothing else. This method worked good, was pretty inspiring, but i always ended up being annoyed that i only had those two melodic structures and i realised if i wanted to keep it all in the box, i would have to get 3 times as much gear, just to add a few more simultaneous tracks + drums, etc.

Also i disliked the fact that when i had something that really was quite good, altering it, just slightly might sometimes cause me to lose that whole vibe and being unable to return to it - as opposed to now, where when i have it, i sample it and then i can play further.

Ableton + es-3 + es-6 + es-7, and a push 2: This setup so far is what ive made the music on soundcloud with 90% of it is eurorack the last 10% is vst). General idea is start blank, tune oscs, begin working on something, then add layers. When im "done", i have alot of clips i can launch on the push 2, which in turn sets whatever sound/osc/thing going on the eurorack, and then on the side i have added beats from ableton, that is either processed in eurorack or inside ableton. I have NO filters and NO fx in my eurorack, all of these are being applied live in ableton.

Reason for this is; whatever i make, when its time to sample it down, i am sampling it pretty raw - it might be modulated, or have modulation on it, or me wiggling "live" while i record, but everything is without fx, which means i can then further play, redo, remake the effects on them, even a week after the track is done, and it all fits perfectly.


With this system, the main dislikes are: Being tied to a computer, and it kinda forces me alot of the time to stay within the traditional norm of music making; Ie. you have to tune your osc, cause if you dont, its super hard sometimes to get the vibe from ableton instruments to fit in perfectly. Also, in the end it sort of doesnt make sense, seeing as im saving all the midi notes with the track, so yes i can go back and make it again, but i have pulled out the cables, so .. it wont be the same regardless. And .. did i say hate being tied to the computer.

Current setup is the same as above + a beatstep pro. Now, this is something that is kinda making me think, and the reason for this post; with the beatstep i am making nice melodies, and i do have a sense of being "live", when i play on this. Once i feel im ready/done, i sample the results in ableton - and then i dont worry anymore.


However, im still tied to the computer, as i have to sample down things, and that quickly leads me to an overall state of just.. feeling traditional about music making.

So.. how do you guys do it? I know alot of people are using harddisk recorders, and in the beginning that made no sense to me, but now that im getting deeper into it, it makes alot of sense. You make something you like, you record it. You make something else on top, you record it. Fluent, free, organic - you get to play.

But what i cant figure out, is if the kind of music im making would benefit from a setup like that? Or would i have to go for something like an octatrack, and simply use that as an "ableton" kind of device? Record loops, put them together?

I have also been looking at the new machine mk 3, thinking again it could be useful; i imagine using a small mixer, having the eurorack and the maschine mk 3 go into that, then play with the eurorack, and the mk 3- once i have something, record it down on the mk3, from which point i can then always chop it up, and modify it if i see need be.

But at the same time, i think my dream machine or item would be a massive midi sequencer, where i could sequence EVERYTHING, and once im done, i have all the note information for later use, but im hard pressed to see the downfalls of doing this - and then i get scared of trying it smile

Phew.

Im sure alot of you guys have had, or are having the same issues, so please - enlighten us - I for one could sure use some advice in this area, as i feel its the only thing im not happy about regarding my eurorack at the moment.
blackjam
The search function doesn't seem to be working for me, so I don't know how much this is generally discussed, but it is an interesting topic and it would be nice to have a semi consolidated discussion on different wigglers workflows.

However I don't expect I'll have much insight for your particular issue, my eurorack is most often just a secondary sound source to place under or over other instrumentation in a DAW
r3x
Exactly - i only see this discussed in fragments here and there, a real discussion, or sub forum for this i think would help alot of people.
blackjam
It seems like something people stumble through and take a long time to work out. I'm sure thats somewhat necessary given the limitations and experimental nature of modular, however a place to read up on others methods would be really helpful
petersandbach
I've been doing relatively repeatable (or at least similar but evolving with each repatch) electronic/techno-ish music entirely in the Eurorack with 12u for the past year or so. I basically got fed up of computers and found the Octatrack wasn't right for me so got myself a Varigate 8+ and a Stepper Acid.

This is quite a good setup as you can save the sequences and as long as you make reasonable patch notes you can replay a tune live.

The MPC live looked like it might be interesting but I understand the OS has been very buggy for people.

Or what about a hardware sequencer like the BSP or the Circlon?

To be honest the slight variations that emerge when attempting to repatch a patch can be quite educational. I've had quite a lot of fun trying to work out how to provide variability in the patch that can be switched live.
r3x
I see what youre saying; I dont mind the idea of not being able to repatch exactly; with learning comes the wisdom of knowing what "that sound" you want to create entails.

What im looking more for, i guess, is a way to unify the eurorack into becoming my..well band. A way to get it to become the "Let me sit down and .. oh this is nice" and boom youre in the middle of creating a tune.

Then you finish up that tune, record it, and move on to the next; all without a computer, over the span of a few hours, or days, or weeks.

I feel that is .. well not impossible, but slow in my current setup, because the nature of my setup forces me to always go out of mind, and back into the traditional way of thinking.
chysn
Don't feel like you need to tie yourself down to a single process. I have basically three different processes:

(1) If I want to record a piece in a single pass, or mess around with a concept for future use, I record my modular straight into a Tascam DR-05. It's small and the audio is crystal clear.

(2) For multi tracking or clip-based music, use Ableton. Either straight in, or with clips previously recorded on the DR-05.

(3) Sometimes, when actual notes are involved, I'll start with MuseScore, then export the notation as a MIDI file, and drag it into Ableton, where it gets split into multiple tracks.

I've found that if I try to unify everything to a single process, I just get frustrated.

If you don't want to be "tied to a computer," consider buying a separate computer for nothing but music. Then, you can leave it hooked up, and it'll feel like more of an audio workstation, because that's its one job.
peripatitis
well i don't think it is the computer driving you towards "traditional music" and staying away from it won't make things different either. It's your choices really.
So the big question is what kind of music do you really want to make instead.

Btw music making is hard and difficult and its very rare to see someone making great music easily, meaning workflow is overrated. Focus is where everything is based imo..
starthief
I made music 100% in the box from 2003-2015, then started adding some desktop synths, and then got into Eurorack in late 2016.

I started with FL Studio and switched to Maschine, though I don't do EDM or hip-hop like the target market for those two packages seems to be -- mostly ambient and abstract stuff, with very little percussion anymore.

When I started adding hardware synths I didn't change my workflow much -- I still sequenced everything, got it "finished" and then recorded it to a single stereo track for some post-processing. It's just I had MIDI tracks going out and audio coming in, through software FX channels. Usually just 1 or 2 hardware voices along with mostly software.

What did change, though, was I started finishing songs in 1-2 sessions instead of coming back several times to muck around with it. This had a couple of implications: mostly shorter songs because I didn't feel the need to extend them and add more ideas to them; mostly simpler projects with fewer parts, which had more chance to speak for themselves, and less messy mixes; no longer just going back and changing stuff for the sake of changing it without really improving things.

Once I got into Eurorack, hardware voices took over about 90% of synth voices but I kept a similar workflow. I got a better audio interface with 8 simultaneous inputs, so I can mostly keep voices separate for FX channels in software.

Sometimes I will tune to A440 first, sometimes I'll just tune everything so it hangs together a bit loosely. That can create some challenges when I've got two Euro voices and an 0-Coast and I want to add Microbrute, which has a limited fine tuning range, or a software synth. If I don't want to retune the first parts, that means some transposing... and I've gotten some happy accidents out of that process.

Sometimes I go without MIDI sequences, and record drones or simple songs, with FX in the DAW. Or sometimes I'll supplement MIDI with simple sequences in Frames, or with Circuit Abbey G8+3x MIA.
createsounds
i understand the desire to not use the computer. i very much dislike it and have resolved to recording my stratified layers in a quality but not perfect, then sending it to be souped up by a trusted engineer.
but it seems to me a few of the things your wanting to do and potential replacing with other things are just actions you can do with a computer(DAW) with out added expense. or potential any great difference other that the idea of it not being a computer.


Quote:
Also i disliked the fact that when i had something that really was quite good, altering it, just slightly might sometimes cause me to lose that whole vibe and being unable to return to it - as opposed to now, where when i have it, i sample it and then i can play further.


i agree and have no advice other then finish the work or do other takes or something,
apparently most people consider this the benefit of modular... i don't agree or disagree, i think its just a aspect you learn to love and hate.




Quote:
I have NO filters and NO fx in my eurorack, all of these are being applied live in ableton.

Reason for this is; whatever i make, when its time to sample it down, i am sampling it pretty raw - it might be modulated, or have modulation on it, or me wiggling "live" while i record, but everything is without fx, which means i can then further play, redo, remake the effects on them, even a week after the track is done, and it all fits perfectly.

this is logical, as I've been told that VST are the future(well now the present from when i was told.) but if thats a concern you could mult the output and send one to the recording device and a second to FX/filters or what have you, and then send that to another channel of the recorder or do the whole re-amping thing, I've found that good at times for things that i want both but don't have that option at the moment. off course you'd have to buy a lot of the out board gear, and in the mean time continue using the current setup as you build (unless you happen to have tons of bread to go shopping if so rock on brother!!!!)



Quote:

With this system, the main dislikes are: Being tied to a computer, and it kinda forces me alot of the time to stay within the traditional norm of music making; Ie. you have to tune your osc, cause if you dont, its super hard sometimes to get the vibe from ableton instruments to fit in perfectly. Also, in the end it sort of doesnt make sense, seeing as im saving all the midi notes with the track, so yes i can go back and make it again, but i have pulled out the cables, so .. it wont be the same regardless. And .. did i say hate being tied to the computer.


musics tonal, and even a noise track can have dissonance (the bad kind) as for the instruments, you have tune them to each other be it a group of VCO's to each other strings or what ever,
- and as it seems these are virtual instuments (I'm guessing) that you can't actually play, you'd have to use some midi controller or something to create those sounds- or the old way, write the music and have a hired gun physically play it, then you can again do the revamping thing.
-to manipulate it to your preference of this and that


Quote:

I know alot of people are using harddisk recorders, and in the beginning that made no sense to me, but now that im getting deeper into it, it makes alot of sense. You make something you like, you record it. You make something else on top, you record it. Fluent, free, organic - you get to play.

theres no difference to that than using something like you have now, and stratifying, you still have to do all the post recording work.
you could just record a track, return to begging and hit record again, with monitors, even a simple garage band type program can do this. if the incoming signal is good. (id obviously advise a better app tho,)
you'd be back to the same thins as above with revamping and things like that to make the tracks perfect, if you didn't have the desired effects/modulation/filters or whatever, on hand and compatible with the modular hardware gadgets.

Quote:

I have also been looking at the new machine mk 3, thinking again it could be useful; i imagine using a small mixer, having the eurorack and the maschine mk 3 go into that, then play with the eurorack, and the mk 3- once i have something, record it down on the mk3, from which point i can then always chop it up, and modify it if i see need be.

i don't know this gadget, but it sounds like you just again talking about stratifying tracks with an outboard gadget, instead of a mac.

Quote:

i think my dream machine or item would be a massive midi sequencer, where i could sequence EVERYTHING, and once im done, i have all the note information for later use, but im hard pressed to see the downfalls of doing this - and then i get scared of trying it smile

are you talking about having a midi sequencer creating all the pattens and note values and such then into a midi/cv module that ships the signals and such around ? if so, to me that sounds like disappointment. as again you'd be back to having to recreate patches (that may or may not sound the same) and you'd have to know all the notes ahead of time and all the v values. but if your talking about a midi seq that is a bunch of loaded sample that you fire of when you see fit live or during recording, that could be fun, but for me, just not my style, and it sounds like you also some from a background of instrumentation. and being active with the creation, I'm not suggesting this type of sequencer isn't playing and instrument but for me personally it alway lost its pizzazz fairly quickly.



----
to resolve this probably hasn't helped you at all, sorry, but i think, my views are the use of a computer are inevitable, unless your using tape machines and a bunch of outboard compressors, filters, reaping etc.etc, etc which is fine but for most unrealistic both physically and monetarily, but you may have better luck with a bit more outboard gear that you can work with programming you "samples" or sequences or whatever in and more channels to record onto so that you can record each line (drum machine, euro, paino etc) that way you get the feeling of performing the composition, which I'm picking up is important to you verses recording each track separate, and later souping them up with this or that.

-as i mentioned above my technique for recording is a bit, disconnected, i just record tracks so the performance is right, and the sounds is pretty close to what i want and the quality is enough that a person more skilled then my self can do their thing and make then vinyl/cd quality with whatever tools they use.
and i do the recording with, a claret, mac book (cheapest you could by in 2016) and 6u84hp 6u104hp, and some typical other rock-n-roller stuff. that I've had forever so i know well.

i hope this helps.
r3x
createsounds; Thanks - no, it did help - its so nice to get other peoples perspectives.

I have made music for .. 20 years i guess, if we count it all - i have worked with other musicians, arranging stuff for them, making melodies, writing lyrics etc.

But ive never had a real interest in actually trying to publish "my" work - i just make it for myself.

I guess part of what influences me now though, is that i see the modular community very much as a "play live" community in many ways. If youre good, its fairly easy to go play in different spots - could just be a small hangout, or a big venue, but the opportunity seems far more often and far more relaxed than that of say a solo act, or a band, performing in the more traditional ways.

And this i think influences me; I have no plans for doing it, but i am being bit by it, and i do think i could end up wanting to try it out; and if i do that i guess im kinda worried now that i think about it, about being tied to a computer.

But that actually doesnt make sense, and your post sort of helped me realise this a bit; If i can make ANYTHING i want here, then if i was ever asked to go perform that song, or that "thing", then i could simply use all my samples, modulate the effects in realtime, and maybe do one or two of the sequences again on the modular in realtime too. Its possible, and its doable, and im bet its already being done.

So you are right; maybe i shouldnt hate on the computer, but just accept it for what it is; a huge pile that can record my thoughts, which i can then put together later, and thats just how that is, period.

This friday im going on a small vacation; im bringing my rack and about 15 modules - i was planning to bring a computer, but i think ill try not to, and just spend the weekend patching, and seeing what i can do without it - just to get deeper into the modular, without the computer being present.

Then maybe when i get home, it will be nice to "want" to go and record some of these ideas, and even to try and recreate a patch by the use of a picture.

In any regards, much appreciated yours, and all the other answers - definately helpful!
MarcelP
r3x wrote:


But ive never had a real interest in actually trying to publish "my" work - i just make it for myself.




Some aspects of this thread have appeared elsewhere - particularly the "being tied to a computer" and the related "recording is a chore that gets in the way of performance". But I think it is worth re-visiting this (broad) subject if only to get some perspective on ones own reason for doing any of this music making lark.

I selected the above quote because it particularly resonates with me right now. I have played the piano for some 50 years and only ever recorded myself maybe five times. When I got into modular over a year ago I thought I would need to multitrack/layer stuff to make a complete performance but soon realised I was happiest performing "live" and that the layered approach was stultifying. I expanded my system to the point where I can now make multiple layers simultaneously and don't need to overdub: I haven't recorded anything at all for some months now, the computer is not connected to my Sapphire interface, I have no evidence that I exist in a musical sense.

Most of my patches last a day or two. After wringing out everything I can from a patch (by twiddling it beyond recovery) I de-rig ready for the next session. I make no patch notes, no diagrams, nothing that documents the "work" I have done. The enjoyment I get is "in the moment" and just for me, nothing left for posterity.

That said I do recognise I have a latent urge to demonstrate what it is I am getting up to with all those late nights in my studio - if only to show my kids, wider family or the few friends I still have left since going down this rabbit hole that I haven't gone completely and silently insane.

To that end I have a few weeks booked off work soon when I will connect the computer up and try to record some performances and then edit them together into a seamless and glorious whole. After that, who knows. I have wondered about finding fellow like minded musicians to "jam" with (I think that is the modern term) though that all smacks of commitment and would require planning - two things I seem to have an innate aversion to.

As for the hardware/techniques/workflow, etc, that will sort itself out as I go along. The difficult bit is working out what motivates and where your pleasures lie. Much like life in general - if you can work out what you want to do then the way will become clear.
hinterlands303
I understand not using effects in eurorack, but no filters???!!! That seems crazy to me. Analog filters are one of the things that make hardware synths special. The minor (or major) differences in filter designs and how those different designs respond to cv is really special. Do you not use any other sound shapers either (wavefolders etc.)?
pitri
i was at the same crossroads (very similar setup - i was just missing the push) - then i decided against a hybrid setup. i grew the modular into a powerful and versatile thing. i started with additional outboard effects and eqs / comp. now i only hit record in a DAW and record the final song as a stereo mixdown. technically i could replace the PC with a tape rec. but it doesnt bother me i need and want the songs digital anyways.
starthief
r3x wrote:
But ive never had a real interest in actually trying to publish "my" work - i just make it for myself.

I guess part of what influences me now though, is that i see the modular community very much as a "play live" community in many ways


I prefer the process of creating recorded, "finished" music -- even though I do it for my own enjoyment, and share it without promoting it. If someone else enjoys it, that's a nice side effect. These days at work I listen to my own music about as much as everyone else's (and that's helped me zero in on the kind of music that I enjoy both creating AND listening to later, as opposed to music that's more fun to make than to hear).

I've done my share of performing live -- first classical violin and jazz keyboards in high school in the 80s, and more recently, taiko drumming. During festivals, the taiko group would have audiences of a few hundred, at 6 shows over 3 days. But I left that group largely because I would rather create my own material than perform someone else's.

I don't have much interest in playing synths live for an audience. But aspects of live control definitely have their place in a context of recording, and I'm 100% in favor of getting comfortable with improvisation as a composition tool smile
r3x
Marcelp:

Quote:
Much like life in general - if you can work out what you want to do then the way will become clear.


I love that. And yes, I totally get where you are, and why you are there; im much the same. Allthough a part of me is getting caught up on the jam, or performance aspect. Not because I want to "be" something, but because I think it will be an awesome experience.

Imagine the moments, when everything clicks; then imagine sharing it with others. I guess thats where I am hoping the path will lead me eventually, in whatever form or shape it might be!

hinterlands303:

Quote:
I understand not using effects in eurorack, but no filters???!!! That seems crazy to me. Analog filters are one of the things that make hardware synths special. The minor (or major) differences in filter designs and how those different designs respond to cv is really special. Do you not use any other sound shapers either (wavefolders etc.)?


Well, I used to have quite a few filters, a koma, a wasp, a dave smith, and some other various ones. I find, personally, that .. well to be honest, i cant hear much of the filter doing anything that i cant do with a VST. If a VST plugin is processing true analogue input, then.. it just sort of gives it the same vibe. I Havent tried all filters, and i am definately not an expert at using them, but from my experience so far, wiggling a VST filter ( cause that is definately possible ) gives me as much meaning as wiggling a module filter.

It might change over time.

I am however using a tiptop fold processor - and you could argue that the many lfos i inject could be considered filters, as they heavily influence the sound.
pieter
MarcelP wrote:

Most of my patches last a day or two. After wringing out everything I can from a patch (by twiddling it beyond recovery) I de-rig ready for the next session. I make no patch notes, no diagrams, nothing that documents the "work" I have done.


starthief wrote:

I prefer the process of creating recorded, "finished" music -- even though I do it for my own enjoyment, and share it without promoting it. If someone else enjoys it, that's a nice side effect.


These are exactly my thoughts also.

Back to the process, though: After two years I am getting fairly comfortable creating interesting patterns with my rig. Sometimes the magic happens, and sometimes it doesn't; fun is being had regardless. What I really do not yet "grok", however, is how to create larger musical structures. I know DCramer has broken down for us how his "engines" work, but I can't seem to get to the essence of it yet.
JES
Great thread! r3x, if you're looking for a powerful sequencer, I recommend Numerology. You can run it in Live and use Push to improvise, edit and save sequences. Works great with Expert Sleepers stuff. He's coming out with a Euro sequencer as well which might be a good alternative option. There are a gazillion Euro sequencers already but Jim has really thought a lot about music in his design of how Numerology works, and it's made with a modular user's mindset at the forefront.

So, to answer the question.

I am a bass player originally, so my ideal model of making music is basically this: Rockin' Banana!

Solo or with others, my basic model is set up, tune up, play and then finish. Before I record something, I practice it a lot. Music happens in real time, serious recording is a special occasion, though we often record practice to check arrangements, reflect on ideas we improvised, etc--this is often just using the iPhone as a notepad. The key is repetition and repeatability. I need a relatively stable setup--the same bass, the same or equivalent effects pedal sequence, etc. Without that, the arrangement changes, which is fine if that's what I and the people I'm playing with want. But I'm in one band where there's a traditional songwriter, and another where all the music is improvised and then a structure is built around the improvisations.

Electronic music and sound art in the computer was different: more like writing, cooking or sculpting. And I've only ever done it with one other person at most. But even there, it was crucial for me to arrive at a consistent setup for at least the duration of a project. Otherwise time was wasted and fun was limited.

The kitchen needs to be ready to cook, as it were.

I'm still working on integrating Euro and the computer. I think it requires the same stability-per-project as the other setups, and the amount of computer is really just a matter of taste. But given that most music is released digitally now (especially niche synth stuff) a computer's going to come into it sooner or later. One could imagine treating Euro as an "instrument" like a bass or a piano and then using the computer as a "studio date" when a piece is finished, or as a sketch book along the way. But I think it's just a matter of taste. A good control surface can make the computer "hardware like" but I think the key thing here is ... having a setup--a cross-device template really, and sticking to it so that the setup work is minimal each time.

As for tuning oscillators, I think that's just part of working with an analog instruments. I tune up my stringed instruments before playing and a tube amp needs a little time to warm up. It shouldn't be that much of a hassle -- just warm up the rig for 30 minutes, tune up, and play. Make it a routine.

Writing is a big part of my day job, and it's the same deal: having a stable setup and routine allows for those wonderful transcendent moments when "everything just clicks."

So if you were me, which you're not, I'd say find a setup and works. Don't worry if another setup is better. Stick with it for the duration of a project, improvise, define some artistic goals, see where it leads you, then record and finish the pieces (with the proviso that you can always "unfinish" them later).

You want to be in a situation where when you're making music, you're not thinking about workflow except in the most minimal way.

At least that's my $.02. Or
Futuresound
oh good it's not just me
createsounds
Quote:
I guess part of what influences me now though, is that i see the modular community very much as a "play live" community in many ways. If youre good, its fairly easy to go play in different spots - could just be a small hangout, or a big venue, but the opportunity seems far more often


I guess good is a relative term but either way,
Where this community?

This is me saying if anyone is putting gigs together I'd like to submit a track to try and get on the bill!
noisejockey
Loads of good advice here, I'll try not to retread too much.

Don't believe you're going to find THE way. There are many ways, and they vary based on mood as well as experience level. I had a period where I only ever did MIDI, perfected it, bounced to stereo. Then I did nothing but audio multitracking; I couldn't possibly believe that I could do a compelling track live in one take on stereo tracks. And, well, now a lot of what I do is just that, borne out of experimenting and increased confidence from experience...and learning to live with the imperfections, at the expense of being able to separately sculpt each layer later. But I still do a mix of all three, depending on needs and desires.

In the latter two cases, my DAW is a tape machine, really, that MAYBE spits out sync, but not always. Sometimes I multi-track with the modular and re-line up timings by hand. Sometimes I want the extremely imperfect clock of a pulsing Music Easel. Sometimes I want a whole patch rigidly driven by MIDI clock. It just depends on the feel I want.

Find a way that works, but always iterate with it, and specifically try working in a way you're uncomfortable with or scared of. A short period of frustration will be followed be epiphanies and techniques that you can use even if you don't switch recording methods wholesale.
starthief
noisejockey wrote:
...learning to live with the imperfections, at the expense of being able to separately sculpt each layer later.


I think that was the key for me to get a good flow going. Sometimes seeking perfection isn't worth it. Sometimes it takes the life and interest out. Sometimes it's just masking indecision, and you're really just making the thing different, not better. Once in a while, it's actually important.

When I listen to my "less perfect" newer music, it has a lot fewer things that make me wince and think "I want to fix that" than my older music does.

I like to think I'm "painting" my music with bolder strokes now smile
TemplarK
I've stopped using abelton, its just not great DAW especially for what we do, yeah for running loops and hip hop and all that stuff yeah its awesome, but for intricate and more electronic/house and heavily produced/mix'ed or recording lot of tracks at once i've gone to Reaper (if i as on mac surely i would use Logic) but i'm finding Reaper has tools that let you do more things to aid actually recording, like easily being able to take multiple takes and choose one without having to rearrange your whole tracks to decide on a 8 bar take, you can set everything up and see everything much easier and better (like a list of all the FX on a channel and ability to pick one without expanding or scrolling.

Same for a lot of midi in REaper as well, you can just see and edit mutiple parts much more easily and coherently.

Abelton has its place, but honestly, i'm refreshed now i've stopped using it and learnt reaper, my tracks are taking a much better sounding and rhytmic path now i'm not fighting a DAW that lacks options and the finesse for what should be easily achieved in 2017 which is to lay tracks down without pulling your hair out to be able to change a small part easily and effciently.

60 day free trial on Reaper try it.
wiggies
+1 on the Numerology recommendation.

I'm a newbie at all this, having been at it for less than a year. I was the lead singer and lyricist for a punk band in the early 80s. The band broke up but I kept writing songs--without anyone to make the music.

In the 90s I tried to make music myself, bought some cheap digital gear, fooled with it a bit, and then, well, life and work and kids and all and that stuff went in a closet.

Last year I dug the stuff out with the intention of making songs from my backlog of lyrics. Then my wife bought me a Mother 32 for christmas and I started into eurorack. Along the way, I've discovered that, at least for now, what I really enjoy doing is patching things up in Numerology in ways that evolve and doing the same with my hardware. I'll sometimes spend a few weeks building up a Numerology project and euro patch. Eventually, I'll do a few recording takes--all live into the DAW--which I'll then polish with effects. Sometimes I can get to places where all I have to do is hit Play on Numerology and the music that comes out surprises me with what it does without me even touching the equipment (but I'm usually turning knobs).

So that's my workflow. I have no idea what I'm doing most of the time, and I'm enjoying that very much. I'm still not getting any "songs" written, but I'm having fun, learning a lot. I suppose it helps that my other creative interest is improvisational theater, where every performance is unique and exists only in the moment where it is created. Part of the beauty and joy of it all is letting it go.
r3x
Noisejockey:

Quote:
Find a way that works, but always iterate with it, and specifically try working in a way you're uncomfortable with or scared of. A short period of frustration will be followed be epiphanies and techniques that you can use even if you don't switch recording methods wholesale.


This is very helpful to me - I do, if I think about it, find myself being scared of walking off the path for longer times.. For no reason, its just habitual I guess, so I will definately try to challenge myself a bit on that smile
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group