Jump to content


Photo

Boss DR 660 vs Renoise

drum machines hardware sequencer comparison

  • Please log in to reply
143 replies to this topic

#101 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 February 2018 - 20:43

You mean something like this one?  :rolleyes:

16461_01.jpg

 

That model must be going-on for something like ten years old now, but not bad, don't like the look of it though, that mirror screen makes it look cheap and the effect would drive me mad.

 

My rant was really referring to the newer stuff they're releasing, it's all that USB crap, they should not even be allowed to advertise them as having MIDI.  MIDI was designed for instrument-to-instrument communication, but those crappy USB efforts don't even do that, you cannot go from the OUT of one MIDI instrument to the IN of another (unless it's a computer).  Computers are not instruments in the classic sense, instruments are.  So that's unacceptable to me, it's not MIDI at all, it's useless crap, no doubt an attempt to work everyone away from good honest MIDI, and into the world of USB where they can manipulate and break things to their hearts content.

Well they can fuck-off, I have never, and will never, buy any MIDI equipment that doesn't use standard MIDI sockets.  That KORG might be my only option if I were to go for a pad controller, so it's not out of the question, I just wish the newer "MIDI" controllers actually featured MIDI.

 


Edited by Renoised, 09 February 2018 - 20:47.

  • El°HYM likes this

#102 El°HYM

El°HYM

    Big Super Masta Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NIBIRU
  • Interests:I AM El°HYM

Posted 10 February 2018 - 11:02

Might be a few days older than the #trash produced in these days....yet you really gotta admit her unique #beastliness  <_< 

e0aswwdmcpgv1ygsfuky.jpg


Inside ur Renoise; helping Byte-Smasher putting Cab Sims on ur Master.  :ph34r: 


#103 encryptedmind

encryptedmind

    Big GrandDaddy Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 493 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India
  • Interests:Jazz, malware, world travel, women

Posted 10 February 2018 - 20:09

Maschine has midi DIN sockets built to its chassis. It can also work as a controller. It comes with its own software like the MPC Studio and Renaissance. I however can some what appreciate the slimming down of midi jacks to 1/8 inch jacks, iRig also had this on its HD Pro sound card that is as slim as a pack of gum. It gives phantom power, has a trs and XLR combo jack for both mic and line in in one place. Has midi input from DIN to 1/8 inch on its body and it comes with compatible adaptor as well. It works with PC, Mac and iPhone and iPad and had peripherals to support it on each device. Possibly works with Android as well though I am eternally to try it. MPC Element has similar adaptors and so does the MPC Studio. It works well to reduce bulk and increase slimness in those products. Also midi was invented around 1983 when FM was also invented and it's already 30+ years now,so some changes are actually welcome. Magsafe would not have been invented if people still used ancient IBM style power SMPS sockets..Apple is really stupid though taking out their best feature and trying to bring USB C by enforcing slimness to its extremes like a fashion obsessed freak.

Edited by encryptedmind, 12 February 2018 - 18:35.

encryptedmind
Victor Marak

uZIK|mAInD|Z0FTwA-RE

marak.bandcamp.com

#104 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 12 February 2018 - 18:09

Hey guys,

so I've been playing around with the Tascam MTS 30 and have gotten the hang of it (not very difficult to begin with), but if I start in the middle of the recording I run into a bit of a problem. After about 3-4 bars, the MTS successfully syncs with Renoise and Renoise starts playing in the middle of song pretty close to where I started the tape. The problem: It isn't really perfect. It's slightly out of time, a bit laid back. I know it takes a bit to find the right BPM and ting, but even then it's still a bit out of sync. If I start the tape right from the beginning, things are perfectly in sync (I now start my Renoise track with an empty pattern where the MTS has some time to get in sync), but if I do so in the middle of the recording, I run into that problem again..

 

Is this just how it is with the old technology and an imperfection we just have to find our way around or are there some settings within Renoise or whatever that can smooth things out a bit? And I don't mean the smoothing function in the MIDI controls. I already have that set to max :3 I'm using the Miditech Midiface 4x4 Midi Interface.


Edited by clirke21, 12 February 2018 - 18:11.

  • El°HYM likes this

#105 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 February 2018 - 01:32

Timing should be perfect.  Not familiar with the MTS 30, but here are some pointers for recording a good, relieable timing signal to tape.

 

- Never use noise reduction on the track you're recording the tape signal to, check in the manual of your multi-track to find out which track is NR free (for example it's track 8 on the MT8X).

- When setting the levels, ramp it up to the point just before you get clipping, then back the level off a bit.

 

The general idea is to get a good strong timing signal to tape without it being distorted by NR or clipping.  If Renoise only starts after some bars have passed, it probably just means that you started recording the timing signal at that point when you recorded to tape.  So try it again, and if that fails, maybe the heads are dirty or the tape itself is not in sufficient condition.  For what it's worth, I knew you'd have problems with it when you got it.  It's inevitable, but the good news is they're actually very simple devices, so chances are it's just something you're doing wrong.  It'll work like clockwork once you realise what the issue is.


  • El°HYM likes this

#106 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 11:43

@Renoised: I'm actually glad that it's probably my fault.

 

I use the Tascam 424 which has a specific sync mode for DBX in which it's turned off on the 4th channel. I also use the sync outs/ins and am recording in a specialized sync-mode where the levels are set automatically.

 

I just realized that I don't even need an empty pattern in the beginning. It starts synced perfectly, but the problem when trying to play a section within the song remains. But this is what the manual says:"Run the tape in Play. After an interval during which the MTS-30 recognizes the tape position in terms of the number of bars (during this time, two or three bars will pass), the rhythm programmer or sequencer will start in sync."

 

So, they seem to expect this sort of thing to happen. Anyways, I'll go and clean the tape heads a bit and see what happens.


  • El°HYM likes this

#107 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 February 2018 - 14:10

Hate to say it, but that system they have sounds quite screwy if I'm understanding you correctly.  The whole point of a sync unit is top keep the thing in sync, not casually start up after some measures have past.  I'm also puzzled how the levels are automatically set, are you sure about that?  I can't imagine how you are not able to set the level manually while you're recording it, cause surely you would just adjust the recording level of the sync track.

To give you an idea of how it's supposed to work, here's what I do (so just imagine you're doing the same):

- Connect the sync unit to the highest number track.

- Trigger the sync unit to output a continuous sync signal.

- Set the recording level high, but not clipping at all.

- Once the levels are set, stop the sync unit and rewind the tape.

- Press record on your Multi-track and then trigger the sync unit so that it starts when you want it to start on playback.

- Let the tape record the signal until it comes to the end.

 

You only need to do that once for each tape you use, cause you're basically formatting the new tape with a sync signal.  So now, just rewind the tape, and when you press play, Renoise will start precisely at the same part of the tape that you started the sync unit when you recorded it, because the sync unit sent a MIDI Start message at that point, and it got recorded to tape.  What you just told me does not make sense at all, the unit would be as good as useless if it worked like that.

Don't forget there's a non-magnetic leader on tape, so triggering your sync unit during record, while the leader part of the tape is over the head, will not work.  Try it again, and count to six before triggering it this time, cause you might be starting it too early and missing the MIDI Start message.

 

Press record, count to six, then trigger the sync unit.


  • El°HYM likes this

#108 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 16:24

@Renoised: Yes, they are set automatically if you use the sync-inputs on the back. Whatever comes through them is being sent to channel 4 automatically and the levels are adjusted on their own  (around +0), you can't really adjust them in that case. At least on the Tascam 424. But yeah, you can also use the 4th channel direct inputs for this and I've tried that, but things get even more fu**ed up in that case (perhaps my cable for that is sh*t).

 

This is how I do it:

- Turn the Sync-switch on the back to the right position

- Either turn on DBX Sync mode or turn DBX off entirely.

- Go into Save mode on the Tascam MTS 30

- Turn on Sync-mode on channel 4 (in order to record the sync signal instead of the direct inputs)

- Start recording and wait 'till you're past the leader, then press play in Renoise until you're done

- Go into Load mode on the MTS 30 and rewind

 

Now, it'll start exactly when you set it up to start. But if you fast-forward a bit and start in the middle of the track, it'll take 2-3 seconds to sync up (and the BPM fluctuates slightly before it finds the right value, for example if it's gotta be 180 it starts out with 183-182-181...etc)

 

Perhaps the unit just sucks, who knows. I cleaned the tapes, but it didn't solve anything. Perhaps I'm using shitty cables? At this point, it could be anything..Perhaps some radio is interfering with it? Or aliens?  :panic:


Edited by clirke21, 13 February 2018 - 16:27.

  • El°HYM likes this

#109 El°HYM

El°HYM

    Big Super Masta Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NIBIRU
  • Interests:I AM El°HYM

Posted 13 February 2018 - 17:55

I-am-not-saying.jpg


Inside ur Renoise; helping Byte-Smasher putting Cab Sims on ur Master.  :ph34r: 


#110 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 February 2018 - 22:36

@Clirke, Dude, that's what it's supposed to do :D

 

As long as Renoise always starts when it hears the Start command from the tape, and as long as it keeps in perfect sync for the entire length of the tape, you're good to go!  I'm afraid you can't just start things midway like that, cause the only signal there is the sync, not the Start command, see?  In other words, there's a Start command recorded to tape at the beginning, and gets repeated, from the sounds of it, throughout the length of the tape.  This explains why it takes Renoise a while to start, cause it's waiting for a Start command.

 

I'm afraid you can't work the way you were thinking though, cause you can't just start and stop Renoise, move around, and expect the tape mechanism to follow it.  That's what SMPTE is for, you can do that with SMPTE cause rather than recording a pulse to the tape, it records time-coded information.  When you set Renoise to a specific position, the SMPTE machine will automatically find that time position on the tape, therefore allowing you to do what you thought.  Like I said though, for SMPTE to work, the tape has to be in contact with the head even during forward and rewind, so that it can track the time-code information that's on the tape.

SMPTE wears-down heads a lot quicker than MMC.  We both have MMC (MIDI Machine Control) with sync, not SMPTE.  You just need to get used to the fact that your tape Multi-track is designed to be 'Master', always.  Well, once you've got the sync signal onto tape and start making music it is, anyway.

 

So nah, not aliens in this case :D

 


Edited by Renoised, 13 February 2018 - 22:38.


#111 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 23:14

@Renoised: Yeah, that's what I suspected. They say it in the manual, too, as I mentioned earlier. In the end, it's not the worst thing in the world. One can find ways to deal with that. :3

 

The reality is that I'm still gonna use Reaper a lot, I think (even though I didn't want to). I just need to do so in order to plan things out, loop ideas, figure out harmonies etc...Doing so on the 4-track isn't really that convenient. But I'll probably do the typical tape tricks in Reaper, so when I then get onto the Tascam, I can transfer all the ideas onto it.

 

My brain needs to get rewired big-time, I suppose. Almost all of the music I've ever made was programmed. Mostly done in Renoise or other MIDI sequencers. I work in a stream-of-consciousness kind of way. I never have outlines in my head. If I find a seed, I know where it should go, but I can only see the next step, everything beyond that is a mystery (and I like that). So now it's a bit of a workflow change. 

 

With the 4-track, due to its limitations and linearity, you really have to think differently. Outline and plan things...Really filter ideas and use the best ones. It's quite interesting, how hard it is for my brain to cope with that right now. Yesterday I just sat there, and for the first time, I had this thing that some people probably refer to as "writers block", lol. I felt totally defeated.  :smashed: But it's nice, in a way. Like I'm entering a new world. It's all the guitars fault, anyway.


Edited by clirke21, 13 February 2018 - 23:16.

  • El°HYM likes this

#112 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2018 - 02:01

Don't get deflated, you're on the right track and the fact you went to the trouble of even locating a sync unit, is a very good thing cause most would probably have lost heart even before that stage.  I could be wrong, but I think you went ahead with it because you feel the analogue thing.  But you know what?  Odd as this might sound to you, screw the sync unit (for now anyway), stick it in a cupboard for a while cause all it will do for you at this stage, is infuriate you.  A sync unit was a very rare beast even back in the 80s, which is why it's taken some effort finding one.

 

If I were you, I would embrace the multi-track and your guitar playing in the way they were meant to be embraced.  In other words, man, guitar, and multi-track.  If you do that then you automatically go from one extreme to another.  You stop being frustrated, cause all you need to do to get your ideas down, is pick up your guitar, set the levels and EQ, and press record on the multi-track.  You're playing a live analogue instrument and recording it in analogue, it doesn't get any better than that mate.  So you do this track after track, and eventually, you end up with a song, just like everyone did back in the day.  If you work the way they did, then you'll likely produce the quality they did, and yes, the music back then was a direct result of the techniques and equipment used.

 

Listen to this:



That was recorded to tape in 1971, I wasn't even born then, still the quality blows even the current crop of "high-end" digital recording systems into orbit (certainly to my ears).  It sounds fucking gorgeus, not just because it was recorded in analogue, but because the instrument being recorded is also analogue, and so is the player, because the player is not a sequencer, the player might as well be you and your guitar.  After speaking with you the other week in this thread, and stumbling across the track I just showed you, it suddenly hit me that I was a complete idiot for wasting money on that Volca Sample anyway, and you know why?  Cause I already have a kick-ass sampler, but what I don't have, is a guitar.  My hardware setup is ready for guitar, but I don't actually have one.  So what I'm saying is, it actually took that track right there to make me start looking into getting a guitar myself, and hopefully, learn to play the thing.

 

You're already way ahead in that respect, cause you already have both a guitar that you can play, and an analogue multi-track tape system, and you know what that means?

 

It means you can avoid the computer completely while you build your song, and once you have some nice guitar recordings recorded to tape, you could sample it into Renoise and not need to worry about sync at all, you just trim anything you like from the start and end of the sample and trigger it whenever you like, inside Renoise, no need for Reaper at all.  So my opinion, you should use the multi-track as a song-writing tool, a companion, something to capture raw performance.  When you're done, sample the result to your hearts content, and even if you decide to master the song in Renoise, your analogue multi-track will come in handy yet again if you decide to record the completed song back to tape so that you have an analogue master of it.

Recording in analogue adds something, you know that, and when you take that and put it back through the system again, you add even more to it.  So think simple is my advice, otherwise you'll just get frustrated by completely unnecessary technology that over-polishes your work and makes it sterile (like 99.9% of everything produced these days).  Listen to that track carefully, and notice for example, how they handled the panning (they used hard panning).  All that track is (apart from being a beautiful composition), is a guitar, a voice, and some strings.  It's really the hard-panning they used and it being analogue that gives the audio it's feel and a very clear sense of 'presence', and you won't be getting that sort of presence by recording on digital equipment - it's just not the same.

That recording was made in 1971 (47 years ago), yet the technology the gear used to record it (analogue) is audibly superior to what is being used these days (unless they're recording in analogue).  So I rest my case, you're on the right "track" (pun intended) B)

 

Anyway, sounds like I'm sales-pitching again, I better go do some web surfing now, cause I got a cheapo guitar to find.



 


Edited by Renoised, 14 February 2018 - 10:46.

  • El°HYM and encryptedmind like this

#113 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 14 February 2018 - 11:21

@Renoised:

Good point. Last night I actually did just that, I put the sync-stuff away and just wrote a guitar track. Worked out pretty well! I guess it's that I'm not that used to thinking about the creative process in such a way, and my brain is already completely occupied with it, so when I try to throw Renoise in the mix, it's just a system overload. So I'll work on both things separately for now. Over time, I can slowly try and combine them using Reaper and perhaps later, with the 4-track. But for now the 4-track to me is this self-sufficient thing which can do bascially most of what you need to do recording-wise, while Renoise is a self-sufficient thing able to do most of the programming you need to do. That's the beauty of them. One can completely feed the "instrumentalist" in me, the other one the "programmer".

 

That's why John Frusciante could release an album on his own in the early nineties, just using the 4-track and some guitars. It's self-sufficient. 

013ee6e882726b96ea6e8982db7eadf0.jpg

 

That's why Bogdan Raczynski could write entire tracks in the mid-late nineties, probably owning nothing but a laptop with a tracker on it, some samples and perhaps some plugins, being homeless much of that time. 

hqdefault.jpg

 

And still, their music resonates, because it's raw, human and only consists of the bare essentials.

 

I generally wanna get away from this professionalism within music, especially these days where it has gotten worse. We need less to make music, but still something outside tells us we need more..more than we ever did. Isn't that fu**ed up? I guess the reason for this is that these voices from the outside telling us these things just want to sell us a product...So why listen?

 

On another note, have you ever played around a with a real reel-to-reel tape machine? That's the real deal when it comes to analogue recording.


Edited by clirke21, 14 February 2018 - 11:25.

  • encryptedmind likes this

#114 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2018 - 16:54

Never owned one, would like to though.  I prefer Cassette to be honest, cause it's the only analogue format you can record your vinyl to, stick it in your pocket, listen to on the move, or in the car, and is a favourite among the indies cause you can duplicate and distribute with ease.  I don't really need a reel-to-reel due to having the multi-track where I can make use of more tape surface if needed, and the only audible differences between reel-to-reel and cassette, is due to them running at different speeds and using a larger tape surface area.  They're otherwise exactly the same.  My cassette deck is high-end anyway, she's perfecly capable of kicking the ass of those reel-to-reel machines without even breaking into a sweat, so I've never been too frustrated by not having a reel-to-reel.

 

I like tape to sound warm and solid, I'm not a fan or crazy-high frequencies, and I've even thought about taking the back off the MT8X and adjusting the speed trim-pots so that I can get even more warmth by slowing it down, cause it would only come at the cost of annoyingly high frequencies that I don't want in my recordings anyway.   I won't even use Metal tape, fucking hate the stuff, takes away the aspect of the tape sound that I like.  Funny enough, I think that's a trap people new to tape-based recording will often fall into.  I reckon most noobs to this stuff will assume that Metal tape is better, even though it's the worst-sounding formulation you can record onto, the most expensive, and is no good for your heads, either.  Ferro and FerroChrome are best for warmth and for the "tape" sound, Chrome is a good all-rounder, but Metal is seriously lacking, so just a little tip there that might save you falling for that nonsense, should you be tempted.

 

But yeah, all fun stuff regardless, and the more you play with it, get aquainted with it, you naturally pick-up tricks on how to get the sort of qualities you want from a recording.

 

Totally agree on the overload thing as well, that's why I keep my hardware setup separate from my software setup.  If I get a guitar, it's strictly for use in the hardware setup, the idea being that because I can't play the guitar, I could just leave the multi-track running while repeatedly playing a part at a time until I feel I recorded an acceptable part.  Then all I have to do is sample it, trim of the bad parts, and trigger the result from the sampler while recording it back to the multi-track.  That means I'd be able to cheat to an extent, cause although I'd be genuinely recording the original performance played live in analogue, and the end result is recorded back to analogue, I means I still had the convenience of calling upon the sampler to remove the surplus, and fix things.

 

I don't mind that at all, it's all done on a hardware setup, so that process wouldn't frustrate me in the least.

 

I must admit I did tell a lie, kind of, cause I actually do have a guitar, an acoustic one, but it's not electro acoustic, the frets were a bit worn when I were given it, and for some reason, a string kept snapping on it.  I went though three or four at the time before I got fed-up with it and put it away.  So I do have one (a Lorenzo), but it's no use to me so it's as good as not having one, no way to connect it, so that would mean micing it up, and I don't fancy that.  I just want to plug it into my sampler and multi-track, so I need either an electric or electro-acoustic guitar.

 

I wish I knew the proper terms for guitar stuff, cause I'd love to know if there's a term for how hard the strings are to press.  I noticed some years back when trying-out some electric guitars, that some were really hard to play, but others were pleasantly easy.  If there's a term to describe a guitar with easy strings that aren't a mile-off the fret-board, I'd really love to know what it is.  The Lorenzo is sort of in-between the two extremes, not excessively hard, but not pleasantly soft like some guitars I tried, and I won't be happy unless it's a soft one that's easy to play.



#115 El°HYM

El°HYM

    Big Super Masta Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NIBIRU
  • Interests:I AM El°HYM

Posted 14 February 2018 - 21:19


Inside ur Renoise; helping Byte-Smasher putting Cab Sims on ur Master.  :ph34r: 


#116 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:00

Great video, I love stuff like that, and I just noticed that Tascam has a speed switch, must be very nice to have that.  I don't have that on the Yamaha, I have a pitch knob for speed, but the switch is a speed-lock on mine.  I'll have to have a word with MT8X and ask her why she allowed a much cheaper Tascam to out-smart her in that repsect <_<

 

Love the idea of the chordal drones, never thought of that, and at least I'm ok in that respect cause I'd be able to use six chords, and still have two left over to record them to, in stereo :D

 


Edited by Renoised, 14 February 2018 - 22:00.

  • El°HYM likes this

#117 El°HYM

El°HYM

    Big Super Masta Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NIBIRU
  • Interests:I AM El°HYM

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:05

Two tape speeds offer HIGH for greater fidelity...http://homerecording...as424specs.html

Great video, I love stuff like that, and I just noticed that Tascam has a speed switch, must be very nice to have that.  I don't have that on the Yamaha, I have a pitch knob for speed, but the switch is a speed-lock on mine.  I'll have to have a word with MT8X and ask her why she allowed a much cheaper Tascam to out-smart her in that repsect <_<

 

Love the idea of the chordal drones, never thought of that, and at least I'm ok in that respect cause I'd be able to use six chords, and still have two left over to record them to, in stereo :D

 


Edited by El°HYM, 14 February 2018 - 22:10.

Inside ur Renoise; helping Byte-Smasher putting Cab Sims on ur Master.  :ph34r: 


#118 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:14

I know what it's for, the Yamaha is set on high all the time though (other than using the pitch knob), that's why I want to adjust the speed-pot inside so that I can get lower fidelity and better warmth by slowing it down a bit.  If I recall, the MT8X runs through a tape twice as fast as standard speed, which is nice if you want the fidelity, but I'd rather trade some fidelity for extra warmth.  I've been toying with the idea of adjusting the speed-pot for years, just haven't got around to doing it.  Seeing that video just gave me an idea though.  Rather than adjust the pot, I could attach a resistor attached to a switch, and feed the wire though the vent on the back.

 

That way I could have a switch without having to drill holes in it (which I would never do anyway).


  • El°HYM likes this

#119 El°HYM

El°HYM

    Big Super Masta Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NIBIRU
  • Interests:I AM El°HYM

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:24

I know what it's for, the Yamaha is set on high all the time though (other than using the pitch knob), that's why I want to adjust the speed-pot inside so that I can get lower fidelity and better warmth by slowing it down a bit.  If I recall, the MT8X runs through a tape twice as fast as standard speed, which is nice if you want the fidelity, but I'd rather trade some fidelity for extra warmth.  I've been toying with the idea of adjusting the speed-pot for years, just haven't got around to doing it.  Seeing that video just gave me an idea though.  Rather than adjust the pot, I could attach a resistor attached to a switch, and feed the wire though the vent on the back.

 

That way I could have a switch without having to drill holes in it (which I would never do anyway).

 

Man, I was thinking for a sec. u named ur Girlfriend 'MT8X' for whatever reasons....now it All makes much more sense. lol! #noice  :yeah:


  • encryptedmind likes this

Inside ur Renoise; helping Byte-Smasher putting Cab Sims on ur Master.  :ph34r: 


#120 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:31

Nah, nothing like that, I'm basically a sad bastard who isn't getting laid, so I've taken to talking to my gear instead, at least until Vic sets me up with a babe :badteethslayer: 

BTW, I just discovered why it has the switch and my Yamaha doesn't.  It's to make it compatible with standard cassette playback speeds so you can play standard recorded music cassettes on it.  That makes sense on a 4-Track cause music cassettes are also 4-Track (2-Sides x 2-Channels).

 

That would never work on an 8-Track, cause there are 8-strips on the head and they're arranged in an alternating manner if I recall, something to do with preventing cross-talk.

So MT8X is off the hook, she's still in for a bit of filthy-hot pot-tampering action though, whether she likes it or not!


 


Edited by Renoised, 14 February 2018 - 22:48.

  • encryptedmind likes this

#121 El°HYM

El°HYM

    Big Super Masta Member

  • Normal Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NIBIRU
  • Interests:I AM El°HYM

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:39

tru & 8 tracks even more lofidelity, as much narrower in space.


Inside ur Renoise; helping Byte-Smasher putting Cab Sims on ur Master.  :ph34r: 


#122 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 14 February 2018 - 22:50

I've also heard about this chordal drone technique. It's quite interesting, but everyone seems to be doing it now and almost every 4-track video is about that technique, so I've actually gotten tired of it without ever even trying it.  :badteeth:

 

In terms of cheating when it comes to guitar parts using sampling et.c: I did that right after I got my guitar and made loads of tracks using that, but now I'm really yearning for some more fluency which the linearity of these 4-track recorders offer. No copy/paste or loop-bullsh**. You gotta learn how to play your instrument all the way through (and due to this, you'll get better on it)...

That's where the tricky part comes in though. You have to plan things out + PRACTICE your parts over and over before you record. That's the weird part. Having to practice your own songs? Damn right.

 

I came up with a song today and spent like 3-4 hours planning everything out. Then I tried to record it, but looking back at it it sounds terrible. Why? Cause I can't play all the parts yet, lol. Gotta re-record the entire thing tomorrow. No big deal though, it's much more rewarding in the end as soon as you get it right.



#123 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 February 2018 - 00:00

@El°HYM, Not true.  You do lose fidelity due to the increased amount of tracks, but you gain it back (and more) by recording the same signal to multiple tracks (cause you have more of them to play with).  So for example, recording to two tracks on an 8-Track machine would give you pretty much the same as one track does on a 4-Track, but you could go further and record the same signal to three or more tracks on an 8-Track, and still have other tracks left over.  Some stuff sounds slightly better when using more tracks, but most of the time you can't tell the difference, so you can happily dedicate a single track to it.

 

@Clirke, Sounds like you're really starting to dig the process of multi-tracking then :walkman:

 

Sounds good, and I love the attitude, cause it's the correct one.  As you're obviously getting setted into it, here's a bit of advice, and it's advice you really need to heed or you'll regret it later.  Start putting some cash aside for three essential peices of analogue equipment to conect to your Multi-Track, which are:

- Analogue Compressor (I recommend the Alesis 3632, a modern but really good, versatile and punchy compressor).
- Analogue Parametric EQ (I recommend pretty much anything that allows you to sweep the frequency of all bands from 20Hz to 20KHz).
- Analogue Sonic Exciter (I recommend the Behringer SX3040 cause it's a secret studio-weapon of awesomeness, but don't tell anyone).

Those three devices will TRANSFORM the quality of your analogue recordings in a BIG way - seriously.

Both the compressor and Sonic Exciter are easy to come by, but be warned, a time will come when Behringer will want to replace their current Sonic Exciter, and once they do, the prices will sky-rocket.  The bad news it that the sort of EQ I described are very expensive, so expensive in fact that most people, after being subjected to one, are prepared to go to the lengths of building their own from kits, or circuit diagrams.  So yes, more money, but you need that stuff even if you might not think so right now.  You do, and you'll regret not buying these devices early if you leave it too long.  I have the Sonic Exciter and would be seriously depressed if I had to go without it.  The Compressor is on my wish list, and the EQ is something I'll either have to pick-up in bad condition to get it at a reasonalble price, or I'll have to do the self-build thing.



#124 Renoised

Renoised

    Big Masta Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 February 2018 - 15:18

 

This guy is enthusiastic.  We need more like him to spread the word on YouTube, the net, everywhere relevant, until one day, companies like Tascam hire someone with the brains to see there's an emerging need in the market for these machines again, and that they need not spend any money in development in order to cash in on it, either, because they already have these devices designed, ready for production, it's like a licence to print money.  They need to reissue the fucking things like the synth manufacturers are reissuing their analogue synths.

 

Either they're being paid by wealthy tech giants to keep tape formats off the market, or the intelligence of the CEOs running these companies, must be sub-fucking-zero!


  • El°HYM likes this

#125 clirke21

clirke21

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 15 February 2018 - 22:20

@Renoised: I'll take that to heart, but for now I've got to focus on other things first before I delve into that territory..I also think it can be a bit dangerous. Nowadays, especially in electronic music, people get so obsessive about mastering, eqing, compression etc...and they do so for the wrong reasons, imo. It's a "shine the turd!"-kinda thing most of the time, you know what I mean? You listen to their music, yeah, it's crafted well and "technically" well done, but it's got no soul. It's just mindless crap. Lots of music out there is like that now.

I also don't like the sound quality, really. Maybe it's those Native Instruments plugins or whatever (not shi**ing on them, Reaktor etc. is the bomb), but it sounds really plastic to me. And not even in a good, Squarepusher kind of way, because his stuff from back then was digital, too...But something "bad" (to my ears at least) is happening there.

 

For now, what I'm mostly concentrating on is planning out song structures in my head and writing them down, playing reverse soloes over some of my riffs, trying to find some of my own licks in there etc etc...Really getting away a little from the way my brain works when I'm programming. So I'm not that concentrated on production techniques right now, I just really gotta get my guitar playing in order first. The simplicity of the 4-track lets me do that and I don't get drowned in unnecessary details having to do with its architecture.

 

Isn't cassette coming back, though? I've heard something like that, I think my mother told me something about that (and if she hears about stuff like that, then it must have been emerging on the surface already)


Edited by clirke21, 15 February 2018 - 22:27.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: drum machines, hardware, sequencer, comparison