A lot of new producers are a very young generation, so they are generally unaware of how music was made in the past, i don’t think many even care to know (which is a shame). So they look for the obvious (and current) routes to production, what software does such and such use, i want to be like him etc etc
Which will obviously lead them to logic, cubase, ableton and so on.
By the time or even if they come across renoise/trackers, they will be too comfortable in their daw to want to move across or take the time to educate themselves on a new software, (consider how many people don’t even learn their synths and other tools properly)
Personally i love trackers, i’m 24, so i didn’t start with trackers, i have logic, and have tried demos of prefty much every major DAW, but the workflow speed i have in renoise is superior to them all, there’s a lot of great features in renoise i just can’t give up by moving back to a traditional daw.
Just my thoughts
I do agree in a broad sense, however, i think it may just be youth and there is a likelyhood this will change when getting older.
I know from my own experience, I wanted quick results when starting out and often chose the easy or convenient at what I realize now my own expense. At least to some degree. In contrast, sometimes taking the quick option can translate well for getting ideas out quick that can be stifled by the technical.
I do agree in a broad sense, however, i think it may just be youth and there is a likelyhood this will change when getting older.
I know from my own experience, I wanted quick results when starting out and often chose the easy or convenient at what I realize now my own expense. At least to some degree. In contrast, sometimes taking the quick option can translate well for getting ideas out quick that can be stifled by the technical.
For sure, though a fair amount of people will just use what their idol uses, which is unlikely to be renoise,
As for converting people to trackers, i think it’s nice to show that it’s a valid alternative, but it will always be a personal choice at the end of the day, the same tool can be a nightmare to one person, a godsend to another…
Should never disregard something which is different to the standard though, the most creative results usually come from doing/using something different.
For sure, though a fair amount of people will just use what their idol uses, which is unlikely to be renoise,
As for converting people to trackers, i think it’s nice to show that it’s a valid alternative, but it will always be a personal choice at the end of the day, the same tool can be a nightmare to one person, a godsend to another…
Should never disregard something which is different to the standard though, the most creative results usually come from doing/using something different.
Agreed. I would also add that creative results can also come from limited resources.
Coincidentally, I have been drawn to certain software because of those I respect. I’m not really one for idolatry, but was curious nonetheless. Having said that, if it didn’t work for me, I abandoned it regardless of recommendation or influence.
I do now feel that once discovering Renoise, the search was over. I t does everything I need and more that I am still discovering.
Absolutely, there’s too many options now, back in time people would only have a few things but they would master them and push the limits, what i love about renoise is everything has a purpose, it’s not bloated with unnecessary gimmicks.
Absolutely, there’s too many options now, back in time people would only have a few things but they would master them and push the limits, what i love about renoise is everything has a purpose, it’s not bloated with unnecessary gimmicks.
Definitely agree. When I was a young teenager, I had a CPC6128 (around 1984), which was an awesome computer for the time, but the handful of friends that had computers used a C64. That presented a major problem: No supply of new software. So I typed in listings from computer magazines (with the fancy checksums after each line), modified them, and slowly learned to program my own stuff. If I needed or wanted something, I usually had to (try to) code it myself.
After the CPC came my first Atari ST (around 1986), and maybe two years later I picked up an import modem that had not been approved, so connecting it to the phone line was not allowed. I did it anyway, of course (it caused a lot of family trouble when the phone bills suddenly exploded after my discovery of BBS/mailboxes). That led to the discovery of a lot of fascinating software (and demos!), but the selection was limited and downloading anything took ages. Whatever I did download, I spent a lot of time with and learned inside out. There were also rarely multiple popular programs for the same purpose, so the temptation to try out ten or twenty different programs for the same task just wasn’t there, which removed a lot of the almost compulsive search for tools (like DAWs) that magically “click” with the user. You used what you had, and you got good at it.
I’m not sure that these were better times (they were more exciting for sure, though), but I do believe that limitation does enhance (and spark) creativity. This is the reason why I sometimes think about using only hardware, because I find it difficult to limit myself in software land, but after buying an Analog RYTM a year ago and barely using it, and finding it somewhat cumbersome, I’m not sure whether that’s working for me.
…
I’m not sure that these were better times (they were more exciting for sure, though), but I do believe that limitation does enhance (and spark) creativity. This is the reason why I sometimes think about using only hardware, because I find it difficult to limit myself in software land, but after buying an Analog RYTM a year ago and barely using it, and finding it somewhat cumbersome, I’m not sure whether that’s working for me.
Great post, interesting story, yes it’s difficult to say which time is better. I mean from what i’ve heard it was a big financial commitment back then, and a lot of hard work, whereas today anyone can get a free daw and plugins. Which is cool but consequently you end up with 1000x more people releasing music…in my opinion the big change came around 2000, and onwards, the shift to more and more digital/computer use. And the shift to releasing mp3s instead of vinyls. Anyone can release an mp3, declined by a label? They end up making their own and self releasing at little expense.
So while there is a lot more creativity available with new tools and plugins, i don’t think enough people can restrict themselves to mastering them, or using as little as possible (a lot harder now than when you had no choice!)
But anyway, the elektron rytm mmm, elektron gear are a bit hit/miss with people, they aren’t particularly user friendly, you could ofcourse use overbridge, but thats using the mouse again.
I love hardware to be honest, i wish i had more room for some synths with keys, but i have a virus c and an old emu sampler and some other things, but they are great fun whether they sound better or worse, because you actually physically have those controls in front of you, sure they will take longer by having to record and maybe slow cpu (hi emu sampler e64!) but it’s great to operate something outside the computer
Plus you also save on cpu… Audio samples and recordings are way easier to process than a plugin synth.
I love hardware to be honest, i wish i had more room for some synths with keys, but i have a virus c and an old emu sampler and some other things, but they are great fun whether they sound better or worse, because you actually physically have those controls in front of you, sure they will take longer by having to record and maybe slow cpu (hi emu sampler e64!) but it’s great to operate something outside the computer
Plus you also save on cpu… Audio samples and recordings are way easier to process than a plugin synth.
And nothing beats a good ol’ fashioned knob twiddlin’.
But anyway, the elektron rytm mmm, elektron gear are a bit hit/miss with people, they aren’t particularly user friendly, you could ofcourse use overbridge, but thats using the mouse again.
I think for me it’s mostly a matter of always having been a computer person, so while those audio boxes (like the Rytm) fascinate me in a “a whole new world” kind of way, and I really like the “tactile” aspects of them (twiddling a knob is just more “immediate” than moving around the mouse and turning a virtual knob), the lack of visual representation throws me off. I actually believe that the absence of a large screen is a great asset when trying to make music, but I still struggle with it.
The solution, no doubt, is to sit down with the thing and sink my teeth into right – exactly like in the 80s and 90s with arcane software (I need to get that careless, reckless playfulness back). I haven’t given up on it, though, which is why I still have the Rytm. I considered selling it (it currently costs €400 more than I paid for it new), but something about it speaks to me and I never had anything like it. I sometimes wonder if an Octatrack might have been a better choice for a first machine, but I expected there’d be a MK2 in 2015 (figured they’d make something that works with Overbridge), though that didn’t materialize.
I think I should probably go the Renoise + controller route. Renoise feels great to me, I love the workflow, I love how “tight” it is, and how relatively immediate it feels (for software). I should tackle that after the next NAMM, in case some mindblowing controller hits the market.
…
I think I should probably go the Renoise + controller route. Renoise feels great to me, I love the workflow, I love how “tight” it is, and how relatively immediate it feels (for software). I should tackle that after the next NAMM, in case some mindblowing controller hits the market.
With your RYTM, i know it’s clique but dig into the manual, not all at once, just bit by bit, ideally while your using the rytm, the more you begin to understand it the more enjoyment you’ll get from it you can have overbridge running at the same time too, it’s useful for the sample management. If you wanted to get a hardware synth, try a small analog mono, vermona mono lancet etc, to be honest analog gear is easier to learn than digital, digital stuff almost always has more features thus more to understand.
Have to agree about renoise, i see normal daws as the slow crappy alternative way now
If you have a tablet you could try that as a controller, duplex and touchosc.
But adding some physical controllers to your setup is always good, i quite like the arturia beatstep, need to buy that soon
With your RYTM, i know it’s clique but dig into the manual, not all at once, just bit by bit, ideally while your using the rytm, the more you begin to understand it the more enjoyment you’ll get from it
This! I did the exact thing with my first Machine. Half of your apprehension may just come from not really knowing what you’re equipment is really capable of. And once you know it inside and out, you may also find there are ways to push it further.
I’m not sure that these were better times (they were more exciting for sure, though), but I do believe that limitation does enhance (and spark) creativity. This is the reason why I sometimes think about using only hardware, because I find it difficult to limit myself in software land, but after buying an Analog RYTM a year ago and barely using it, and finding it somewhat cumbersome, I’m not sure whether that’s working for me.
I feel bad for some reason you bought that and didn’t use it much. I do think that if you go with the classical usage tracker flow a bit and use the tracker as a sample sequencer and the RYTM as sample fodder (makes some loops and sample some drums/hits) you might get some mileage out of it? Maybe it is so simple as saying you will be using anything you can get your hands on in any way but only as sample material?
