DAWs, Virtual Instruments, MIDI Controllers, Audio Interfaces, Monitor Speakers and Headphones?

[(Name To Be Changed)]

Some software allow splitting the keyboard, while in others you have to take extra steps to make it happen. Generally I find it easier if it happens on the keyboard side. And a dedicated MIDI output is used for external sound sources and it's not something you have to worry about, since you are interested in composing entirely inside the computer.

Generally, yes, it's a good idea to get a good audio interface and headphones and monitors, but it's not a necessity when you are starting out. There's no reason for you to have everything when you begin and that's why I think you don't need to worry about it now. You might end up just wasting a lot of money in gear you don't know how to use and when you know how to use them, you have no use for them.

In fact, that Oxygen keyboard has the extra bonus that it comes with a small host software. So the only thing you need is that keyboard to get started, really.



Also about that video you posted, notice that the host software there is FL Studio. It's generally pictured as something used for techno, trance, etc -- but clearly, it's not so, as it's used for metal music in that video. There really is no such thing as a "DAW for electronica" or "DAW for rock music" as you worried about earlier. It all comes down to what you make of it.

A good thing about FL Studio is that the upgrades are free-for-life. So either you die or the software company dies, but you'll get free updates until whichever comes first (unless of course they change their policy).

There are however a few different paradigms/workflows that host software usually focus on. You should try different hosts to see which workflow suits you the best. FL Studio is very much pattern based, but music in general can be seen more or less as pattern based (intros, verses, choruses, breaks, etc). From my point of view, others that focus on patterns are Ableton Live and Bitwig Studio, but they do it differently from FL (they also focus more on live performance).

I suggested earlier to get Cubase, but there are a number of other hosts that have similar approach. That approach is probably the most common, sort of "industry standard". There's the mixer and there's the recording area and not much more. Studio One is also a good example of this and so are Reaper and Samplitude. You can get a slightly limited but free edition of Samplitude by searching for "Samplitude silver edition".

Other hosts have more unique workflows, like a tracker interface, a modular interface, or just stand-alone software for live performance.


And another thing I noticed when I checked out some of those metal music threads here at KVR is that people seem to like Electri6ity for their guitar sound. Perhaps check that out.

I actually prefer internal keyboard splitting over external keyboard splitting, so I'll stick with that. About a dedicated MIDI output, I will not be using it. So, yeah, I won't need that. I will leave the audio interface and the speakers/headphones for later, but for now, proffessionally, are speakers better than headphones? Why? Why not?

About that MIDI interface, Oxygen 61, I will think about getting it. I prefer 88 keys as I'll have much more options and stuff to control, but I will consider 61, too.

Also, about DAWs, I have digged deeper into those for the previous couple of days. FL Studio is a good option to consider, but there maybe better ones, so I will look more into those. I checked Electri6ity and a couple of other plug-ins, too. I will check those in more depths over the next days, too.

Thanks a lot for everything, as usual. You were a huge help to me, man. Thanks again.

[thecontrolcentre]

I can't really see how you can make rock music (or any other genre tbh) when you dont play an instrument. My advice is to get a guitar and some books/ tutorials and spend at least 2 hours a day learning how to play. Then once you have some ability and understanding of music, worry about software, monitors etc.

Good luck. Its a long road, but worth it when you get there.

[james0tucson]

proffessionally, are speakers better than headphones?

There's no answer to this question. No right answer, no wrong answer.

One thing you might consider is that with speakers (even with near-field monitors), the room participates in the sound. When (clueful) people are talking about the relative merits of their expensive monitor setups, it's helpful to realize that they are starting with good rooms. In a good room, you might be surprised by how good your average clock radio sounds. This reality dawned on me once in a treated room, listening to a track on laptop speakers.

Another issue with headphones and with many kinds of speakers is that the frequency response is often a manipulated curve, intended to color the sound. Monitoring through ordinary consumer headphones can fool you into thinking your sound has significant bass boosts which were put there by your headphones. If you learn to compensate for this, you can get good results.

It's pretty normal for people to use headphones while recording tracks, and to mix using monitors. But before anything is done, you should listen to it on cheap headphones, expensive headphones, on phone speakers, on a cheap car stereo, on a high-end car stereo, and with extreme compression.

If people are going to be listening to your work, they are going to listen on everything you can imagine, and perhaps you should have an idea how it will sound.

There are people on this forum producing entertaining and listenable work using nothing but free software, a cheap notebook, and earbuds from the supermarket. There are people on this forum producing nothing even though they have remodeled a room and expensive gear. There are people on this forum with cheap instruments who perform nightly, and people on this forum with high priced vintage guitars that never leave the case.

Back on the topic of monitors -- the first time you hear truly flat sound, in a tuned environment with a controlled signal, it might surprise you. It will sound very quiet, and brighter than you expect. People who get their first studio experience are often taken aback by this. With monitoring, we are listening for *details*, and for that, we need a silent space, so that the signal doesn't have to be particularly loud. As for bass, you might be very surprised to learn how much bass content is lost just by reflecting off the walls.

It turns out that stopping these reflections is the most important (often the most expensive) thing about studio sound. Using headphones will save you from this set of issues for a while. Eventually, you might start to see the room as the most important tool in the box, and will move house because of it (I've done exactly that, but it's because I require space for a grand piano, and I laugh when people claim their electronic music studio was expensive

All that said, what kind of headphones are you thinking about?
If you aren't investing in (for example) powered monitors, at least consider getting good headphones.
Beyerdynamic, AKG, Sennheiser. Maybe some Sony models are okay. Find something you can tolerate wearing for four hours at a stretch, and steer clear of anything aimed at a consumer market, where the standard seems to be "loud music sounds better", just like "bright colors look better."

[(Name To Be Changed)]

Subject: DAWs, Virtual Instruments, MIDI Controllers, Audio Interfaces, Monitor Speakers and Headphones?

I can't really see how you can make rock music (or any other genre tbh) when you dont play an instrument. My advice is to get a guitar and some books/ tutorials and spend at least 2 hours a day learning how to play. Then once you have some ability and understanding of music, worry about software, monitors etc.

Good luck. Its a long road, but worth it when you get there.

I will get myself a couple of books, but not a guitar. Maybe just learn on a virtual guitar using a keyboard MIDI controller after I finish learning about the keyboard and music theory.

proffessionally, are speakers better than headphones?

There's no answer to this question. No right answer, no wrong answer.

One thing you might consider is that with speakers (even with near-field monitors), the room participates in the sound. When (clueful) people are talking about the relative merits of their expensive monitor setups, it's helpful to realize that they are starting with good rooms. In a good room, you might be surprised by how good your average clock radio sounds. This reality dawned on me once in a treated room, listening to a track on laptop speakers.

Another issue with headphones and with many kinds of speakers is that the frequency response is often a manipulated curve, intended to color the sound. Monitoring through ordinary consumer headphones can fool you into thinking your sound has significant bass boosts which were put there by your headphones. If you learn to compensate for this, you can get good results.

It's pretty normal for people to use headphones while recording tracks, and to mix using monitors. But before anything is done, you should listen to it on cheap headphones, expensive headphones, on phone speakers, on a cheap car stereo, on a high-end car stereo, and with extreme compression.

If people are going to be listening to your work, they are going to listen on everything you can imagine, and perhaps you should have an idea how it will sound.

There are people on this forum producing entertaining and listenable work using nothing but free software, a cheap notebook, and earbuds from the supermarket. There are people on this forum producing nothing even though they have remodeled a room and expensive gear. There are people on this forum with cheap instruments who perform nightly, and people on this forum with high priced vintage guitars that never leave the case.

Back on the topic of monitors -- the first time you hear truly flat sound, in a tuned environment with a controlled signal, it might surprise you. It will sound very quiet, and brighter than you expect. People who get their first studio experience are often taken aback by this. With monitoring, we are listening for *details*, and for that, we need a silent space, so that the signal doesn't have to be particularly loud. As for bass, you might be very surprised to learn how much bass content is lost just by reflecting off the walls.

It turns out that stopping these reflections is the most important (often the most expensive) thing about studio sound. Using headphones will save you from this set of issues for a while. Eventually, you might start to see the room as the most important tool in the box, and will move house because of it (I've done exactly that, but it's because I require space for a grand piano, and I laugh when people claim their electronic music studio was expensive

All that said, what kind of headphones are you thinking about?
If you aren't investing in (for example) powered monitors, at least consider getting good headphones.
Beyerdynamic, AKG, Sennheiser. Maybe some Sony models are okay. Find something you can tolerate wearing for four hours at a stretch, and steer clear of anything aimed at a consumer market, where the standard seems to be "loud music sounds better", just like "bright colors look better."

Thanks a lot for your detailed reply. I am staying in a quite filled room with lots of bumps and such, so monitor speakers are not a really good option for me. I live in a quite peaceful neighbourhood, but my house is not that peaceful as I am living with my family, and I sure won't be moving just for that. With that said, I am pretty much left with one last option; headphones. I have one question about those, though. Do headphones that can give you as neutral and clear voices as a monitor speaker does exist? If they do, how much does it cost for a pretty good pair of those that can do the job but not cost tons of money? Can you give me one or two of those neutral and good-but-not-so-expensive headphones? Can you also give me one or two of the best neutral headphones that exist in the market (For this, money is not a matter as I am barely using it for reference)? Also, is there any features or stuff that I should be looking for when buying a pair of headphones?

Thanks again for your detailed reply, I really owe you a lot.

EDIT: Note that I will be listening to my computer-generated music that was made by the the computer and some softwares solely. I won't be listening to anything that was not generated by the computer. Also, there's such a thing called 'VOCALOID' and it's pretty much a software capable of generating vocals. It is still a computer-only thing, so I might be listening to that along the way too. Give me your suggestions and so on based on this. Thanks in advance.

EDIT TWO: I forgot to ask you about this before. But, do mini headphones (Whatever they call these: http://www.highfidelityreview.com/wp-co ... dphone.gif) lack anything compared to the big/normal headphones? Which is better in both neutral quality, and pricing?

[thecontrolcentre]

The only way to choose headphones is to try them yourself. Take a couple of reference CDs with you (music you know well) and listen to as many sets as possible. I'm still using a pair of Senheisers I paid £45 for in the early 90's. Wouldnt want to mix with them but they're great for live (as in loud enough) and DJing and of course, checking mixes.

[(Name To Be Changed)]

The only way to choose headphones is to try them yourself. Take a couple of reference CDs with you (music you know well) and listen to as many sets as possible. I'm still using a pair of Senheisers I paid £45 for in the early 90's. Wouldnt want to mix with them but they're great for live (as in loud enough) and DJing and of course, checking mixes.

I prefer to know what I am going into before I actually get into it. Knowing more won't hurt, so why not ask before I step outta my home and buy me a couple of headphones. Also, there's not much quality headphones' shops in my place, so I am kinda limited.

[KarmaShaman]

You can buy a hundred dollar controller, a hundred dollar audio interface, a hundred dollar guitar and be making music right now instead of all this overthinking. Both the interface and the controller will likely have a basic DAW bundled with the product.

You wanna play rock and metal then you absolutely need a guitar. If you insist on not playing one then youre only a hundred dollars away from making music. What are you waiting for?

[Mivo]

You can buy a hundred dollar controller, a hundred dollar audio interface, a hundred dollar guitar and be making music right now instead of all this overthinking.

This really sums it up.

I perfectly understand the overthinking, because I did the exact same thing, but it's a recipe for not making music for months, and for getting increasingly intimidated and "blocked" to the point where you just walk away from it.

In my case, I ended up buying four different DAWs (which caused me to get confused further), an amplifier, a couple pre-amps, a mile of cables, headphones, a commercial soft synth, a studio microphone with a stand, two MIDI keyboards (I underestimated the bulkiness of a 49-key full-sized device), and an audio interface.

Now looking back, the only four things I needed were: one DAW, one MIDI keyboard (Axiom 32 Air Mini), the headphones (Audio Technica ATH-M50), and the audio interface (Scarlett 2i2, though in retrospect I should have gotten the 2i4). I already had my acoustic instruments (a family of different kinds of kalimbas with pickups). And actually, I could probably do without the keyboard since I mostly use it for punching in notes, not for playing. This would have saved me a) money, b) frustration, and c) that sense of "overwhelmedness".

Less is really more when you're starting out, and diving in (without spending a truckload of cash) is better than dwelling on it for months. The choice of DAW is individual, and I still don't know which I really prefer. I think I'm tempted to recommend FL Studio's Signature Edition since you get a fairly complete package and won't have to deal with external VST(i)s right away. Besides that, FL Studio also has by far the most beginner tutorials available on Youtube (Seamless' channel is a good start).

The complete opposite approach would be Reaper, which is very powerful, but initially looks super plain and doesn't come with instruments, other than a very simplistic synth. It does have very good documentation, a vibrant community, and it is also incredibly affordable. You'll need to get (virtual) instruments, which is both an up- and a downsides, depending on how you look at it. There are many free synths out there that are perfectly fine. It's again tempting to buy twenty different ones, but the free ones do serve, or you can get an all-round synth (like SynthMaster). Reaper is great if you plan on recording audio, e.g. your guitar, if you go that route. If you get Reaper, you should probably also buy KennyG's tutorial series at Groove3.com. Those are superb and help you through the "what the hell am I doing?" phase.

The other two DAWs I bought are Renoise and Bitwig. The latter needs a bit more time, I believe, and Renoise is a tracker. A very excellent tracker, but it's a completely different approach to making electronic music (it may appeal to you, so check it out).

But DAWs are just tools. All of them will do essentially the same, just in their own ways ("workflow"). There is no "best". Find something that clicks with you. As mentioned, I still bounce around between those four, and there are plenty of other choices that people are productive with. You should spend time trying out the demo versions of all frequently, but not too much, because you'll not really be making music while you demo software. Reaper is certainly a safe choice, especially since you can evaluate the uncrippled version for quite a long time, meaning you don't have to spend any money yet and can still start learning.

All of the above is easy and just a matter of money. The hard part is making good music, not just random noise.