U-he repro vs phase plant

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

"All this concerns you. Not me."
A difficult concept for some, apparently

No sht.

One almost feels like analyzing it: If cannot state my views as universals about objective limitations, they are of no value, therefore I state them as universals? Why isn't it enough to say: I prefer HW for this and that reason, no matter if you can do the same in software? Where is the fire?

[ghettosynth]

You are talking right into my profession

Then you should be well aware that reading adds an additional processing step and that, consequently, when comparing two experiences they are not the same if a user is expects to rely on muscle memory.

But it does not matter anyway if it ain't a problem to me and Maschine users. Some people do not even need use muscle memory at all beyond a mouse for making music.

And many people do. In fact, it is dominant. Ask anyone who plays an instrument. Ask a piano player if they need to look at the keys or a guitarist if they need to look at the frets. Ask them why they bothered to to internalize them when they could have just as easily looked at the fretboard or the keys and read the answer?

If people suffered from lack of muscle memory in general, the units would not sell. As simple as that.

No it isn't. Things sell for many reasons and you cannot reduce a complex model to a single parameter. Just because one tool is more tedious to use than another doesn't mean that it won't sell. Do you really need me to provide additional parameters and examples? Moreover, as I have repeatedly stated, it is a continuum of experiences and the value of one over the other varies considerably on your activity. If I'm trying to do some detailed sound design with a complex synth then I find NKS/Maschine to be a good compromise. While it's not better than dedicated controls on the hardware, it might, in fact, be better than walking across the room to get to the hardware, hence the entirety of the experience is improved because both the synth and the DAW are controlled from the same place.

Finally, the explosion in interest in hardware over the last decade contradicts your assertion that sales indicates that there is no difference. Especially in the domain of live performance. By your own argument, if the experience wasn't different, then why would the market respond by buying hardware in ever increasing numbers? It costs more, it takes more space, it has to be maintained, all downsides of hardware.

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

But whatever gets you off.

Keys, pads and sticks, so I do not have to write all music in a score. I want to play as much as possible into Reason. A decade ago, I did not have patience with controllers, so I just wrote into the lanes with mouse. Eventually, it felt too detached, and I will not go back there again. P4 and Reason stroke me, because they got as close to a Workstation I could get, and they replaced my Fantom 6, offering much more ITB options, which I needed.

[ghettosynth]

chicks dig it.

Big hardware?

their way out of eggs.

he wanted a reason, other than his reading comprehension.
i grasped!

just tryna help the guy out

You're always so helpful.

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

Then you should be well aware that reading adds an additional processing step and that, consequently, when comparing two experiences they are not the same if a user is expects to rely on muscle memory.

Rubbish. Show the peer review articles showing that. Until then, it is but assertions to be proven. Hardware synths have labels too, and your brain will read them automatically. You are making up your own cognitive psychology, and that won't bite on me.

But it does not matter anyway if it ain't a problem to me and Maschine users. Some people do not even need use muscle memory at all beyond a mouse for making music.

And many people do. In fact, it is dominant.

Dominant, really? You have any stats about hardware vs software users in the world to state that too, then it is time to show it, for otherwise, it is just another claim and assertion to be proven.

Ask anyone who plays an instrument. Ask a piano player if they need to look at the keys or a guitarist if they need to look at the frets. Ask them why they bothered to to internalize them when they could have just as easily looked at the fretboard or the keys and read the answer?

So you have asked them and can provide the statistics, then? Besides, pro guitar and piano players learn to read partitures all while they are playing and do not suffer, on the contrary. The guesswork above is not anyway near an argument and obviously wrong. And muscle memory is not something you decide to internalize, but comes with training and training, just like I am getting more and more trained to the multifunctionality of P4

Finally, the explosion in interest in hardware over the last decade contradicts your assertion that sales indicates that there is no difference.

Strawman. I did not infer that from the sales. The sales indicate that your universals that your muscle memory should be a general problem to all users who have to read something are false and ungrounded. Again you try to revert this and pretend the universals come from me or Bones, but they are all on you, evidently. And plz stop teaching in a subject that has been part of my work for 26 years. It just displays your ignorance to me, and that is not even at undergraduate level here.

[jancivil]

"Ask anyone who plays an instrument. Ask a piano player if they need to look at the keys or a guitarist if they need to look at the frets. Ask them why they bothered to to internalize them when they could have just as easily looked at the fretboard or the keys and read the answer?"
Well, you would seem to need to ask because the person who has done/is doing this would have a reality-oriented view rather than this.

If it's a real question (rather than this rhetorical question gesture):
I started on guitar in 1970. I was a somewhat ambitious guitarist for a time. I, and many I notice who are known masters, look at the fretboard.
One could even use all of it, and a 20-fret difference (or 24) is probably a span to look at at times, if it's even not pure instinct to check. Here's a couple facts about the matter: there is no indication of a difference by feel except for the difference between notes, frets, which are considerably differently spaced at the one end vs the other. One note on a guitar may appear in several positions on different strings, with different gauges.
Yes, blind people can play music. Cross that bridge when we get to it.

I would interalize it for reasons, and I would tend to think trying to get into that would be lost on the person making arguments like this.

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

Forget it, Jan. It is not even close to scientific facts. Usually brain is multimodal and integrates hearing, smell, tactile feedback, motor movements and reading into a perceptual whole. If it did not, we would not even be cable of steering a car and reading signs on the road simultanously. Interference can occur, though, if the processes are contradictive, for example reading a text while hearing another is difficult. Likewise if you have to shadow one message in one ear and another in the other. However, most knowledge on this comes from experiments using situations, which are not natural. Usually we get by.

[jancivil]

'usually we get by'. yes

Yeah, I was particularly struck by "Ask anyone who plays an instrument." I actually get the sense that certain people who opine a whole lot here have never played anything that wasn't a synth or its model in software. But of course the Dunning-Kruger Effect being what is are sure they have it all sussed. One here, though, has mastered the art of begging the question, always bulletproof, so let's do give props

[ghettosynth]

Show the peer review articles showing that.

This is a casual conversation, not a science paper. You said it was your profession, you should understand that reading is a mental processing step.

The sales indicate that your universals that your muscle memory should be a general problem to all users who have to read something are false and ungrounded.

That is not my assertion. My assertion is that muscle memory has value to people who have learned to rely on it and that instruments that limit the use of muscle memory are different from those that do not.

Again you try to revert this and pretend the universals come from me or Bones,

If the shoe fits.

[jancivil]

I think you can even see people playing guitars on videos on Youtube, and check.

Some people don't look as often as others.

point is that's an extraordinary assertion, and it's done to win an argument; which argues basically that one's experience is the only experience, and is specifically circular to an unexamined premise (which once examined may not be as beautiful).

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

This is a casual conversation, not a science paper. You said it was your profession, you should understand that reading is a mental processing step.

Which was not the question, but whether it was an exhausting one making a hardware set up more preferable for Machine users. It ain't as a matter of fact but usually a complementary one that gives you the ability to drive a car and read signs simultanously. And if you want to keep it causal, then do not try to make up scientific facts from your imagination. Deliver the articles or keep quit, thanks.

That is not my assertion. My assertion is that muscle memory has value to people who have learned to rely on it and that instruments that limit the use of muscle memory are different from those that do not.

Really? Want me to quote all the incidences where you put it forward as an universal drawback on basis of your extra-step hypothesis? And my P4 does not limit any muscle memory just because the functions change and have to be read. It is still within its structure and logic and not far from any WS I have used. Neither does the tactile feeling of a knob change because the functions change. Your differences can now be boiled down to multifunctionality versus unifunctionality, where you presume people need extra significant work for the former. Well, that is subjective too and a matter of training. I am a WS guy and trained. To some it is a limit, to others a benefit. You will have to live with these facts as far as there are people who will prefer one above the other. Question has not been whether there is a difference, but whether it is an important one that puts hardware in a superior position. Well that depends on preferences and training, not the hardware alone and certainly not he changing labels per functions.

Again you try to revert this and pretend the universals come from me or Bones,

If the shoe fits.

Yours do, seemingly. I do not even know why anyone would feel need to justify their choices by imagined universals. When I choose SW or HW, it is for practical reasons concerning me, and I take for granted that everyone else has his own ways and reasons. Diversity is not a threat to me. For all I care, I even allow myself to be deeply irrational about my choices, maybe I just pick HW or SW synth due to look. Why would I need to convince others about anything? To each, his own.

[ghettosynth]

...

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

There is significant evidence, posts here, from a renewed interest in hardware, from the community at large, that dedicated hardware is a different experience from controllers and software for many people.

What a big surprise. Here is another revelation: To many it is not, including me.

Here is the conclusion: To some there is a significant difference, to others there is not.

WOW!

If you want to provide P-values for anything else, you better do it now, before I just mute you because I think you are too ignorant to have a meaningful conversation with.

Friggin amazing to want to state something as facts but not provide the evidence even though one "could". Pile of nonsense. Anyone lame enough to buy that say "aye".

[rj0]

A lot boils down to simplicity versus complexity. If there's a simple solution, why make it complex? Simplicity (focused hardware/software synth) is quick; you're there (and it may sound better, subjectively, to any flexible solution). If an emulation or basic synth gets you where you where you want to go, why make it complex?

And yet, sometimes the simple solution won't get you there, now what? That's where the complex (and maybe even modular) synths come in, but then, how much (time, effort) are you willing to learn? How 'flexible' the results? That's a pretty personal and subjective decision.

As a result, I suspect most have their preferred bread and butter (simple emu/analog, really good) solutions, but also augment that with more complex solutions that get them where they want to go when the quick, simple solutions just won't get them there.

But then again, some are satisfied with just the quick/good solutions for what they need (and that's awesome), others need more. It's good that we currently have lots of options for both. Why have a focused synth? It gets you there quickly/painlessly. Why have a for flexible/modular synth? It's there for those other cases.

[ghettosynth]

A lot boils down to simplicity versus complexity. If there's a simple solution, why make it complex? Simplicity (focused hardware/software synth) is quick; you're there (and it may sound better, subjectively, to any flexible solution). If an emulation or basic synth gets you where you where you want to go, why make it complex?

And yet, sometimes the simple solution won't get you there, now what? That's where the complex (and maybe even modular) synths come in, but then, how much (time, effort) are you willing to learn? How 'flexible' the results? That's a pretty personal and subjective decision.

As a result, I suspect most have their preferred bread and butter (simple emu/analog, really good) solutions, but also augment that with more complex solutions that get them where they want to go when the quick, simple solutions just won't get them there.

But then again, some are satisfied with just the quick/good solutions for what they need (and that's awesome), others need more. It's good that we currently have lots of options for both. Why have a focused synth? It gets you there quickly/painlessly. Why have a for flexible/modular synth? It's there for those other cases.

It's always good to get back on track wrt the topic subject. Indeed, I think that was the general consensus.

In any case, just hang around long enough and you'll have all the plugins.