KVR Audio

braj · Post by **braj** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:41 am

And can you contrast the concept with a traditional DAW? Thanks.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:45 am

Basicly it's just a different way of entering sequenced data (notes, automation etc). Kinda like piano roll vs notation

pHz · Post by **pHz** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:47 am

imagine writing music with a spreadsheet and youre getting there ...

slainte

rob

braj · Post by **braj** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:48 am

Ya know, I love Excel and all, but I'm not sure how musical that is.

quincy · Post by **quincy** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:52 am

Right then.

You have vertical columns instead of horizontal tracks, and in these columns you have slots into which you place notes. You may have , for example, 4 "ticks" per beat which would equate to every 4th tick being your kick drum in a 4 to the floor dance track for example. Excuse my shitty non-use of music terminology, i'll try to be clear!

So effectivley each vertical track equates to a horizontal track in a traditional DAW. Tracking traditionally revolves around sampling, so you would use sample-based instruments which have all the normal amp and filter envelopes etc, loop points to create sutained intrsuments if necessary etc.

These days they are much more advanced, and in renoise for instance you can use VST instruments and efects, curve-based automation, insert and send FX and all sorts of other great stuff.

Also, the tick-based nature of tracking means you can have very fine control of many parameters on each and every note, so you can play an arpeggio synth line and set different filter, resonance or whatever on every note much like a step-based automation in traditional DAW, simply by adding more vertical tracks with which to accomodate thse commands(entered as number for controlling which paramter and with what value).

Most important and commonly useful thing - trackers are GREAT at sample-mashing and using loops. Very easy to whack in a loop, auto-stretch it to fit a cerain tempo, and then slice it up using the process of playing the sample from a certain offset. So imagine you can slice it into 256 pieces, then you'd use 128 as half way, 64 as 1/4 way through etc.

If you want to do crazy jungle breaks or IDM stuttering madness then trackers are spot on.

Hope this helps

quincy · Post by **quincy** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:54 am

braj wrote:Ya know, I love Excel and all, but I'm not sure how musical that is.

The tools you use aren't musical, you are!!

rounser · Post by **rounser** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:39 am

Ya know, I love Excel and all, but I'm not sure how musical that is.

If trackers are about as musical as Excel, then sequencers are about as musical as MS Word's draw tool.

Kriminal · Post by **Kriminal** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:48 am

rounser wrote:
Ya know, I love Excel and all, but I'm not sure how musical that is.
If trackers are about as musical as Excel, then sequencers are about as musical as MS Word's draw tool.

Oooooooh

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:36 am

I am really glad i got into computer music after most programs lost thier trackers. I imagine those would kill workflow.

ouroboros · Post by **ouroboros** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:42 am

believe it or not, trackers become really intuitive. They're like fruity w/o the ability to zoom in and out; kind of like a player piano. They are more difficult to "play" music with, but easier to "program" to make music. if that makes sense.

but uh, yeah, now that you mention it, using a volume fader is a lot easier than remembering the hexadecimal code.

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:50 am

rounser wrote:
Ya know, I love Excel and all, but I'm not sure how musical that is.
If trackers are about as musical as Excel, then sequencers are about as musical as MS Word's draw tool.

j/k. You never get to post "owned" images here.

soulkraka · Post by **soulkraka** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:53 am

No name · Post by **No name** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:57 am

I just asked about this last week. Welcome to the "What is a Tracker?" club! After finding out how boring it would really be to do anything musically with a tracker, I gave it up!

funkadil · Post by **funkadil** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:05 am

yeah, trackers are kindof cool. Lately I have been messing around with buzz which is really cool because it sort of open new possibilities and gives you new ways to view the music you create and is a bit inspiring, and buzz is free. Like a piano roll, but more parameters. Its kind of hard to get used to though.

VitaminD · Post by **VitaminD** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:18 am

pHz wrote:imagine writing music with a spreadsheet and youre getting there ...

ouroboros wrote:...kind of like a player piano. They are more difficult to "play" music with, but easier to "program" to make music. if that makes sense.

but uh, yeah, now that you mention it, using a volume fader is a lot easier than remembering the hexadecimal code.

hehe funny I was about to post these things in combination as my description of a tracker..

I dont think trackers are bad.. actually screamtracker and impulse tracker are the reason I'm here

otherwise I'd probably just be a code jockey or off wasting my time in front of a videogame

the only bad thing about trackers are the very same good things about trackers (imo of course) as quincy mentioned.. there is a high level of detail available to your sequences.. so its great for IDM things and percussion/rhythms.. but it can get really tedious in programming it all out note by note with the keyboard..

C-4 FF
------
F-4 D4
------
A#5 A0
------

yes you probably need patience to start off in a tracker.. it took me over a year on my own to figure out how to properly use one

then again I was completely new to anything musical (minus the casio keyboard

) so mileage may vary greatly..

What exactly is a tracker?