The Best Looking Host Console View

[stefancrs]

Bones, seriously, how would you go about for making for instance "trance'ish" filter build-ups without automation? Or, in the bridge in a song, pull up the reverb amount on an instrument? And so on.

He doesnt do that kinda music, i know he uses a lot of vel to control filters tho.

But others do. Heck, if all I did was music with four-on-the-floor 909 kick and nothing more whatsoever, it'd be quite weird of me to mean that what I use should be enough for anyone.

I use the automation alot for filter sweeps and stuuf in Orion, i record it using the mouse or knobs on my controller, and edit by hand if i need to, piece of cake.

Yeah, I never doubted you easily could do automation within Orion

[Kriminal]

But others do.

Bones doesnt care what others do. If he doesnt need it, its crap

[Caleb]

Bones doesnt care what others do. If he doesnt need it, its crap

Correction.....krap.

I do tend to use automation curves for pitch bend work and volume fades more than anything else I guess, but I have been known to use it for sends as well.

Caleb

[BONES]

Bones, seriously, how would you go about for making for instance "trance'ish" filter build-ups without automation?

How about using velocity to modulate your cutoff? Not that I do any of that girly, poofta dance style krap . But if I did, that's the obvious way to do it.

Or, in the bridge in a song, pull up the reverb amount on an instrument? And so on.

My songs are all built at ground-level and require no bridges.
But seriously, those are exactly the times when I would use automation but, like I said, that represents something that I would need to do on about 1 in 50 mixer strips, and in even fewer pattern piano rolls, and I can do it without ever having to look at any graphical representation of the events - just turn on record, press play, move controls, turn off record, done. Then I can forget about it.
It might just be habit but I would much rather set/automate levels on an instrument than on the mixer. In the old days it was my only option and in ORION events are handled significantly better at pattern level than at song level which, again, is the way I am used to from 10+ years of KORG workstations.
As krim pointed out, velocity seems to be the most overlooked modulation source around here. I released 3 synths with totally broken velocity modulation and I was the only one who noticed for months and months. Now, thanks to Etric's shiny new Unison Oscillator, all my velocity mod woes will soon be over.

[stefancrs]

Bones, seriously, how would you go about for making for instance "trance'ish" filter build-ups without automation?

How about using velocity to modulate your cutoff? Not that I do any of that girly, poofta dance style krap . But if I did, that's the obvious way to do it.

No, automation is. Velocity wouldn't work that well for them pads...

Or, in the bridge in a song, pull up the reverb amount on an instrument? And so on.

My songs are all built at ground-level and require no bridges.
But seriously, those are exactly the times when I would use automation but, like I said, that represents something that I would need to do on about 1 in 50 mixer strips, and in even fewer pattern piano rolls, and I can do it without ever having to look at any graphical representation of the events - just turn on record, press play, move controls, turn off record, done. Then I can forget about it.
It might just be habit but I would much rather set/automate levels on an instrument than on the mixer. In the old days it was my only option and in ORION events are handled significantly better at pattern level than at song level which, again, is the way I am used to from 10+ years of KORG workstations.
As krim pointed out, velocity seems to be the most overlooked modulation source around here. I released 3 synths with totally broken velocity modulation and I was the only one who noticed for months and months. Now, thanks to Etric's shiny new Unison Oscillator, all my velocity mod woes will soon be over.

Ofcourse, if your an "insert fx" kindofaguy, you might want to automate the volume after the inserts. But, obviously, you already do know that automation can be suitable for some people (the ones not into using for instance velocity, also, it's just one modulation source, so it's hard to do "layered" modulations with it).

Now, what do you say princess? How about going back to being your normal self before you frighten anyone of us, ok?

[Sascha Franck]

As krim pointed out, velocity seems to be the most overlooked modulation source around here. I released 3 synths with totally broken velocity modulation and I was the only one who noticed for months and months. Now, thanks to Etric's shiny new Unison Oscillator, all my velocity mod woes will soon be over.

I'm using velocity to whatever parameter modulations on almost ALL of my synth patches.
Still, that's got nothing to do with automation at all.

[haydxn]

yup, automation just isn't the same as modulation, and to say it's krap is almost as stupid as the glasses you wear

[ModuLR]

Automation curves? I doubt that one track in 50 of mine has any automation in it at all. Automation curves are the absolute last thing that I ever want to see.

and probably why you like orion and dislike Tracktion. We work different. I am an editor by profession... I work with timelines and automation. For me, it presents the information needed in the best possible manner. Your extensive hardware exposure surely has melted a few circuits in your noodle unit if you think automation is pointless.

And I don't think I would describe using a hardware mixer as a tactile experience.

would you not agree that many people touch the mixer? that some people ride the faders in response to what they are hearing? What's so strange about that?

I probably spend 10 times longer listening and making visual comparisons than touching anything.

that's great for you... happy to know you like staring at (not touching) a mixer for long blocks of time.

Where do you guys get this krap from? Seriously!

my ass... I feel enlightened knowing that automation is for stupid people like me...

[keyman_sam]

Lol, i use automation a lot of times. For panning, for filter sweeps, for creating volume envelopes. Its just another good feature. Use it if you like. If you dont need it, its not gonna kill you fer god's sake.

[Meffy]

Here's a little snapshot of the console in our bedroom. Helps to fill some of the vast expanse of space between the gigantic circular bed and the in-floor Jacuzzi.



And yes, those are pews. What else would you expect? We're skunks! Now please refrain from commenting on the size of my organ. I'm... shy.

[BONES]

No, automation is. Velocity wouldn't work that well for them pads...

For that I would use a modulation envelope.

Ofcourse, if your an "insert fx" kindofaguy, you might want to automate the volume after the inserts.

Again, I rarely use effects but usually I prefer the way a distortion falls off when you attenuate the incoming signal, as opposed to turning the output down. That's why the distortion on my synths comes after the master volume.

But, obviously, you already do know that automation can be suitable for some people (the ones not into using for instance velocity, also, it's just one modulation source, so it's hard to do "layered" modulations with it).

I never said otherwise, I just said that it wasn't something I wanted to be able to see on screen at all times, if you read the posts.

Now, what do you say princess? How about going back to being your normal self before you frighten anyone of us, ok?

I suppose I should feel a certain pride that so many people take my word as gospel but, like everyone else, I'm just expressing my opinion here. Putting "I think" or "In my experience" at the start of every sentence gets very boring and tediously repetitive. Nobody else seems to have to qualify their opinions thus so why the hell should I?

yup, automation just isn't the same as modulation, and to say it's krap is almost as stupid as the glasses you wear

Of course it is. You use both to change the value of a paramter over time. That you fail to make the connection speaks volumes for the amount of thought you put into production.

[IIRs]

yup, automation just isn't the same as modulation, and to say it's krap is almost as stupid as the glasses you wear

Of course it is. You use both to change the value of a paramter over time. That you fail to make the connection speaks volumes for the amount of thought you put into production.

BONES, you're a fuckwit!

[hello1234]

welp, the best looking console view so far.........samplitude.

I love the old-school look and feel. I'm not going to buy it! But I like the way it looks.

[haydxn]

bones, you really are a fucktardwit.

automation is very different to modulation. if you WANT to go to the effort of setting up a modulation routing so that you can control the panning of an instrument from within it triggered by an exact velocity, then that's great. indiana jones and that guy from national treasure both get kicks from doing stuff just like that. or, perhaps your synth doesn't have extensive modulation options to do things like that but has the exact sound you want. automating the pan of a channel lets you just say when you want it to be somewhere. that's just not the same as what we label modulation. you can use both tools to achieve the same ends in certain cases, but to say there's no difference between the two is more stupid than all the other ridiculous pompous gas emmisions you pipe out into the various kvr forum threads.

[Sascha Franck]

BONES, velocity based modulations don't exactly change parameter values over an amount of time. Of course you can't enter different velocities for one note at one time, but still... velocity based modulations are something entirely different from what anybody would call "timebased", simply because it's - yeah, you might've guessed allready - dynamicbased.

In addition, modulations *usually* are used to alter something while playing, so they are part of synth patches and the likes, whereas automation usually is used to fix a mix (or fool around with FX, whatever).
Sure, there's quite some overlap in the sonic outcome of both, yet the two are more or less fundamentally different.