Mixbus demo test run

[MarlaPodolski]

Every daw I've seen is a rack of it's own annoyances.
Is overcoming them to the point of producing some music
that maybe get's heard twice, even worth the effort?

I really think this comment is going to be placed in a very nice frame and hung in a good place on my studio wall. I've been involved in DSP since a child, in part thanks to keyboards as my main instruments and their close ties to everything else electronic and digital, and my Dad and upbringing in a musical family. I've watched and spent loads of time keeping informed, up to date and using much of the best and newest stuff. The increasing complexities all around have truly reached the point of absurdity. I still hear papa talking about the '60s and seventies, about the hardest parts was lugging the gear, but after that all was needed was to plug in the jack and turn up a few knobs -- nothing much else to know except how to play your instrument and (hopefully) compose great music. Recording wasn't a lot more than good mic placement, (hopefully) enough mics, and set the tape reels turning. Now? Find me a DAW that has a manual under 400 pages. And many plugins come with 80 or 100-page or even longer manuals. Where's the fun, the spontaneity, the joy left in ANY of this?

[glokraw]

In linux, timemachine is a one-button recorder, with only
a level meter. For spontaneity, there are a few great standalone
instruments and effects that use qjacktl (or other patchbay gui)
to connect the outputs for recording, so zynnaddsubfx,
hydrogen if drums are desired, and rakarrack multifx panel
makes for a great trio, rich with possibilities, but with
a poverty of complexity. Hardware on your soundcard line-in
is also available, so adding a favorite Triton, QS8 or XG sound
is simple. For standalone DX7 sysex access, linux Hexter
is a dssi synth that loads them, and also has extensive editing
missing in the old windows version.

Timemachine records 24bit .w64 files,
or optionally 16 bit wav. Audacity can import and edit the files.
Media players vlc, mplayer, xine etc you can send their output to timemachine,
if some basic overdubs are desired, and then off to the mixbus.
Cheers

[fmr]

I still hear papa talking about the '60s and seventies, about the hardest parts was lugging the gear, but after that all was needed was to plug in the jack and turn up a few knobs -- nothing much else to know except how to play your instrument and (hopefully) compose great music. Recording wasn't a lot more than good mic placement, (hopefully) enough mics, and set the tape reels turning. Now? Find me a DAW that has a manual under 400 pages. And many plugins come with 80 or 100-page or even longer manuals. Where's the fun, the spontaneity, the joy left in ANY of this?

I think your statement doesn't address the reality. There are still musicians for whom recording is just plug the jack and play. And there are still composers who don't need anyhthing else than a piano to compose great music. In the 60s, musicians knew nothing about producing and recording, and left that part of the job to the technicians and engineers. Mind you, even arrangements were left to someone else (take The Beatles and George Martin, for example). In the 70s, some bands started to get involved in production (some members of some bands, to be more precise). Yet, recording and mic placement were still a job for specialized people. And recording on 16 tracks came only in the 70s, and maintaining those reel machines was a delicate task, also. It wasn't just "set the tape reels turning" - not at all.

Now you have DAWs that include all the instruments (virtual and virtually), the sound processing, may run hundreds of tracks, may edit the smallest detail of the audio, and the synthesizers (which noone in the 60s knew anything about, since they only started to be unveiled to the general public in the end of the decade) were relatively simple, except for modulars, which were territory for only a few, and even those usually had some specialized help. Now, many of the virtual synthesizers we have available are incredibly more powerful and complex than the most complex synthesizers of the 80s.

And you wonder that the manuals have 400 pages? I think they could very well have thousands, considering the huge amount of complexity of today's DAWs. However, musicians don't have to learn that. They could still pay some studio to do the job, go there and plug the jack.

[MarlaPodolski]

I still hear papa talking about the '60s and seventies, about the hardest parts was lugging the gear, but after that all was needed was to plug in the jack and turn up a few knobs -- nothing much else to know except how to play your instrument and (hopefully) compose great music. Recording wasn't a lot more than good mic placement, (hopefully) enough mics, and set the tape reels turning. Now? Find me a DAW that has a manual under 400 pages. And many plugins come with 80 or 100-page or even longer manuals. Where's the fun, the spontaneity, the joy left in ANY of this?

I think your statement doesn't address the reality. There are still musicians for whom recording is just plug the jack and play. And there are still composers who don't need anyhthing else than a piano to compose great music. In the 60s, musicians knew nothing about producing and recording, and left that part of the job to the technicians and engineers. Mind you, even arrangements were left to someone else (take The Beatles and George Martin, for example). In the 70s, some bands started to get involved in production (some members of some bands, to be more precise). Yet, recording and mic placement were still a job for specialized people. And recording on 16 tracks came only in the 70s, and maintaining those reel machines was a delicate task, also. It wasn't just "set the tape reels turning" - not at all.

Now you have DAWs that include all the instruments (virtual and virtually), the sound processing, may run hundreds of tracks, may edit the smallest detail of the audio, and the synthesizers (which noone in the 60s knew anything about, since they only started to be unveiled to the general public in the end of the decade) were relatively simple, except for modulars, which were territory for only a few, and even those usually had some specialized help. Now, many of the virtual synthesizers we have available are incredibly more powerful and complex than the most complex synthesizers of the 80s.

And you wonder that the manuals have 400 pages? I think they could very well have thousands, considering the huge amount of complexity of today's DAWs. However, musicians don't have to learn that. They could still pay some studio to do the job, go there and plug the jack.

Well, I think I'm probably more guilty of generalising than not reflecting reality. But let's start with reality for a minute. The changes and near total disintegration of the music industry means for most aspiring players and writers that they have to do the recording and assembly themselves. Or get a knowledgeable friend to do it. There are few deep pocket eager record companies any more and there is almost nothing to be earned via airplay. If you do any of my bill-payer sideline of advertising music, it's totally on you to submit essentially ready, finished work. I assume there must be musicians who are basically in the plug and play scenario, but I haven't met one in years now, and I also haven't heard of any aspiring musician kid who doesn't have a laptop packed full of audio software.

To get back to the main point I was making, yeah, I'm aware of some of the simpler solutions. I keep Audacity installed. Even though I only use it for editing things or auditioning something quick – it can be a help for streaming music onto file – I'm well aware that people have used it start-to-finish for whatever they were creating. Also, a lot of us got by pretty well with Variety of Sound plugins and their 3-page 'manuals' or Tokyo Dawn productions. It can all be done without Ozone 7 and 80-some pages of text and dozens of tutorial videos. Or the Plugin Alliance bundle. Or the complete WAVES bundle. Or … At some point in the last couple of years, though, I began noticing a real increase in complexity. Does every DAW have to have every conceivable feature, even if a few of them don't work all that well? All DAWs must have scoring abilities, every imaginable arpeggiating and MIDI feature? Many of the new compressors need 30 controls? I bought Klanghelm's DC8C2 and I think it's a pretty good compressor, but trying to use it in Expert mode gives me nothing but a headache. Turn this, ah, getting close, turn next, no, losing it again – for an hour straight. Does every new synth have to also come with full Wavetable setup and/or FM capabilities and arp and 3-4 FX just to be accepted? We demand that every DAW come with a full complement of advanced plugins and instruments when we already have 400 or more of our favourites installed already?

I realise a lot it counts for marketing, but I also think a lot of this is pure overkill. I think I was more creative and got more work done back when all I had was a beat-up Rhodes Stage Piano, a small box of a combo amp and borrowed my Dad's 4-track recorder and 2 mics. I'm agreeing more and more with the ones who are always saying, too many choices, or too many options will stifle productivity. I've started ignoring a lot of the new software that seems to show up every other day, whereas I used follow so many forums and websites and jump on every new thing to try it out. I'm not updating so much either any more. Too much time spent with update installs and wading through lengthy manuals was not only eating up too much of my (supposedly) creative time, I began to notice diminishing returns and less finished work. Some of us have become mere technicians – software custodians, computer janitors if you will. And I really think a lot of the current trends here have gone way off track.

[fmr]

Well, I think I'm probably more guilty of generalising than not reflecting reality. But let's start with reality for a minute. The changes and near total disintegration of the music industry means for most aspiring players and writers that they have to do the recording and assembly themselves. Or get a knowledgeable friend to do it. There are few deep pocket eager record companies any more and there is almost nothing to be earned via airplay. If you do any of my bill-payer sideline of advertising music, it's totally on you to submit essentially ready, finished work. I assume there must be musicians who are basically in the plug and play scenario, but I haven't met one in years now, and I also haven't heard of any aspiring musician kid who doesn't have a laptop packed full of audio software.

To get back to the main point I was making, yeah, I'm aware of some of the simpler solutions. I keep Audacity installed. Even though I only use it for editing things or auditioning something quick – it can be a help for streaming music onto file – I'm well aware that people have used it start-to-finish for whatever they were creating. Also, a lot of us got by pretty well with Variety of Sound plugins and their 3-page 'manuals' or Tokyo Dawn productions. It can all be done without Ozone 7 and 80-some pages of text and dozens of tutorial videos. Or the Plugin Alliance bundle. Or the complete WAVES bundle. Or … At some point in the last couple of years, though, I began noticing a real increase in complexity. Does every DAW have to have every conceivable feature, even if a few of them don't work all that well? All DAWs must have scoring abilities, every imaginable arpeggiating and MIDI feature? Many of the new compressors need 30 controls? I bought Klanghelm's DC8C2 and I think it's a pretty good compressor, but trying to use it in Expert mode gives me nothing but a headache. Turn this, ah, getting close, turn next, no, losing it again – for an hour straight. Does every new synth have to also come with full Wavetable setup and/or FM capabilities and arp and 3-4 FX just to be accepted? We demand that every DAW come with a full complement of advanced plugins and instruments when we already have 400 or more of our favourites installed already?

I realise a lot it counts for marketing, but I also think a lot of this is pure overkill. I think I was more creative and got more work done back when all I had was a beat-up Rhodes Stage Piano, a small box of a combo amp and borrowed my Dad's 4-track recorder and 2 mics. I'm agreeing more and more with the ones who are always saying, too many choices, or too many options will stifle productivity. I've started ignoring a lot of the new software that seems to show up every other day, whereas I used follow so many forums and websites and jump on every new thing to try it out. I'm not updating so much either any more. Too much time spent with update installs and wading through lengthy manuals was not only eating up too much of my (supposedly) creative time, I began to notice diminishing returns and less finished work. Some of us have become mere technicians – software custodians, computer janitors if you will. And I really think a lot of the current trends here have gone way off track.

Hi Marla:

I didn't say I don't agree with you (in part). Yes, you are right. Musicians now have to be also their own technicians and sound engineers, and producers. This force us to not only have to lern to play but also lern to record and produce (which are entirely different things). Having grown musically used to the Vangelis paradigm (you know: composed, arranged, produced and performed...) which is also more or less the same in the academic world where technology is used (most of the time, the composer has to be his own technician and engineer too) I am more or less used to that. Since I was never a gigging musician, I never missed the "plug and play", but I know that musicians the the 60s and 70s, for the major part, worked like that, and may feel completelly lost with todays high tech standards.

Yes, some of the current synths may demand a degree in physics and electronics to work with. Yes, the DAWs may be totally overwhelming and overkilling.

Yet, what does more also does less. Nothing prevents you to create simpler working templates on your DAW of choice and stick to them. Does the DAWs come with notation, and other out of ordinary functions? Yes, most of them do, fortunately. May it be overkill for some people? Perhaps, but then, they may simply forget they have that. The same about the the instruments, and the plug-ins. You can create ready to go templates for some of the more common tasks you usually perform and stick to them (that's what I do, personally).

Regarding synths - I am a synth geek, since ever, and I get excited when something new (I mean - that has something REALLY NEW) appears. That's why I recently bought Sugar Bytes Factory and Arcsyn, and I have an eye on Wiggle. But I agree that the vast majority don't need them (hell, even I don't really need any of them - it's just my geek spirit that made me buy them). Nevertheless, I may very well produce great music with very simple things that I already own for decades.

To sum it up - yes we may be buried in options, but no, we don't have to be. That's not a fate. We just have to find our way through all those choices, and keep going. Remember - what does more also does less. You decide what to keep with.

[MarlaPodolski]

I was with you completely until you mentioned Wiggle. You've revealed to us all, even if unintentionally, that you are in need of a good 12-step program for your affliction. [insert cutesy, tongue-in-cheek emoti]

No, seriously, lately I'm of the mind that two opposing forces pertain to where we currently find ourselves today in DSP music: "Whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger" ... and "here we are in our brave new century, only to discover that all the tech and digital 'helps' that have been created to make everything freer and faster and easier have, instead, only served to more completely enslave us".

At least the latest update releases to the two Mixbus DAWs don't suddenly catch fire and burn our houses down. And at least all the often-annoying complexity of so much of this software isn't lethal in some other, ghastly way.

Speaking of which (including the things that don't kill us / make us stronger' thought), I'm back to using Mixbus BIGTIME, raving over 32C especially, after nearly committing suicide or strangling my cat, Boofy, back when I so faithfully tried to stick it out and make the earlier versions (like, I guess, early to mid v2.x) of Mixbus work. I really thought they would never get it together but very glad I was wrong.

[glokraw]

Anybody here take advantage of last weeks half-price offer ?
Cheers