Workstations that have WiFi and apps to increase display size and whatnot - are there any?

[JCJR]

Re standalone drum generator, for "conventional music" not technobeats or whatever, I had good luck with Alesis drum boxes. To my ear the old recordings still basically "sound like drums". It is so taste-dependent. Some folks consider Alesis tones unbearably cheezy.

Haven't really had many drum boxes. First programmable, MIDI box was an SCI DrumTrax which was "phat" but for anything except rock/funk, about as subtle as a baseball bat. Used it for a few years then got an Alesis HR-16 to my ear more musical, natural tones, good for more than just rock and funk. Well, also had some kind of Yamaha rack mount MIDI drum box for awhile but didn't keep it very long.

After a few years replaced HR16 with Alesis DM5 which I still have. Unfortunately over the years the rotary encoder got flakey. Otherwise works good as new. But marginally un-usable with the flakey encoder. Possibly need a replacement encoder but some threads say that re-seating the ROM chip and ribbon cables to knock off corrosion and re-establish good connections sometimes brings them back. With bad eyes fine detail work is an annoyance so haven't got around to it.

Anyway the DM5 recorded real well and still sounds reasonable in old recordings (to my ear). I also used it along with a homemade drumkit controller for drummer friends to record MIDI drums into some of the old songs. Dunno if any of the modern Alesis drum units sound as good/better than DM5. They are not particularly expensive.

There are many Roland drum sounds in my FA06, including some SuperNatural kits. Those are sposed to be more modern and hyper-realistic than the old Alesis sounds, but when I play drums using that it sounds too "canned" and "polished" fake. Using any of those drumkits would doom my songs to sound the same as a zillion other songs on the web using those same "perfected" kits. I mean, drums on the old DM5 just sound better to me. Maybe the same could be said of some current-manufacture Alesis boxes or maybe not, dunno.

I need a new drum machine like a hole in the head. Got multiple drumsets in multiple hardware synths in addition to the DM5. And lately have been constructing DAW-splice drum parts between BIAB realdrum audio snips + various MIDI drum bits. Like painting a 747 Airliner with a Q-Tip but sounds OK after too many hours burned.

[lfm]

I only had a TR909 back in the day. It was just tunable pretty much.
I had pads unit Yamaha DR55, I think it was.
Loads of kicks and snares and cymbals etc, and some latin stuff too to map to pads.
Now with Yamaha DTXPRESS IV and I just bought a new engine DTX700.
It got 1200+ sounds, 120 kicks, a couple 100 snares and so on, even orchestral percussion.
Some divided into categories like arabic and latin percussion.
50 preset kits, but you can store 60 and modify them all to liking.
You can even load a sample file to a pad if you want.

I like Yamaha engine partly for it's groove check feature that I like for practising drums.
Doing these George Lawrence Stone stick control practises you also get statistics, biggest deviation early/late etc, where you can read how you improve.
That stimulate me, not only hearing improvement but also confirming it like that.
Not playing for a good while and do the stick control again I also can read time to do some more practising.

Taking drums lesson some years ago I learned this stick control thing as the base to get lims in sync perfectly and independently. You do left and right hand first, then you do the patterns the same with left hand and kick pedal next etc. Then it all comes together.

I try to get above beginner on all instruments, it's part of the satisfaction for me.
- Yeah, it takes forever but it's all fun part of making music and recording and stuff

And what drums+bass do together to create the groove is really fascinating.
What Aron and Henrik in Dirty Loops are doing is incredible


Another

[JCJR]

Hi lfm. That first Dirty Loops vid reminds of the old LA Band TOTO. I like the second vid better but am more "roots oriented" or whatever. Maybe you would like these as well.



Though for me it is inspirational rather than aspirational because I'm not even talented enough to roadie those guys' gear.

I generally don't try to create MIDI drum beats anymore except as placeholders, except rare cases am fairly certain the part is appropriate. Just ain't a drummer and never will be. The mindset and "keep it simple stupid except the occasional tricky bits" just eludes me. Knowing how to fit an appropriate part together with only a handful of drums and cymbals. Neither too dull, too stilted, nor too busy. That is a drummer's job.

For a drummer I can see how MPC pads would be attractive. Also the attractiveness of having MIDI record/edit, Audio record/edit, MIDI and Audio I/O all in one working box very attractive, assuming the timing is always rock solid.

For my personal DAW gripe of "unergonomic MIDI tracking" I don't see that the MPC would be either more or less ergonomic than a DAW computer. When playing in realtime tracks from a keyboard either one seems about the same real estate and ergonomic issues. Unless the mechanics of switching between tracks/patterns/song arrange, record-arming, etc, is somehow extremely streamlined in the MPC compared to typical DAW operation. Unergonomic MIDI tracking is really my only major gripe with DAWs, and if I had an MPC I probably wouldn't ever use the pads anyway.

Been using Reaper the last few years, with some hardware synths, MOTU MIDI Express and 18 track digital mixer/interface. I really like Reaper EXCEPT the MIDI playthru timing is horrible, and it can't really be fixed because of Reaper's software design. If I were to build a new computer and "get luckier than last time" building low-latency hardware, and buy some other kind of mixer/interface, the MIDI hardware playthru latency could be improved, but even then it would still be f'd up. But other than MIDI hardware playthru the setup works great, so it seems a rather big gamble to change a bunch of expensive crap hoping just to minimize a problem that won't completely go away.

I kinda worked around the broken playthru latency by hardwiring a spare GM synth module between my 88 key controller output and the computer MIDI in, so that when I'm tracking I turn down the destination synth and listen instead to the direct-connected GM synth module for the playthru timing. So that MIDI doesn't have to loop thru Reaper before I get to hear it. If I ever would replace the old KX88 controller with something like a MODX8, could do the same thing by turning MODX8 Local Control ON and turning off Reaper soft midi thru while tracking.

Next time I get around to trying to compose a MIDI song from scratch, might try an old MIDI sequencer program with better timing for the MIDI record phase, then ship the MIDI into Reaper. But am kinda Reaper-dependent because most of the plugins I use, I wrote fer myself in Reaper JSFX. I like em fine and am too burned-out to write C++ VST plugins nowadays.

So I would miss the plugins in any other DAW, and the same would go for the MPC so far as that goes, so even if I had an MPC it would just be another "layer". Would eventually have to ship projects out of the MPC and into Reaper to finish em up. Oh well.

[lfm]

Next time I get around to trying to compose a MIDI song from scratch, might try an old MIDI sequencer program with better timing for the MIDI record phase, then ship the MIDI into Reaper. But am kinda Reaper-dependent because most of the plugins I use, I wrote fer myself in Reaper JSFX. I like em fine and am too burned-out to write C++ VST plugins nowadays.

Hi again
Reaper has un unusuall way of handling pdc when realtime monitoring in that as soon as a plugin with any latency it adds a full asio buffer, and can even be multiple until largest latency is handled there. So unless having an interface that allow 32-64 samples you are soon in trouble.

But seems you have experimented a lot and know this turning off pdc adjustments of recorded "leave as recorded" or whatever they called it feature. Or possibly "record adjust" or whatever they call it beside the asio buffer settings to always adjust more than is reported by asio and let Reaper place clips differently. Daw is probably adjusting according to roundtrip latency, but with midi it's not dependent on asio audio buffer on input so will be off, so think record adjust is the best bet to get a permanent solution. And disable plugins with any latency while recording.

Haven't seen any midi patchbays or switches that allow to route output to different unit directly but would be smooth instead of plugging cables around all the time.

Looking at Squarp Pyramid it has a bunch of midi plugins but not sure what kind you wrote that you need and you can run 5 each track.
There are 12 effects to choose from:
• Quantizer (with integrated humanizer)
• Arpeggiator
• Harmonizer
• Swing
• Randomization
• Delay
• Equalizer
• Scale
• Note to CC converter
• BPM
• Chance (probability)
• LFO
Looking at if syncing that sequencer from elsewhere could be a solution, MTC or midi clock. Drum engines can run midi clock out, and not using diffferent time signatures it will be the same speed. If using different time signatures in daw is a mess since midi clock time is not constant all the time so MTC is best option.

When I used the Fostex hddporta I used mtc to sync computer to render some things from computer, worked well. So looking at self sufficient solution for midi with hardware while computer still run well and be prepared kind of for the day it dies.

A local store have an MPC X and will try some things like thru monitor delays on that before taking the plunge, if as a sequencer or if Pyramid might be better solution. Then a mixer to sum midi gear, like I did in the 80's with a 4 channel Tascam and a rack reverb.

But with a Pyramid + Tascam Model 12 you don't have automation and bouncing options. So MPC X clever little bugger has it all, midi sequencing, audio recording and automation and stuff. Both solutions about same price.

...and research continues.....

[JCJR]

In my case Reaper generally records input midi timing fine and syncs playback midi timing fine against playback audio timing.

Similarly I cam playback a reaper midi track into a hardware synth and record the synth to reaper audio track and both tracks sync fine against each other on playback.

I slightlu adjusted reaper record/playback offsets to put it "right on the money" but was within a couple of ms with default automatic settings.

The pronlem is hardware midi playthru timing because reaper only transmits hardware midi playthru at AUDIO BUFFER BOUNDARIES. A long ago software design decision.

I do not use any midi plugins in reaper, not even channel mapping and program change plugin. All my jsfx are audio plugins.

The midi thru workaround is strictly "always hardwired" rather than midi interface patching/merging.

KX88 midi out to a spare GM syntj input (old roland DS330). DS330 mIdi thru to midi express input 1 into the computer. So when I record a midi track I listen to un-delayed scratch audio from DS330 rather than the messed up timing coming out of reaper hardware midi thru.

After reaper records midi, hardware midi playback timing seems OK. So far as I can tell, the main thing messed up is hardware midi playthru timing.

[lfm]

Ok, I misread your actuall implications.

Having a midi box on master keyboard with just a switch to play on any of the external midi gear would be useful. One interface from iConnectivity is highly configurable, any in to any out directly, filter certain messages only, some to computer and some not and so forth. Highly flexible and can do 10 virtual midi ports as well.

Mio XL have 8 midi ports
https://www.iconnectivity.com/midi-interfaces-1

Once configured class compliant, and no drivers per se at least with Mio2 that I have.

So having just switched to another input port that could send to the others as you wish.
And a little box with flip of a switch could make that without repluggin any cables. I had a merge box to send to different routes but iConnetivity could do it too.
- one midi input could route to computer for recording as well as sending to external gear
- and another allow computer to see all through different ports as usuall and taking master keyboard in.

If having each midi unit running on own midi channel, even if on own midi port - you can easily having a merge on another port select which to play from master keyboard by channel. So local midi to unit and to computer.

Another clever interface I have is Nektar which senses if an input or output, so can suddenly be active in computer just by pluggin another cable. But no software to configure anything, just class compliant as it is.

Using that as mpc x offers, a knob to dial in mix of direct input signal and mix from daw, and you have any of your gear playing with zero latency.

Just rambling here without knowing your full setup.....

[JCJR]

Just rambling here without knowing your full setup.....

Thanks lfm. Apologies the topic got drifty. Further drifty conversation should you find it interesting, otherwise please ignore the off-topic drivel.

Here are pics more recent than on my website that time forgot. Three pics because room is not deep enough to back away for a good wide-angle single camera shot.







Have begun to suspect there is no such thing as an ergonomic workspace, but this is the most recent post-retirement attempt at a minimalist, compact ergonomic workspace. Everything easy to see and reach from an office chair sitting in the speaker sweet spot. Not real successful ergonomic attempt, same lack of success as previous tries.

One 32" vid monitor and a pair of 27" vid monitors. When running reaper, usually track and mixer windows on the 32" monitor and plugin windows on the 27" monitors. Also I usually run PianoRoll window on a 27" monitor to PianoRoll edit while facing the midi keyboard.

The wirekess comp keyboard has a built-in trackpad, also there is a wireless mouse, and you can see the wireless trackball sitting atop the far-right of the KX88 midi keybd, beside the little Roland DS330 "midi record monitoring synth". The comp kbd/mouse can be used atop the KX88 midi kbd, and also a shelf can be optional inserted so that the comp keybd/mouse can be used directly in-front of the KX88 midi kbd if desirable.

Homemade 12" coaxial monitor speakers and homemade 18" subwoofer, triampsd with a pair of Crown XLS amps on sub and mids and an Ashly amp for the horns. Crossover and EQ via DBX Driverack. Old Conn Strobotuner (mainly for guitar/bass tuning) sitting behind the vid monitors because there's no other place to put it.

Behringer XR18 digital rackmount mixer to the right, sitting above that laptop. That old laptop is dedicated via ethernet cable to control the XR18 mixer. The mixer control software is the only thing that old laptop ever runs. The mixer USB connects to the main computer mounted out of sight rightward of the computer desk. Mixer can be set to either 2X2 or 16X16 audio interface modes. I usually leave it set to 2X2 because I rarely record more than two audio tracks at a time, and latency is lower in 2X2 mode.

That right rack also has a motu MIDI Express 8X8 midi interface and some hardware synths.

Also have a "gig rig" of mixer, 3-way PA speakers and some keyboards/synths set up in another room. If/when I want to record any of those synths, I move the Reaper project to a lenovo laptop and record the parts in the other room, using USB audio from an analog mixer and a motu FastLane 2X2 midi interface.

[JCJR]

Having a midi box on master keyboard with just a switch to play on any of the external midi gear would be useful. One interface from iConnectivity is highly configurable, any in to any out directly, filter certain messages only, some to computer and some not and so forth. Highly flexible and can do 10 virtual midi ports as well.

Mio XL have 8 midi ports
https://www.iconnectivity.com/midi-interfaces-1

Once configured class compliant, and no drivers per se at least with Mio2 that I have.

So having just switched to another input port that could send to the others as you wish.
And a little box with flip of a switch could make that without repluggin any cables. I had a merge box to send to different routes but iConnetivity could do it too.
- one midi input could route to computer for recording as well as sending to external gear
- and another allow computer to see all through different ports as usuall and taking master keyboard in.

On a more modest scale, the cheep motu fastlane 2X2 has a non-buffered mechanical bypass switch enabling each midi input to be direct connected to its midi output, bypassing the computer. At least allowing one to "direct play" a small rig with the computer bypassed or turned off.

Dunno much about the Mio midi interfaces. Was researching and considering getting one of the bigger Mio's a few years ago. A Mio owner said it basically worked as advertised but seemed buggy around the edges. I don't recall his detailed complaints. That, plus the need to program the thing via computer, scared me off buying one, rightly or wrongly dunno.

A main reason I prefer hardware which many think is an idiotic attitude-- The hardware will always have the same specs and performance until it wears out. No guarantee how long before it wears out but in my experience it is usually a long time. Seems to me bonkers to buy hardware that is computer-dependent for basic operation. At any time Windows or MacOS can have "one more update" that kills the controlling software, rendering such hardware useless except as a doorstop. I don't want hardware held hostage to the whims of Apple or Microsoft. Don't tell me it can't happen, I've seen it again and again over the years. Am not talking about computer peripherals, which are necessarily dependent on vagarities of computer OS and support software. Talking about synths, amps, speakers, standalone signal processors, etc.

My favorite routing/mapping/merging midi interfaces were motu Midi Time Piece II and Midi Time Piece AV. Virtually all functions front-panel programmable. None of the routing/mapping/merging was computer dependent. My old MTPII still works good as new. Though it has been un-usable as a MIDI interface since apple quit making computers with ADB ports (decades), MTPII still works fab as a standalone 8X8 router/mapper/merger. I do not understand why motu quit making that class of interface.

My motu midi experss 128 8X8 is not programmable at all, just a dumb 8X8 interface, but is not very expensive. If I needed extensive routing/mapping/merging I would re-rack the MTPII right above the Midi Express 128 in the rack, and get a bunch of 18" midi patch cables. Cross-wire all the Midi Express ins/outs with the MTPII ins/outs. Thereby adding front panel-programmable routing/mapping/merge to the 8 port dumb midi interface capability.

For many years when I was programming for a living had to test/debug lots of consumer audio/midi interfaces, so I would hook up the 1 or 2 midi i/o on cheap/midprice interfaces to the first 1 or 2 inputs/outputs of the MTPII, enabling 1 or 2 computer ports to transmit/receive with a stack of synths via the MTPII.

I also have an old 360 Systems midi patcher which presumably still works, but haven't had a midi rig big enough to need it since the 1990's. Back then used the MTPII hooked up along with the 360 systems to access all the synths.

[lfm]

Maybe customize a box with simple 2 pole switch, to direct midi to KX88 instead.
So if 8 ports - a box on KX88 with 8 such switches on, to simplify routing a bit to convenience.
And 8 in and 8 out din midi on that box and a 9th in from KX88. Just select one to connect that synth directly. Would be done in half a day or so.

I like hardware gear for the same reasons as you do. Some extra care to interface but it's worth it. And something that actually has a second hand value too. And just one button power up and sit and fiddle a bit.

Nice clean setup with modules all the way.

If setup with a box like I fantisized about above you could play either module any time, or are you setup for that anyway?
Or are they daisy chained and you just select a midi channel?

About MPC X, I got an email to make a survey about how Akai support handled my case, but never received a reply from Akai themselves and questions I had. And nothing in spam folder. Had many issues with something called megamailservers that many connect to that eats just about everything, including regular conversations.

If regular postal services would just ban certain adresses there would be a riot. But emails are dismissed just like it didn't matter.

[JCJR]

Maybe customize a box with simple 2 pole switch, to direct midi to KX88 instead.
So if 8 ports - a box on KX88 with 8 such switches on, to simplify routing a bit to convenience.
And 8 in and 8 out din midi on that box and a 9th in from KX88. Just select one to connect that synth directly. Would be done in half a day or so.

Yes an unbuffered mechanical switch network might be viable for some uses. Care would be needed to minimize odds of ground loops (isolated ground jacks, switching both wires in each MIDI pair, break before make switches, etc). A series of toggles might do. I would have thought maybe multi-stack rotary switches but perhaps the simpler/cruder the better. A few years ago noticed that custom-configured stacked rotary switches can now be ordered in small quantities from China. Probably such custom parts would raise the parts cost higher than some sort of mass-market MIDI patcher. Alas long ago there was bigger variety of MIDI patcher gear.

My current simple use of the motu Midi Express 128 connects 88 key controller to InPort 1, no OutPort 1 connection since it is a controller-only. And nothing is connected to InPorts 2 thru 8. OutPorts 2 thru 8 are connected to various noise boxes.

If worth the trouble (possibly some day), I could re-mount the old MTPII above the Midi Express 128 and cross-wire thusly:
KX88Out -> MTPII In_1
MTPII Out_1 -> Midi Express In_1
Midi Express Outs 2 thru 8 -> MTPII Inputs 2 thru 8
MTPII Outputs 2 thru 8 -> Hardware synths

Then I could front-panel program the MTPII to send KX88 output to the computer and also direct to any assortment of synths, each output port on a different Midi channel if desired. And any synth I want played by the computer, I could program the MTPII to echo its numbered Midi Input (from the Midi Express 128) to its Midi Output. It could also be programmed to Merge, sending both computer Midii output and KX88 to a destination synth. Unless I'm having a senior moment and thinking about it all wrong.

The merge trick would be most practical if the computer is sending on different MIDI channels than the KX88 to avoid trainwrecks. But the MTPII easily maps channels, and that would be the typical desired sequencer operation. For example if using a multitimbral synth to play a bunch of horn parts on different Midi channels-- Play the "already-recorded" horn parts from the computer on their assigned channels, and record the new horn part on a new Midi channel, also monitoring it merged "direct live" from the keyboard controller.

It would be so much more convenient, avoid so much hassle, if reaper happened to have real tight hardware Midi playthru timing, but oh well we can't have everything. I do appreciate the numerous good things reaper can do.

The problem would also be simplified in another fashion if motu would manufacture a modern USB Midi interface with capabilities of MTPII or MTPAV. Becvause hardly anybody ever uses SMPTE or MTC anymore, and usually have better ways to sync big rigs (for the folks with big rigs)-- Motu could simplify and cut costs a bit by deleting smpte striping/reading and wordclock-sync features. Possibly even delete the footswitch inputs without making anybody mad. Just provide at least 8X8 Midi ports with front-panel-programmable, patch saveable standalone route/map/merge.

[JCJR]

Finally returning to the MPC X topic: What other gear, and physical placement, do you envision using along with the MPC X?

For my own use, would consider it most ergonomic to place the MPCX front-and-center ontop of an 88 key controller, or at least as close possible if the MPC X has to be raised above an 88 key instrument with a busy front panel such as any of the common workstations. The higher it has to be raised above the keyboard, or even worse if it has to be moved to the side rather than front-and-center, would in my imagination make the workflow less immediate. Perhaps silly but when tracking it makes a difference whether the hands have to move inches vs feet between the recorder and the keys.

Obviously from pics of my current setup, I would have to tear out and radically rearrange my setup to ergonomically integrate an MPC X.Also, perhaps not apparrent from the pics, but a good bit of care has been taken about speaker near-field reflections off keyboard, vid monitors and other gear. When I was thumbfingered treating the room and making lots of measurements, many of the worst audio anomalies were caused by nearfield reflections off gear.

In my case might need to go back near square-one to figure out a good way to integrate an MPC X. But you are in the process of imagining and designing so my impressions don't matter much.

Perhaps my previous goal of getting every function into one convenient workspace was wrongheaded. But I thought being able to monitor synth tones "as flat and clear possible" while tracking was purt important. A possible alternative :

Set up two rooms (or one big room, but my house doesn't have any real big rooms).

_1_ A Mixing/Mastering room with only the monitor speakers, computer and vid monitors, and several fathoms of fluffy fiberglass acoustic treatment. The only design considerations would be acoustics and easy access to lots of screen real estate.

_2_ A tracking room possibly only lightly acoustic treated unless live micing will be common. With one or more keyboard stacks, however many needed, plus whatever guitar/bass/drum/singing stations desired. Sound system just a high quality stereo PA, midfield or farfield monitoring depending on room size. Room acoustics not so important so long as the speakers have decent fidelity and most recording is "direct". Because most final mixing EQ would happen in the Mix/Mastering room, PERHAPS the tracks laid here only need to be clean and "close enough that it can be polished in the Mixing stage".

That way tracking room ergonomics could be refined without having to worry about the room acoustics impact of the equipment.

[zerocrossing]

I’ve got one by Dell. It’s pretty good but you need to buy a bunch of software, controllers and an audio interface for it.

[JCJR]

My desktop is a dell too.

[lfm]

Finally returning to the MPC X topic: What other gear, and physical placement, do you envision using along with the MPC X?

For my own use, would consider it most ergonomic to place the MPCX front-and-center ontop of an 88 key controller, or at least as close possible if the MPC X has to be raised above an 88 key instrument with a busy front panel such as any of the common workstations. The higher it has to be raised above the keyboard, or even worse if it has to be moved to the side rather than front-and-center, would in my imagination make the workflow less immediate. Perhaps silly but when tracking it makes a difference whether the hands have to move inches vs feet between the recorder and the keys.


 

I think I will make use of a speaker floor stand I don't use now, and just place MPC X beside my mixing desk/masterkeyboard(Nordlead) 90 degrees. It can be raised and lowered as needed and will take minimum space.

Or move Nordlead to the side, I think it will fit there.
Pic 1
Pic 2

Having the midi gear conveniently to a preamp rack through patchbay I will keep that and get a dsub 25 to take analog out of preamps into MPC X, I think. At least try if better than built in preamps in MPC X.

For video I probably will use mtc sync from mpc to laptop and run that this way. But looked yesterday for hardware solution but seems to involve computers anyway.

[Fle81]

Thanks, you are probably right about workstations. Just trying to keep an open mind and see where it ends.
The editors is what they rely on probably, and you need computer anyway.
Strength is that they have sequencer, midi editor and recording.
Thought there might be an opening.

Looked at some demos of Tascam Model 24 and DP24/32 and they lack too many things
- Model24, no bouncing to overcome no automation, just the main mixdown so everything is realtime.
- Model24 has MTC over usb, but then in my case video player need to be computer
- DP32 has virtual tracks and bouncing too, and aux sends are just mono and no MTC at all.
- one guy had both, and audio quality was way better in Model 24, and it cost double so it should

It was all dead ends. At least I know now, and can stop speculating.
So on pc it is Linux left pretty much that I don't know much about.
I installed a Red Hat Linux in the 90's for normal use, but felt really hacker level.
Graphic interface I tried install was really buggy and most menues did not work.

I use a Tascam dp24, never felt more happy, ok, that is my point of view, well i dont use automations or similar, that approach is more “analog like”