I guess my little 'analogy' made my point obvious then, didn't it?
T featured in Computer Music #79
-
- KVRAF
- 25028 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
ah - I see, Greg
I guess my little 'analogy' made my point obvious then, didn't it?
I guess my little 'analogy' made my point obvious then, didn't it?
-
- KVRist
- 196 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from Aberdeen, Scotland
Simon, once again I totally agree with you. I have been rightfully accused and convicted of not knowing what I am talking about in this thread. If that means not knowing all the intricacies of Cubase, etc then that'll be right!simondsouza wrote:
Just for the record I really hope that T2 comes up with the goods on MIDI editing!
Until then I am enjoying working in one window and composing withinhe limitations.... (rather than spending all my time relearning how to do stuff in new versions of complex programs!)
-
- KVRist
- 161 posts since 31 May, 2004
You were making great sense until the last 2 sentence, then you messed up. You see, in software, different peoples will have different view on what would be a Ford and what would be a Mercedes. In my case, Tracktion would qualify as a Mercedes and Cubase would be an old and clunky Ford; I abhore hardware emulating in software, I think it's an inneficient, unimaginative and clunky approach for a work environement, I have no use nor do I want to have to turn to another window for mixing, score editor I thought was very cool in the first sequencer that I've used, but then realised I never use it, video right in the sequencer I found to be more distracting than help, not to mention it would make Cubase crash every 2 minutes; I could go on like this, but I hope you get the point: you can't critique peoples for putting down your tool of choice, and then put down theirs.
Ezy Ryder,
it is not my intention to put anybodies choice of sequencer down. Just forget my car comparison. All I wanted to say is, that it is not reasonable to put the "big sequencers" down because of a good review on tracktion. Personally, I have never read a really good and objective review about a sequencer in any magazine. I remember that Sonar 3 (I own it, but don't like it really) gets in an american magazine 4.5 points of 5. The only negative point was that it is limited in the choice and application of different color shemes.
Well, if the reviewer only found that as a negative point then, I guess, he played with Sonar only for 2-3 hours.
All I wanted to say is that Tracktion works for some people and doesn't work/or is not suitable for others. Nothing more and nothing less. There is absolutely no need for putting any product down or telling that it means the death for cubase, sonar, logic or whatever.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 144 posts since 10 Mar, 2004 from Brighton, England
CUBASE IS CRAP
SONAR IS SHITE
LOGIC IS LAUGHABLE
LIVE IS LUDICROUS
ACID IS ANATHEMA
REASON IS RUBBISH
FLSTUDIO IS F***ING SHITE
TRACKTION IS TOPS
Only joking...
Simon
SONAR IS SHITE
LOGIC IS LAUGHABLE
LIVE IS LUDICROUS
ACID IS ANATHEMA
REASON IS RUBBISH
FLSTUDIO IS F***ING SHITE
TRACKTION IS TOPS
Only joking...
Simon
...and so it goes (Kurt Vonnegut)
-
- KVRAF
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
OK, so I finally got myself a copy of CM79. But I don't think that the SX3 review is quite as presented in this thread...simondsouza wrote: There's a review of SX3 in same issue, takes 3 pages to say that - wahay- you can do 'in track editing' (wahay!) and that the release is full of bugs.
It really says something about T that you can say all that needs to be said in 2 pages. And not a bug in sight....
And it costs about 8% what SX3 costs!
...particularly bearing in mind that the review makes a direct comparisson with Tracktion, and says Cubase is better
"If a decent budget £50 programme like Tracktion allows you to make fantastic music, why would anyone in their right mind spend nearly £600 on Steinberg's legendary sequencer?... The answer is simple: while budget sequencers do most of what you need reasonably well, programmes such as Cubase can do almost anything you could ask...and probably much better than you thought possible"
"Being able to "tempo-ramp" a complex composition of loops, MIDI data, and live performances - in perfect synchronisation - is something that you could only dream of doing in a budget sequencer".
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 144 posts since 10 Mar, 2004 from Brighton, England
yeah I know, you can do great stuff in SX3. But you know you can do tempo ramps really easy in Tracktion (though not with audio loops automatically timestretching themselves)
But my main point is tht I am actually enjoying the limitations that T imposes. I am relying far more on my own musicality and what I hear in my head than on what the technology can do for me...
(think not what your sequencer can do for you, but what you can do for your sequencer)
Maybe I'm just getting old......
Simon
But my main point is tht I am actually enjoying the limitations that T imposes. I am relying far more on my own musicality and what I hear in my head than on what the technology can do for me...
(think not what your sequencer can do for you, but what you can do for your sequencer)
Maybe I'm just getting old......
Simon
...and so it goes (Kurt Vonnegut)
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
There's obviously still a place for tools like SX3, and if you need those features, you're welcome to them.
I simply don't.
Greg
I simply don't.
Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
Yes - I won't be getting SX3 
I still love Tracktion - WORKFLOW!
And I'll do my tempo-ramping in Live 4 .
I agree that SX3 and no doubt Sonar 4 & Logic 7 all have their place, but change is in the air, and it will be interesting to see how many people still work with those tools in a decade or so from now...
I still love Tracktion - WORKFLOW!
And I'll do my tempo-ramping in Live 4
.I agree that SX3 and no doubt Sonar 4 & Logic 7 all have their place, but change is in the air, and it will be interesting to see how many people still work with those tools in a decade or so from now...