Mark Mothersbaugh on Classic Hardware vs Software Emulations

[stoopicus]

And when I go to a show to see live music I want to see live music being played by live musicians. I know many other people who feel the same way

and I would rather shoot myself than play in or listen to a cover band.

I totally get this feeling. I really dislike playing covers that are close to the originals. I've done a bunch over the last few years as practice on a new instrument and I quit doing them because I just don't find it enjoyable at all.

When I think of my favorite covers, very few sound like faithful imitations of the original; all the best are entirely new reworks of the original song. This is the opposite of what a cover band does.

[stoopicus]

Someone is selling a minty looking MemoryMoog on Portland Craigslist for $9k right now.



At least vintage synths are generally repairable, unlike these modern pieces of garbage they sell.

Yeah but on the other hand, the modern ones are generally much more reliable and let's face it, you could buy 30 of Uli's Model D's for the price of that museum piece. If one breaks, just grab a spare. Behringer's is polyphonic already and just stack six of them slighly detuned and you've got a much bigger Unison wall going than the MemoryMoog would for a fraction of the price. And it would be both more reliable and "repairable" - if one breaks, just swap it out, total cost $300. How much will a repair on the MemoryMoog be? Got a good Curtis dealer so you can reliably source the CEM chips?

[BONES]

I think the only truly redeeming part about hardware is it's not prone to software depreciation.

I think that's a very tenuous argument. My Analog Keys cost me $1500, second-hand, but I sold it for just over a grand. I lost more money on that one instrument than I have spent on softsynths in the last 3 or 4 years.

Native Instruments is a good example. You're safer on Windows but there is still software you can no longeer use in a modern setup from them, because they abandoned it etc.

The same is true of anything. Using my Analog Keys again, replacing a dud key to get it into a sellable condition cost me another $200, which is more than I have ever spent on NI software. I got a version of Komplete with a Maschine Mikro MIDI controller and I've bought TRK-01 and SCHEMA:Dark from them, both when they were half-price. I got FM8 for free when I bought something on Plugin Boutique. Nobody has ever given me a free DX-7.

There are dozens of reasons why software is great, being able to open old software on modern computers is not one of them.

A lot less of an issue than it ever was for me moving from one set-up to another. I used to basically have to rebuild all my songs from scratch every couple of years for 15 years. First on the 303s, then on a QX-7, then the SQD-1, then the Korg M1, Korg 01R/W and finally the Trinity. Even exporting/importing MIDI files was very hit and miss back then.

The bottom line is that I used to have to sell my old hardware so I could afford new hardware but it has never even crossed my mind to sell any of my software synths because the money we're talking about for them is a pittance. It's not worth the hassle. Seriously, the entire V Collection cost me $50. I never use it but why would I be bothered trying to sell it?

The resale value argument simply doesn't make any sense. The money involved in one is a couple of orders of magnitude greater than the other, there is no equivalence.

[VOODOO U]

And if you are playing covers, then the songwriters will get their share, too.

Not here in the States. A license is not required to earn an income performing covers for private parties, weddings etc.
In certain cases it's still the land of the free.

[TechHaus]

Someone is selling a minty looking MemoryMoog on Portland Craigslist for $9k right now.



At least vintage synths are generally repairable, unlike these modern pieces of garbage they sell.

Yeah but on the other hand, the modern ones are generally much more reliable and let's face it, you could buy 30 of Uli's Model D's for the price of that museum piece. If one breaks, just grab a spare. Behringer's is polyphonic already and just stack six of them slighly detuned and you've got a much bigger Unison wall going than the MemoryMoog would for a fraction of the price. And it would be both more reliable and "repairable" - if one breaks, just swap it out, total cost $300. How much will a repair on the MemoryMoog be? Got a good Curtis dealer so you can reliably source the CEM chips?

I'm not that guy. I don't even buy from amazon or walmart, because it's all junk. I wouldn't own a car made after 2012 because it's all unrepairable junk (except directly from the dealer and you will wait forever for parts like Bones and his analog keys). I've never ordered from temu or ali express. To me, buying ANOTHER exact copy of your broken synth because they are so cheap and disposable is disgusting.

And no need for anyone to nitpick and poke little holes and contradictions in what I just said.

[machinesworking]

Yeah but on the other hand, the modern ones are generally much more reliable and let's face it, you could buy 30 of Uli's Model D's for the price of that museum piece. If one breaks, just grab a spare. Behringer's is polyphonic already and just stack six of them slighly detuned and you've got a much bigger Unison wall going than the MemoryMoog would for a fraction of the price. And it would be both more reliable and "repairable" - if one breaks, just swap it out, total cost $300. How much will a repair on the MemoryMoog be? Got a good Curtis dealer so you can reliably source the CEM chips?

The price of repair and parts is not that high, the elephant is the complexity, these things are spaghetti inside. CEM chips are currently being made, thanks to all the neo vintage manufacturers out there like Moog Oberheim and Sequential etc. The cost isn't that high around $100 for the chip, the hourly repair cost is where money comes in.

To your point though, it's a 40 year old synth, whether it was made more durably hardly counts when all the soldering is that old etc.

[machinesworking]

I think the only truly redeeming part about hardware is it's not prone to software depreciation.

I think that's a very tenuous argument. My Analog Keys cost me $1500, second-hand, but I sold it for just over a grand. I lost more money on that one instrument than I have spent on softsynths in the last 3 or 4 years.

Native Instruments is a good example. You're safer on Windows but there is still software you can no longeer use in a modern setup from them, because they abandoned it etc.

The same is true of anything. Using my Analog Keys again, replacing a dud key to get it into a sellable condition cost me another $200, which is more than I have ever spent on NI software. I got a version of Komplete with a Maschine Mikro MIDI controller and I've bought TRK-01 and SCHEMA:Dark from them, both when they were half-price. I got FM8 for free when I bought something on Plugin Boutique. Nobody has ever given me a free DX-7.

There are dozens of reasons why software is great, being able to open old software on modern computers is not one of them.

A lot less of an issue than it ever was for me moving from one set-up to another. I used to basically have to rebuild all my songs from scratch every couple of years for 15 years. First on the 303s, then on a QX-7, then the SQD-1, then the Korg M1, Korg 01R/W and finally the Trinity. Even exporting/importing MIDI files was very hit and miss back then.

The bottom line is that I used to have to sell my old hardware so I could afford new hardware but it has never even crossed my mind to sell any of my software synths because the money we're talking about for them is a pittance. It's not worth the hassle. Seriously, the entire V Collection cost me $50. I never use it but why would I be bothered trying to sell it?

The resale value argument simply doesn't make any sense. The money involved in one is a couple of orders of magnitude greater than the other, there is no equivalence.

I was talking about being able to use it, i.e. the Memorymoog here is still around Kore is not, and I would doubt it would run on Windows 11, certainly not Mac OS Tahoe. I've been very lucky in a sense that the synths I chose to buy have all gone up in value, I think the only one that has gon down is the Uno, but I got it used for $100, I don't think it would be hard to sell it for $70.

I'm not one of those people with dozens of hardware synths, it takes it being useful in some way beyond soft synths, and I immeditaly sold my samplers when Reason came out, not to mention Kontakt a few years later. In the case of the Memorymoog, it's owning it since I was a kid.

[zerocrossing]

Who are any of us kidding, suggesting that any of us are into this because we don’t like to spend money?

Lol you have no idea! I've had to train myself to give myself an hourly wage so I won't waste time doing things without spending money on it over just getting it over with. I'm as cheap as they come, but I also learned to rationalize spending money on software I love to use by comparing it to my old weekend drinking habits. IOW spending up to $350 on booze and taxis etc. on the weekends in the past means if I really want Oblivion Drums for $129 I should just get it. Even with that in mind today I'm resampling drum kits in the MPC with external distortion boxes, I've got a half dozen of them, and most of the appeal of Heavyocity is the variety of distorted tones they bring. So I still haven't bought it. My dad is the type that will drive ten miles to save 10¢ a gallon on gas, I'm not there but close.

I totally use similar logic to justify purchasing things for my music, though I’m not a big drinker. Instead, I’ll think, “that’s what I’d spend on a nice sushi dinner, or movies.” Of course, I eat the nice dinners and see the movies as well. I don’t spend any money on stuff a lot of dudes my age do, though. I’ve got a friend who spends a lot of money on sports and sports memorabilia. They go to Vegas a few times a year and drop a lot on gambling. They’re doctors who work a lot, so they’re not broke, but I’m sure even with all my expensive gear and software, it’s a fraction of what they spend on what really amounts to as entertainment, which is how I view my spending as well, even though I was making a living off it for years.

[zerocrossing]

And when I go to a show to see live music I want to see live music being played by live musicians. I know many other people who feel the same way

and I would rather shoot myself than play in or listen to a cover band.

I totally get this feeling. I really dislike playing covers that are close to the originals. I've done a bunch over the last few years as practice on a new instrument and I quit doing them because I just don't find it enjoyable at all.

When I think of my favorite covers, very few sound like faithful imitations of the original; all the best are entirely new reworks of the original song. This is the opposite of what a cover band does.

Same, though it’s a great way to learn the craft. I was lucky to befriend a guy who was a much more experienced guitarist. He took me under his wing and taught me how to really listen to a song and replicate it as close as possible to the original. He was quite a taskmaster and would even expect me to replicate little mistakes that he found on the recordings. He basically kicked me out of the band because my vocal range was Ringo and he couldn’t accept a rhythm guitar player to not sing a John part in a Beatles song.

But it was a gift to be free of that. I never wanted to play covers ever again, at least not as they were originally recorded. I’ve always slipped covers into sets, but only if we had a good new take on them. Knowing how to replicate a song is crucial to knowing how to compose and arrange one, or rework one.

[zerocrossing]

And when I go to a show to see live music I want to see live music being played by live musicians. I know many other people who feel the same way

I guess I just have a much more expansive and open minded view of what I find great in a show.

[IvyBirds]

And when I go to a show to see live music I want to see live music being played by live musicians. I know many other people who feel the same way

and I would rather shoot myself than play in or listen to a cover band.

Then don't.

[IvyBirds]

And when I go to a show to see live music I want to see live music being played by live musicians. I know many other people who feel the same way

I guess I just have a much more expansive and open minded view of what I find great in a show.

Using 'open-minded' as a euphemism for having zero standards for actual performance is hilarious. Nice try trying to dress up a glorified karaoke night as high art, though

Imagine thinking it's 'open-minded' to defend a band hitting spacebar and miming along to a WAV file. Keep telling yourself you're cultured while you pay triple digits to watch a synchronized iTunes playlist

I guess I just value my money enough to pay for actual live musicianship, but hey—if you like paying hundreds of dollars to watch someone press 'Play' on an iPod and karaoke their way through a set, I love that for you

However don't confuse having an ''open mind" with lowered expectations. It’s not that you're more cultured or open-minded, you’re just easier to please and have lower standards

[andrelafosse]

<damn it's hard to reply to specifics with this many nested threads)

[andrelafosse]

<delete, wrong button hit>

[andrelafosse]

Using 'open-minded' as a euphemism for having zero standards for actual performance is hilarious. Nice try trying to dress up a glorified karaoke night as high art, though

Ivy, the guy you're insulting is a very accomplished instrumental musician with many gigs under his belt. He's done professional media scoring, and has worked with Laurie Anderson, for crying out loud.

Talking down to people who don't share your aesthetic preferences is bad enough, but you're spending a lot of time trashing fellow working musicians.

This stuff exists in DEGREES, man. It's not two diametrically opposed states of being, where things are either 100% live instrumental performance or 100% pre-recorded glorified karaoke. The overwhelming majority of recorded or sequenced tracks happen in conjunction with live playing in some capacity.

It's awesome that you're able to do all of your gigs under exactly the specifications that you want to, and have the budget and resources to consistently make music in the precise manner that matches your philosophical beliefs.

But not everybody can do that. Not everyone who CAN do that actually wants to. And no: not everybody who goes to shows cares about splitting these kinds of hairs. I mean, you're a function gig player. You must, on some level, realize that audiences in general are not nearly as invested in this sort of thing as you'd like to believe.

The elitist, holier-than-thou thing is NOT a good look. But you're going to write me off as not knowing what I'm talking about, so I'm probably jousting at a windmill...