Software vs Hardware

[BONES]

Thanks, but why is it any different than people who have multiple hardware synths?

Because it takes all the things that make hardware a PITA compared to working ITB and adds to it the different hassles and heartache that goes with using computers, multiplied by 10. How do you not see that?

People that are into hardware synths like I used to be talk about how important it is to have physical controls, and dedicated instruments, so why is it insane to treat computers as dedicated instruments that offer more flexibility?

Because those people are delusional and no-one should take any notice of them. They happily ignore all the hassles that working with hardware involves, pretending that it's nothing but sunshine and roses.

If I had a hardware set up with a DX7, a TX817, a SY99, a TG77, TX816, DX100, CZ100, and a DX21 and arranged them all in a corner in my studio, most people wouldn't find that insane in synth forums.

I think they might but, even if they didn't, you have to remember that people are idiots.

Many people would find that awesome, even if they were not into FM.

Many, many more would just find it kinda sad but be too polite to say anything. I don't really do polite, it feels dishonest most of the time. BTW, was that a CZ1000 or CZ101? When I got a CZ101, I got rid of my DX, it became redundant along with most of my analogue krap. The only decent FM synth I've ever come across was Maxx Claster's Toxic, which he licensed to Synapse before selling out to ImageLine. It was an FM synth that made sense and sounded great.

Then would it be insane to use DANTE, MADI, or some other Digital Audio network protocol to send all of those to a digital mixer and/or DAW?

Yes, yes it would for the simple reason that it overcomplicates what can be a simple process. Why would any sane person choose to make their life so f**king hard? It seems like you are punishing yourself for past misdeeds or something.

So why is it insane to do exactly that and have multiple computers networked together for audio and MIDI?

Because it is completely and utterly unnecessary and a huge waste of time, space and resources. There was a time when it was necessary, when none of us had any choice if we wanted to do what we wanted to do, but that time has passed. e.g. My first gig was just a 20 minute set on a Sunday afternoon at an outdoor concert put on by a local radio station. It took me and two helpers 90 minutes to set up and about half that time again to dismantle it all and pack it back up in the car. So I spent more than two hours f**king about for a 20 minute show. By any definition that was f**king insane but I didn't really have any other choice at the time. If I used that experience to justify doing something equally convoluted today, I think anyone would be justified in having me committed to an asylum.

Because Bones had said that the East German Industrial Chart is the only thing that matters to him

No, he didn't. He is well aware that East Germany hasn't existed for nearly 40 years and that there is no Industrial chart in any part of Germany.

I'm not sure HZ is saying much except how he works. Fair play to the guy he's clearly very good at making sound tracks. Personally I think it's great for someone so high profile to show that the tools they use, are largely attainable by anyone.

I'm not having a go at him, just wondering why anyone would care. Interesting, sure, but not actually relevant to anyone here, I'd have thought.

You're not that old are you?

As old as Hans Zimmer, yep.

The so called "eureka" moment for me was when I realized that most synths have the same controls that are pretty much universal

Seriously, that wasn't obvious to you 20 or 30 years prior? Really? I couldn't imagine approaching it any other way, I just don't see the point of it when there are superior ways of interacting with software.

[Uncle E]

Intense!

[IvyBirds]

The reality is I have never caused an accident of any kind

And I've never been in one. Situational awareness will save you most times, even from a rear-ender at the lights. Harder when you're a kid, to be fair, but not as an adult.

Yes situational awareness is important which is why it's obvious and hilarious you don't have any which is why you get banned so often.

As for me when I was 9 years old I was riding to school in a bus and a car hit the bus. So how exactly could situational prevent that in anyway? Should I have jumped out of the bus as it was moving down the highway?

When I was 44 I was stopped a traffic light on a multi lane road. In America when the light is red at an intersection everyone stops so all of us did.

There were cars in front of me, cars on both sides of me and a car behind me. We were all stopped. A truck driver had fallen asleep after being awake for at least 36 hours. He slammed into the car behind me killing that driver and seriously injuring his son, that car and the truck then hit my car injuring my back and breaking my arm and ribs in the process

Tell me genius how would situational awareness make a difference when I had no way to move? In fact as the truck hit me I had leaned over to turn the radio to a different station as I was at a red light and stopped. The doctor said not being aware the truck was going to hit the car behind me, especially as there was nothing I could have done anyway saved my life or prevented me from more serious injury as I was not tensed up when I got hit

It's obvious you lack basic logic and reason so the rest of your drivel doesn't even deserve a response. Situational awareness is a good thing, you should try it sometime

[sin night]

Thanks, but why is it any different than people who have multiple hardware synths?

Because it takes all the things that make hardware a PITA compared to working ITB and adds to it the different hassles and heartache that goes with using computers, multiplied by 10.

Unfortunately, I have to agree. I don’t know if it’s multiplied by 10, but I use hardware and the last thing I’d want/use it’s a secondary computer. Actually I have one, because I upgraded my daw a few months ago, I switched back from Windows to Mac and I have some legacy software (for example some editors… but not just that) forcing me to keep that computer around.

I tried syncing Reason once… but going back and forth between two computers is far from being my favourite workflow. I have shared keyboard, mouse and screen between the computers, but the action of switching between computers really breaks my workflow, to the point I rarely use my old computer, I try to avoid it as much as I can.

I have an old Reason license on that computer, guess how often I use it…
I could use Live on my laptop while my main studio computer runs Cubase… but it never happens.

If I run two daws, I have to make sure they are in sync. Then there’s file management, because I’d need to bounce audio files and send them to the main computer to import them into the main daw (unless I just record the audio, but you also know the drawbacks)… it just slows down everything, compared to running everything inside a single application on a single computer.

Unless there are good technical reasons for doing do (for example: the resources of a single computer are not enough to handle the whole session, or maybe a specific piece of software is very unstable but you still want to use it for some reasons), I’d stick with a single computer.

Running software synths on a different computer, unless it’s inside a daw on that computer as well (and you have to sync the daws), requires to give up to vst parameter automation and use midi instead (which has lower value resolution and it’s not sample accurate… and you deal with control change numbers instead of parameter names). It may not be an issue for some people, but you give up one of the advantages of software…

Syncing daws is not an easy affair. Midi clock is not that accurate (this is an issue for hardware drum machines/sequencers as well…), there are other solutions but you’re adding a complexity layer to your workflow.


Parameter resolution through midi is limited (unless you use nrpn, sysex or multiple control changes - but I wouldn’t call them “user friendly”). That’s one of the big drawbacks of hardware.
For example, recently I bought a Jomox MBase 11 and some parameters have a finer resolution on the device than what I can achieve using midi. The same goes for the filter on the Korg Minilogue (unless I use sysex, I think), it has 1024 possible values but you have only 128 steps using midi (values in between are lost). Software is a clear winner on this point; I could only dream to have vst parameter automation, which is both sample accurate and high resolution, for my hardware synths.

I could go on… both hardware and software have advantages and limitations; the last thing I’d want is to bring the limitations of a solution into the other one…


Speaking of controllers, everybody is different. There are different needs, for example performing vs working in the studio in front of a daw.
In the studio, I use the mouse most of the time. I spend my whole day doing software development work, using mouse and keyboard is natural to me. In the time I’d spend to raise my hand and reach for a knob, I can do a few actions with the mouse (nevermind if I have to map that knob to make it work).


That’s the harsh reality to me. I use hardware (but also software as well) and I won’t give up it, but I have to be honest about the issues…

[pdxindy]

Parameter resolution through midi is limited (unless you use nrpn, sysex or multiple control changes - but I wouldn’t call them “user friendly”).

Yes... parameter resolution via midi is crude... too crude for various synth controls. There are so many headaches in setting up midi controllers in order to deal with this. The whole business is a freakin nightmare.

And then even in a best case scenario, the mouse and screen is still far faster and the mouse can handle every situation such as drawing waveforms, MSEG curves, etc.

The mouse is literally 10 times faster than any controller setup.

[Vortifex]

I've always found mapping MIDI controllers to be a pain in the arse. If I want to do very basic mapping of a couple of plugins in a single project it's fine. But attempting to standardise a comprehensive mapping of multiple plugins across multiple projects is basically pointless and pretty much impossible.

[sin night]

I mapped some controllers in the past, but I ended up using the mouse most of the time.

Nowadays I try to keep a minimalistic approach, when I play with a controller I play with cutoff most of the time; so if I do any mapping / setup any default, usually I limit myself to cutoff (always in the very same place, to help muscle memory) and maybe a few others if they really make sense.


You know what I use a lot? The remote control of my audio interface, to handle the output volume, output A/B and mute groups for inputs. These are dedicated controls, they never change their function (almost, the volume jog is shared with headphones, I just need to press a button to switch).

I get a similar kind of user experience with hardware with a one knob per function interface (usually it’s analog / virtual analog). When I want to turn the cutoff, I instantly know where it is…

I use also hardware which has some combo / submenu and I curse whenever I don’t remember how to do something… there’s a learning curve which I would avoid working with a computer and a decent piece of software.


Many years ago, Reason 4 had a good integration with the BCR2000, where it would follow the currently selected device and update the mappings and the values (it had encoders with a led ring for those who don’t know that controller). But it was a relatively simple closed system, so they could provide that kind of tight integration at the time…
All you had to do was remembering what the 32 encoders did depending on the device


Whenever it’s hardware or software, there are always some compromises in the way we interact with our tools, that’s the sad reality…

[vitocorleone123]

I sometimes map one or two knobs on my Keystep 37. I don't need all 4, let alone banks of them.

My least used hardware synth is my Digitone because it isn't 1:1 - I'll actually often use Overbridge to control it, instead, becasue the mouse is faster for me.

[IvyBirds]

Unfortunately, I have to agree. I don’t know if it’s multiplied by 10, but I use hardware and the last thing I’d want/use it’s a secondary computer.

It's obvious you don't know what Audiogridder is, but even if you don't use Audiogridder you say you use hardware synths

Actually I have one, because I upgraded my daw a few months ago, I switched back from Windows to Mac and I have some legacy software (for example some editors… but not just that) forcing me to keep that computer around.

Audiogridder would help you there

I tried syncing Reason once… but going back and forth between two computers is far from being my favourite workflow. I have shared keyboard, mouse and screen between the computers, but the action of switching between computers really breaks my workflow, to the point I rarely use my old computer, I try to avoid it as much as I can.

But there is not need to do that

I have an old Reason license on that computer, guess how often I use it…
I could use Live on my laptop while my main studio computer runs Cubase… but it never happens.

Again no need to do that

If I run two daws, I have to make sure they are in sync.

Why would you ever run two DAWs at the same time?

You don't understand what I am doing or how Audiogridder works when you are agreeing with Bones

When you use Audiogridder you install a tiny piece of software on all your computers on the network. Then on your main computer where you are running your DAW you run it exactly the same as you do now. If you want to to run a plugin on another computer you run the Audiogridder plugin right in your DAW just like any other plugin, you point that at the other computer and it will run audio gridder on the other computer and you can launch any plugin installed on that computer. You remain right in the DAW and just like with any other plugin you will see the GUI and be able to control everything with your mouse right on the same exact computer computer your DAW is running on

You are not running two DAWs and you are just running a single DAW the difference is the plugins you are running in Audiogridder are being run on the other computer and using its CPU. It's just a client/server relationship between the two machines on the same network. From your perspective in your DAW you won't notice a difference

Your DAW sees the plugin on the other computer EXACTLY like it's all running on the same computer so you don't have to sync anything and all the DAW automaton and everything visible to the DAW is exactly the same. All the Audi, MIDI, Automation, the graphics and everything else gets transmitted right through the network. You won't even notice you are using two computers it's pretty much seamless. There are MANY major advantages to this

The first advantage is every instance of Audiogridder on the other computers gets by default its own core. So if you are using a CPU intensive plugin like DIVA for example it will run on its own core with no overhead of anything else. The performance enhancements you get with that are pretty incredible. So for me if the other computer is an i7 with 12 cores I will run up to 10 plugins on it each one will have its own core, that leaves two free for the OS and anything else.

Another huge advantage is that Audiogridder works on Windows and Mac and can host any format. So in your case you could run it on your Mac in Logic and then inside of logic use it on your windows machine to run Windows only VSTs inside of Logic and treat them exactly the same

Or if you are running Protools and want to run VSTs which are not supported you can do that also

The other main advantage is that it gives new life to old computers, as it allows you to run plugins on them that might not be the fastest or have many cores. For example I have a rather old laptop that is now 12ish years old maybe 13. It is running Windows 7. It's screen has a giant scratch in it, normally it wouldn't be of much use, but for me it's my Reverb server. I run reverbs on it that means they are not hitting my CPU they are hitting its CPU

The best part of Audiogridder is that it's totally free and pretty simple to setup. All you need for it to work well is a fast network. You can get a decent Gigabit router on Amazon for $50 or less and some Ethernet cables and you are good to go

https://audiogridder.com/

[IvyBirds]

This is a great video about Audiogridder and shows the advantages of using it with multiple computers. In this video he is composing with a lot of pretty big sample libraries from Kontact, HALion, and Spitfire.

Note that he is already using a pretty beefy Mac Studio with 128gb of RAM but that is not enough so he is offloading the Spitfire Plugins and Libraries to another computer so it's CPU and it's RAM can run those plugins all within the same instance of Cubase

Note that in the very first part of the video he is comparing it with another similar program called Vienna Ensemble. That software is not free but has the advantage of keeping the massive sample libraries he is using loaded into RAM on the server computers as if you switch between projects it's instant as they are already loaded. With Audiogridder it's exactly like just loading a project in your DAW and any massive sample libraries will have to be read off your drive



He also does not have a monitor attached to his server PC that is running Spitfire. I have tried that but prefer to have monitors on a keyboard, and a mouse on them.

[sin night]

I already knew about Audio Gridder, but I never tried it, maybe I should… that’s a “computing server”, it’s more akin to adding resources to the main computer than using a secondary computer (from a user perspective) and I would switch way less often between the computers.


For me, the reason for running two daws is accessing some proprietary built in synth/fx.
Reason can be run as a plugin (as Reason Rack) and maybe Audio Gridder would do the job for me; while Live is a useful to approach things differently than my main daw (I’m a Cubase user and that’s not going to change for the foreseeable future), so I may still be tempted to run it on a secondary computer as a “performance tool” for some tasks.

There are people using two computer with two daws, one for sequencing / synths and the other for recording / mixing: that’s something I’d avoid (whenever there’s not a strong reason for doing so).

Audio Gridder could do the job, but some editors need to be run as standalone (and I need to connect the device to the old computer as well… maybe I should try doing something more advanced with networked midi, but that’s another subject).

Speaking of network infrastructure, I already have a Gigabit network in place in my homestudio (and it has been so for at least 15 years, I always avoided 100Mbit), so that’s not an issue (unless I manage to saturate it… ).

One of the reasons I didn’t try the Audio Gridder solution yet is… my old computer is quite noisy. Using it as a server requires to move it out of the room (but then I’d have to bring that Gigabit network to another room, which is not easy in a hold building), I don’t want it on all the time when working. At the moment, I turn it on only when I need. If I want to work with Reason or anything “legacy”, I do what I need to do and then I turn it off as soon as possible. I know it’s a bit of a silky reason (also, for standalone editors I need it in my room, unfortunately), but that’s how it is…

[seafire]

ReWire... was that a thing when you could use Reason and a diff host, one as slave, one as master, but then it changed so only Reason could be master or something like that....?

[Uncle E]

Running Maschine, FL Studio, or Reason as plugins gives you a DAW within a DAW. I’ve been doing this in some form or another for over 20 years, it’s a great way to work if there isn’t a single DAW that does what you need.

The Usual Suspects made a DSP Bridge that (I think) works like Audio Gridder. It works great. My old laptop is exactly the same size as my new one so I just stack the new one on top, connected over Thunderbolt.

[Uncle E]

ReWire... was that a thing when you could use Reason and a diff host, one as slave, one as master, but then it changed so only Reason could be master or something like that....?

Also Ableton Link.

[vurt]

Running Maschine, FL Studio, or Reason as plugins gives you a host within a host.

or bidule