the gearlust thread part deux: post your GAS

gearlust
toys
gear
gas

#1582
@cuckoo, out of curiosity, could you please clarify "ins outs and master around half level" - what does that look like?

Basically it means that during the recording and mixing process I don’t want the audio levels close to hitting the distortion limit. […]

yes, understood, I meant more like what dB figures would that look like? e.g. -6 in, -6 out, -6 master already stacks to something pretty quiet.


#1583
@cuckoo, out of curiosity, could you please clarify "ins outs and master around half level" - what does that look like?

Basically it means that during the recording and mixing process I don’t want the audio levels close to hitting the distortion limit. […]

yes, understood, I meant more like what dB figures would that look like? e.g. -6 in, -6 out, -6 master already stacks to something pretty quiet.

I don’t know about the numbers. I’m just winging it.


#1584

As a rule of thumb you typically want your final mixdown to be hitting -6dB. Every mastering website I’ve looked at and any mastering engineer I’ve spoken to ask for this. For me, the first thing I do when I get my audio into my DAW is pull all the faders down to -10dB. At this point it is quiet. You can turn up your amp or speakers or whatever you use and away you go. Also, just by adding a compressor the levels jump back up again and the result is a more cohesive sounding mix.

I’m not sure if what I just wrote will help anybody in this conversation. You guys were getting deep about this K-mix ohm business but at any rate I’d thought I’d chip in.


#1585

Sorry no GAS for me by the way. The wife would go hammer and tong if she even detected the smallest spec of GAS omitting from a single spore of my musically inclined being. For now, I want to be much more stricter on myself too.


#1586
Sorry no GAS for me by the way. The wife would go hammer and tong if she even detected the smallest spec of GAS omitting from a single spore of my musically inclined being. For now, I want to be much more stricter on myself too.

Lol very funny post


#1587

I would love to hear more examples of the Avalanche reverb through synths (even the OP-1)


#1588

OP1! I can see that an OP1 would pair up really well with my modular. I see an OP1 on the horizon in 2017. Happy I kept my lovely handmade case from my last one.


#1589

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6G96PgU2c8


#1590

On the waiting list for a Cirklon.

Should arrive when I’m 40 :smiley:

#1591

Trying to not convince myself that my OP-1 for initial ideas and fed into the new MPC X is a lovely workflow


#1592

^ This

*Edit would go for live over cost of x.


#1593

was thinking about picking up an OTO Biscuit, anyone own one? or does anyone know of any similar hardware fx units?


#1594

Good luck finding one. I’m fighting the urge to buy his friends Bim and Bam.


#1595

Is anyone trying to justify a new MPC? I wonder if it would be best friends with the OP-1?


#1596

@joesy_op I’m struggling to understand whether new MPCs are sampler replacements or computer replacements. Seems more like a complete in-the-box recording solution if you don’t want to use a DAW. It just doesn’t feel like a classic MPC to me. But maybe that would be more useful than another sampler.


#1597
Is anyone trying to justify a new MPC? I wonder if it would be best friends with the OP-1?

Has dual USB hub so should team up with op1 pretty good.

Prob gonna grab the Live if it’s solid. Seems like a swiss army knife that ticks all the boxes OT doesn’t (linear sequencing, 64 voice sample polyphony + 16 audio tracks, multisampled instruments, browseable user drumkits/instruments, name tracks etc, daw integration/separate track export, simple looper function, ableton style clip launching etc etc). Seems like OT/Op1/Mpc live + pedals would be sweet small footprint rig for shows.

It still does everything an mpc1000 did (I think?) plus more. Just use it how you want to. Doesn’t have to be a ‘daw in a box’ if you don’t want it to be that. Tho that idea is appealing for sofa jams/writing/sampling/making instruments etc.

Nick sonicstate saying the screen response is ‘snappy’ so unless it’s full of bugs I’m gonna grab one for sure…


#1598

@Callofthevoid Yeah, it seems like it does a lot of what you’ve previously described wanting. Do you think OT and MPC would be necessary, or is there plenty of overlap? Reason I ask is that the OT looks nice for sequencing, effects, etc, but in the end seems very sample focused. I would only want to get one (if I were to put up the money finally), so knowing which feature set best aligns with what I want to do would take some research. I would be curious if the OT+OP+MPC provides too much overlap that it makes for too many decisions of which to use for what instead of getting to music making. OT+OP doesn’t seem to cause anyone issues in this way around here.


To elaborate on my “DAW in a box” concern (in hopes that others weigh in and provide some feedback) – I currently need something that makes recording easier than firing up my old Power Mac G5 with 4 ins and outs. So that means I need a new audio interface at the very least to keep doing DAW recording. Then I get torn on whether I would use an iPad effectively for this as it is even more convenient. I wanted an MPC, but this complicates things even further since the new ones do everything a DAW will do. I would have a hard time justifying the cost of MPC Live vs MPC 1000/500 if I don’t use the DAW features. In the end, I just don’t want to throw money at every solution to find that I don’t use some of what I paid for, if that makes sense.

#1599

@GCF Yeah the mpc is almost exactly what I’ve been wanting for a sofa jam box that I can integrate with studio. Looks really useful for live too. Using Op1 sequencers via the USB should be pretty fast/interesting using sounds on the mpc etc.

There’s def some overlap between the Mpc and OT but I think theyll naturally take on roles when they’re next to each other. OT is the natural choice for weird/random. Mpc for more traditional, long passages/chord progressions etc and polyphonic instruments. They can both do both to an extent but each seems to have pretty clear strengths. And Obvs they could both be sampled in to each other, so for shows maybe only one would be necessary. OT probably most fun for that, with scenes etc.

I love OT for its ‘this song just came from nowhere’ voodoo. But it’s the last place I’d want to record anything approaching a pre-formed idea of traditional, linear stuff with parts longer than 64 steps etc. It’s doable but involves Pattern chains or tempo divisions etc. Vibe killer if your half way through an idea and then realise you want to have an instrument play a long passage over shorter ones etc. I’m not making techno, more like weird pop/psych and I often feel hemmed in working inside OT. But at the same time its a super inspirational box.

Can’t really advise on your Daw situation. Depends how many inputs you need etc. Mpc only has a couple I think and only 8 tracks standalone. Maybe that’s enough that you wouldn’t need a computer/daw? For me it’s more like a great scratchpad that I can just plug in to computer and open the vst inside Sonar or Ableton and have everything there to go back and forth with…


#1600

@Callofthevoid Great feedback, thanks. I think the thing I need most is the fluidity of being able to quickly move to a new instrument without having to move stuff, follow wires, etc. This may mean just moving to a patch panel and using a 2 or 4 input interface.


#1601

Still wanting to sell my filterbank so I can grab a Space!