by tom moodyComments Off on "Double Carbon (Hardware)" and notes on hardware vs software sequencing
"Double Carbon (Hardware)" [mp3 removed]
This track "slices" and re-orders drum hits in a previously recorded Richard Devine Reaktor Sinebeats patch. Other beats were then added.
Pedagogical techno? -- none of those mystifying effects chains, everything as up front as possible.
Tradeoffs working with a hardware sequencer vs computer sequencer (or at least my computer sequencer):
1. No mouse (it's all buttons, knobs and key commands)
2. Gives you the ability to quickly and intuitively:
--add effects to single notes or drum hits,
--build a groove (with up to 8 channels)
--timestretch and beatslice
1. Effects tracks for each track; more or less unlimited tracks
2. Easier to:
--move tracks around and visualize how they are layered
--record and trim samples (as opposed to slicing)
--mix track levels
--integrate other sampled material
Addendum to the above comparison: Writing tunes in the MIDI piano roll is about as equally painful as writing them with step keys. But the piano roll is graphically superior to the list views and key-by-key pitch adjustment you are stuck with if you use step keys. Hence, in conclusion, hardware is better for beats and grooves and software trumps the beatbox for any kind of sophisticated tunesmithing.