"Actually, I’m wondering more and more if the software industry is the future. Between developers/companies complaining about piracy and sometimes giving up because of it and musicians/users fed up by abandonware, erratical, abusive registration processes and OS or hosts dependency, I see less and less the future there. "
I don’t think software will be deterred by any of these issues.Basically if you buy from companies with a strong track record like Native Instruments or Spectrasonics you can be as insured of a future as any hardware company (look at EMu for example) . I agree that hybrids either standalone updatable or tied to a computer like Maschine are part of the future.
As big an issue to me is the usage whether solo studio/hobbyist or commercial recording. There is no difference as far as quality demand from the hobbyist or solo studio user. However the commercial studio user has to fulfill clients asking for specific sounds ,mostly heard in todays music. You’d be hard pressed to quickly dial up a Gangham Style bassine or a dutch house comp chord from a 10 year old Roland unit. It certainly can be done but the time it would take would likely cost you repeat business . I have 11 hardware synths including a JP 8080 and thats the only one that gets used and now its less and less.
To me ,for studio use, software is better in nearly every way and NI Kontakt is probably the best single sound generating bang for the buck thats made today; hardware or software.
The new Roland Integra-7 looks mighty interesting for more traditional sounds. It’s a pro device at a pro-ish price.
For modern electronic dance stuff, the Virus TI are a lot deeper than many give them credit for. There are plugins that have aspects of what the Virus offers, but I’m not aware of any that do everything it does while also delivering such an enormous library out of the box.
Quite a few hardware manufacturers offer VST control panels for their hardware… Lexicon comes to mind… however, in the case of the Motif, its a much closer relationship of course!
The editor is probably better than the cheaper one I linked, but the cheaper one does the trick and is not priced stupidly.
The VSTi version is nice, but it really just does stuff you can already do using the MIDI track with CC’s and PC’s. Once you’ve been in the editor and see what channel stuff responds to, it’s easy to make a MIDI track template for the QS8.
My 2 cents… don’t mess with the maps. It’s a time consuming hassle. The CC’s are just stuff like velocity, aftertouch, sustain pedal, note on, note off etc… PC is patch messages that set various parameters in the target instrument. Cubase is able to send that stuff on just the plane ol’ MIDI track.
Beyond the CC’s you know, there are a ton of free floating ones that various vendors assign to their inards. You can also map your own CC’s to some. So for example, the QS internal reverb can receive PC messages to pick modes. It can also be mapped to a CC to select the amount. On the QS itself it can be mapped to one of those sliders. In fact, a lot of factory patches are mapped to reverb amount on one of the 4 faders.
That fader is tied to a CC#. You can send that same CC# from Cubase and set the reverb level from a MIDI track using automation just like you could with a VSTi.
yes, you can send the Patch/Program information to the QS from Cubase. That’s one of the things the MIDI Instrument does. So, go to MIDI instrument and tell it what MIDI channel your QS is on. The 7 has a map already created. Now load the MIDI instrument onto the MIDI track. The patches will be available in the patch list under the normal spot (like where selecting a drum map is).
That will get you started. But, the MIDI instrument thing is just hiding the MIDI messaging that you can already do on a MIDI track. Once you see what is happening, you should be able to eliminate the MIDI instrument step.
I don’t think I’ve seen much “new”. The Integra Steve linked is just a rehash of the sounds that already exist with some newer capabilities. It’s not a bad thing, it just isn’t really a “new” module. More of a part III. Same with the Motif etc… Nothing new, just getting the last bit of mileage out of the product line. Unfortunately most of them haven’t completely embraced trying to integrate to DAWs yet. Slowly, I think they won’t have a choice. You see more editors and stuff popping up all the time. For example, DSI Mopho has a group of people finishing off the editor that was half assed done by the people who were supposed to do it for DSI. Another group is doing the Alesis Venom editor. This is echoing throughout the analogue and rack module ecosystem now.
Heck, I have an actual modular synth … 100% old school analog, but Expert Sleepers (and I guess others like MOTU) have come up with a way to use audio card outputs to send the DC coupled CV signals. So, I can run my modular without MIDI from Cubase!
This technology merge will continue I think. There’s something about laying your hands on the knobs, sliders and keys that computers just can’t duplicate.
I am waffling between this and the Integra-7. I like having something that’s GM capable around, and I’ve just had a thing for multi-timbral polysynths of all kinds since forever.
Wish there was a local place that had both of these things available to demo. I just want whatever has the best soundset. (Er, the Integra’s probably better overall… but I’d like to see if it’s $1600 better.)
Steve, just started reading this entire thread and what strikes home is when you said …you’re not interested in something named " mo-phat". This cracked me up. Yes it is a matter of taste and I DO NOT have any tolerance
for " mo-phat " either.
So much of the libraries I bring up are just that too. I was inspired enough by your ideas I just put new batteries
In my old TR-505 and found the ac adapter for my Roland MT-32. …really
I think your analogy about the “wheel” is a great one. I believe I need to do the same thing. And…nothing is really ever a step backwards…you said it right, sideways
), I have developed a certain admiration for your “sideways” ways. 