Yes, we’re slaves because our self-expression masterpieces are not subjectively valued by other people enough for them to want to throw as much money/bananas/hugs/recognition/etc at us as we want them to.
Yes. We’re totally enslaved.
Or... maybe we’re not slaves. Maybe slaves are slaves, and we’re just people who whine about stuff.
I too use real guitars. I’ve been working on my “brutal” guitar/drums tone for many many years (mostly with 7-string guitars, like NoizMan).
Right now I use a TC Electronic VPD1 mixed with some mild amp simulation and a tiny bit of EQ on the DAW’s tracks. But I try to be as minimalistic as possible, the lesser the plugins the better, in order to save CPU resources, and so that it’s not much of a pain to move my sound to another DAW in the future.
I really dislike sequenced guitars. People say powerchords are supposed to be “easier” to simulate, but to my ears most sequenced powerchords I’ve heard are as painfully obvious as any other kind of sequenced guitars.
Having said that, I think TJMusic is very close to reaching nice sounding acoustic strumming. At least it has some “life” to it, which is a must when simulating guitars I think.
Hmm I think this thread has lost its purpose.
This was supposed to be about finding the most brutal tracks, not about everyone posting any rock-ish/metal-ish stuff they can think of in their portfolio, LOL!
Oh sure, I have recovered: When I joined, I had no sales. Soon after that, I had 4 sales. Six months ago, I had 4 sales. One month ago, I had 4 sales. Today, I have 4 sales. Tomorrow, I will have 4 sales. 6 months from now, 4.
A year from now, I wil have 5 sales (see? I’m not pessimistic! :D).
If other marketplace peeps can use watermarked music from audiojungle in their videos then can I use watermarked aftereffects animations or watermarked stock footage in my audio previews? Only seems fair.
Of course the audio player would have to be updated to allow video playback but I don’t see why that would be very difficult…I’d be happy to provide links back to the watermarked file author or whatever. Just seems a little biased towards video-fx/footage guys having cooler available options.
I think this would at least double the work, logistics-wise, that must be done by AJ. Reviewers would have to check that videos are in proper formats, are allowed for AJ use, etc. Also, users would psychologically relate some specific imagery to our music, which I’m not sure is such a good idea. The “video preview” would then have to be an optional thing, which means a different set of conditional validations and verifications by the system, making the review process more complex.
But who knows. Maybe it could work, if done right.
PT did have MIDI capabilities way before PT8. But those MIDI capabilities (especially sequencing-related) were famously incredibly mediocre. It was laughable. At least, compared to Logic and Digital Performer.
Indeed it was since around version 8 that Digidesign began to pay attention to MIDI-related features in general (including adding VIs, like brandonamatias points out.)
PT forte had always been audio editing. But nowadays all major DAWs are pretty capable in all regards.
Well, for starters 24-bit is not new at all. If it ever had a “new buzz” phase, it was, if I recall correctly, back in 2004-ish when you began to see “affordable” 24 bit interfaces. And it might have had its fair share of “OMG this is the latest so I have to get it” market for a while. But then it calmed down and it became just another option.
I don’t think the change from 16-bit to 24-bit is as important as HD in video. HD video really is immensely superior to the older standard resolutions, and anyone can notice the huge visual difference immediately.
With 24-bit I think it depends on what you’re doing. I’ve never thought to myself “God I wish I could record this in 24-bit, it’d be so much better!” when I’m recording, say, some heavy metal stuff.
On the other hand there have been times when I have genuinely wished for 24-bit resolution recording and/or playback. Examples would be, while making an ambient piece, or while trying to capture/play the complete decay of a cymbal hit, down to the lowest amplitude of its release. Or foley recording.
For those kinds of things you really notice the difference. That is, you really notice the limits of 16 bits.
Sometimes the extra resolution can even be annoying. There’s been times while recording interviews outdoors when I’ve switched camera mics from 24 down to 16 bit, because the extra resolution just captures a lot of unwanted background noise.
Hope that made sense. Basically I think it’s not a fashion or a buzz (too old for that anyway). You either need it or you don’t, based on what you’re trying to achieve. It depends on your use case.