HELP!! I want to produce trance

S

son

New member
:confused:
I want to produce trance.
I own a korg trinity+, waldorf Q rack, MAC G4{I'm buying this week and selling my PC PIII500Mhz 256RAM[good choice?]}.
pleas help me to build and connect a setup for producing trance.
what to buy?, software to use?, hardware to use? soundcard?, how to use midi?, how to connect all? etc.
I need a guro :)
Q: do I need a MIDI keyboard?
(i want to use the KORG trinity and the Q rack)
Q rack connected to channel 1 MIDI OR AUDIO?
korg connected to channel 2 MIDI OR AUDIO?
in the software sequencer. right?
I'm A Newbie sorry.
:o
I want the soundcard Luna2 + Luna 2496 I/O box (8 additional analog I/Os) . good choice?
http://www.creamware.de/en/Products/Luna2/default.asp
 
Last edited:
Luna 2 = bad choice for newbies, take my word (otherwise Creamware rocks!)
PC + Cakewalk Sonar = good choice (fastest learning curve) unless you wanna spend a year just learning to use Logic or Cubase (and to find it's still slow and painful to use).

Trinity has a midi keyboard so why would you need another one?

Connect midi out from Trinity to midi in on your computer and vice versa. Midi thru from Trinity to Q rack (unless you have more than one midi out ports on your computer -> just connect one to Q rack midi in).

Audio OUTs from synths to audio INs on your mixer / sound card(s).

Just my 0.001 cents... feel free to disagree.

Toni
www.mp3.com/NativeAlien

PS. my track "Aroma Therapy " was the featured song on mp3.com today!!! Yaaaahoooooo =)))
 
One more thing : PC is just as good as MAC these days, or I'd say even better and even more reliable. Just get a fast AMD Thunderbird and SCSI drive!!!!

The only difference between MAC and PC really is that MACs come with SCSI drives by default as PCs usually come with IDE drives. Just get a scsi drive and you can get a twice more powerful PC with the same price (or less) of a lame MAC.

IBM Ultrastar SCSI drives would probably be the best value for your money - Fast & reliable

Toni
www.mp3.com/NativeAlien
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hello
Toni thank you for the help and good info.
I want to be a pro not a newbie so I'm willing to work very hard.

PS. PC is not as good as MAC.:D
I'd say MAC even better and even more reliable .:D

I'm buying a MAC.

733MHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache
128MB SDRAM memory
40GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-RW drive
NVIDIA GeForce2 MX
Gigabit Ethernet
56K internal modem
108-key Apple Pro Keyboard
Apple Pro optical Mouse
Apple Studio Display (17" flat panel)
Apple LCD display this thin film transistor (TFT) active matrix flat panel display is sheathed in a stunning crystal enclosure. With a resolution of 1280 x 1024 pixels it offers the workspace of a typical 21-inch CRT display.
Sensational display performance
•17-inch (viewable) active-matrix liquid crystal display that delivers sharp text and graphics
•1280 by 1024 pixels for display of page layouts, large images, or even spreadsheets
•Designed to work with the Power Mac G4 digital graphics interface for distortion-free images
•Incredibly wide (160* horizontal and vertical) viewing angle for maximum visibility and color performance
•Lightning-fast pixel response for full-motion digital video playback
•Support for 16.7 million saturated colors, for use in all graphics-intensive applications
 
Ok, your decision ofcourse, and I won't say anything about graphics processing coz that's not my cup of tea,
but with the price of a G4 733mhz you can get a Thunderbird 1400mhz with a VERY fast SCSI drive!!
Remember, 1400mhz TB beats a 1700mhz Pentium 3 in speed!! That's pure power!!
And think about all the native synths and effects that you can run on a 1400mhz TB!!
You can barely record/playback a couple tracks of audio with one or two FX on a 733mhz G4
especially with an U-ATA drive, and don't even mention native (software) synths.

PC is just as "PRO" as Mac these days, if not even more so. It's just an old tabu (it used to be vice versa a long time ago).
You just got to buy the right parts into your PC!

Also, for PRO quality you practically need 24-bits and AT LEAST 48khz for audio (needs CPU power and
drive speed unless you want to invest thousands of $ for an external HD recorder which is just plain stupid
with today's powerful PCs and excellent software like Sonar ;), you can quote me on that). Btw. some of
the best external multi-track HD recorders that are out there, are based on PC technology, ofcourse.

High price doesn't always mean quality. And PC is just as reliable. And FASTER, a LOT faster.

Another point: Everyone is a newbie at the beginning! No equipment will make you pro from day 1!
With PC you'll be "PRO" faster because it's easier to learn.

Ok obiously you already made up your mind so I'll shut up now. Still, IMHO I think you're making a mistake.
A big mistake. Don't just believe what I say, ask other people too. But I bet a lot of "PRO" people will agree with me.
Mac is dead. MOT. :bat:

Toni
www.mp3.com/NativeAlien

PS. sorry for shouting a word here and there... I have a neural condition :D
 
Those tests were conducted by Apple on Altivec optimized applications - nothing to do with audio processing !!!

Read some objective tests run by 3rd parties and you'll see how things really are. I'll try to find some links later on... back to work now.


Toni
www.mp3.com/NativeAlien
 
Just a quick couple points I'd like to add...

1. 1280x1024 isn't a very high resolution. If you're using Cubase you'll be running out of screen space like mad. For doing audio with multiple plugins and such, 1600x1200 is a good starting point.

2. Ultra ATA is not scsi, it's the same tech used on PCs, so your disk performance won't be any faster.

3. The apple benchmarks are extremely biased. PPC rawks at certain very specific operations, but falls by the wayside with lots of modern multimedia and floating point operations. I have a couple friends who use 500mHz macs for audio and my 500 celeron used to run laps around them... Then I upgraded to a P3 533 (which is quite outdated already) and with the doubled bus speed I can eat them for lunch.

4. The reason you hear that a lot of pros use Macs for audio is because it's what they're used to. Macs used to kill PCs for midi stability and such, but the OS is so outdated now (unless you want OS X which is plagued with problems, much like Win95, OS X is a new breed that needs serious refinement and bug killing) that PCs have surpassed them.

5. With PCs you will always have more flexible and economical upgrade choices. My system started out with a Celeron 500, 128mb ram, 10gig hd and 50x cdrom. Now it's a P3-533, 256mb ram, 10+20+20gig hds, 50x cdrom, 32x10x4 cd-rw. I took it there with the same case, motherboard, power supply, etc just by spending a couple hundred bucks or less every 6 months or so. And that doesn't even include all the other minor, but handy upgrades-- wireless keyboard & mouse, up to a 19" monitor, video card with tv out for multimedia shows (only $150!), the list goes on...

It just sounds to me like you've bought into some sales pitch, and are under the assumption that you must have a Mac to do audio, and hey it's more expensive so it must be better! If you go with a PC you won't be limited by the miniscule size of the Mac market when looking for software (freeware, cracked and/or purchased) and the hardware upgrades you will be craving before long.

Anyways, that's my $2.50. Do what you want, but really REALLY do some research beyond apple.com and your 50 year old buddy who's an engineer at some recording studio.
-mj-
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How about getting a RAID motherboard? you could have a couple of 30 gig ATA-100 hard disks in a striping array and it would be as quick as a SCSI drive at a fration of the price. Or, how about SCSI drives in RAID....
 
mac vs' pc. part 1

MAC VS' PC - PART 1
dear son.
the mac vs pc is along story, from the past through the future.
but you have to know the truth about the two platform.
1. in terms of cpu performance, the ppc 740 series as known as (G4) power pc-
base on (RISC) technology is far superior from intel p4 or amd chip. why???
first this is the reason why super computers like SUN - SGI - use a risc cpu to process complex task's.
p4 and AMD use more pipelines for per instruction to calculation, at this point in time the G4 cpu use only -
seven pipelines so the result are faster calaulaiton per clock cycle(this is the most important to encode mp3 files-
or convert sound files!!!)

2. OS comparison.
all windows version suffering from bug's and thousandth of virus type.
all win. version non compatible with each other.
windows incapable to recognize more then 1 gigb of ram, you need to move to win. NT
mac os resolution support up to 1920x1440 not(1280x1024) wrong value
GET THIS WINDOWS DO NOT SUPPORT - FIREWIRE

"FireWire is one of the fastest peripheral standards ever developed, which makes it great for use with multimedia peripherals such as video camcorders and other high-speed devices like the latest hard disk drives and printers.

Already the interface of choice for digital audio and video, FireWire benefits include high speed, flexible connectivity and the ability to link as many as 63 devices. "
so who need SCSI!!!
links:

http://home.cnet.com/software/0-429669-8-6112332-1.html?tag=st.sw.429669-8-6112332-7.back2.429669-8-6112332-1 http://www.apple.com/g4/myth/ :victory:
 
Uhhhhhum!!!

1) Get this: Windows does support firewire, and my dick is bigger :p. There are PCI firewire cards out there for a buck or two u know.

2) Firewire hard-drives are not faster, or even as fast as SCSI.

3) SO what if PPC encodes MP3 files a little faster than Intel or AMD chips? How many hours per day do you spend encoding MP3's or converting audio files anyway ?

3b) No-one said mac was restricted to 1280x1024. They were talking about SON's monitor. Read ALL previous posts before replying, ok?

4) I don't want to talk about Intel, I changed to AMD a few months ago and would never go back.

5) In all tests (not the ones conducted by Apple ofcourse), if you put a PPC and Thunderbird on the same line according to price, Thunderbird leaves PPC so so, so far behind. PPC doesn't even compare to TB if you spend the equal amount of money on each!

6) I have never had any problems with viruses during my years of PC-use. Viruses don't spread on their own you know? If someone e-mails you an executable file you have to be really, REALLY dumb to run it.

7) Duh... Windows versions are compatible. Plus you'll get along fine with WinME, it's the most stable OS I've ever used (right after Linux), a lot more stable than Mac OS!!!

8) You don't need 1GB of ram for audio. + Windows XP will fix that limit anyway.

9) You Mac-heads can't seem to get the fact that PRICE does not always equal QUALITY.

10) You can keep copying&pasteing all that marketing B/S from the Apple site or you could just stop to think and try out a few other things and see how (much better) they work.

.
.
15) I could go on and on... got to roll before I go nuts. :D
.
.

Toni
www.mp3.com/NativeAlien

PS. alcohol is bad.
 
URI.B: You could not be more wrong on most, if not all of what you're saying. If I'm not mistaken, it sounds like the argument you are making is based on 1 or 2 PC's that you have come into contact with, put up against every piece of positive Mac fact, hype, and spin you have picked up over the weeks that you have been a computer user. I don't want to sound like a pr!ck about it, but I hear people making non-fact-based arguments all the time and it irritates me.

First, Funktastico is right on almost every point. Firewire cards are cheap and easy to come by, firewire hard-drives are NOT faster than SCSI, I personally don't spend more than a couple of hours a week converting audio files, resolution is restricted by video card and not operating system, viruses DO have to be executed by somebody or something, price does NOT always equal speed or quality (especially in the computer world), and Win NT and Windows 2000 (and pretty soon Win XP) all support over 1GB of RAM, but unless you're running a web or database server, you'll never need anywhere near that much. Phew!!!

However, I think Windows ME was a big mistake on M$'s part. It's a little buggy. Hopefully, XP will be much more polished when it comes out.

That's my two cents (again) on the whole Mac/PC, Fords/Chevys, Tastes Great/Less Filling debate. However, the big paragraph above is FACT. I have been using computers for over 13 years now and was a computer science major in college, so I consider myself a reliable source on the subject - all arrogance aside.

And if anyone says otherwise, I'll pop 'em one! :D

:cheers:
 
I love it how PC people are always so quick to say that their systems are just as good as Macs. you never hear mac people saying their systems are just as good as PCs. That's because Mac set the benchmark.

I've had the luxury of using both. I started on a PC and swithched to Mac. Best decision I ever made. I have a G4 450mHz. I've run 32 tracks with Eqs and effects without a hitch. My 800mHz Pentium which I still have couldn't come close to running that smooth. It's not a matter of hardware now a days. I think it has more to do with software architecture.

Sure PCs are cheaper, but by the time you finish tweeking them to where you need them, they're just as expensive as a mac.

Drew
 
I have just
a 460 MHz PC with 128 MB-RAM and cracked software

and boss DR770 Drummmaschine

its enough ! and im a profi

i know Profis which only use reason.

Any questions?
 
theres something i have addy to say:

i know people which started to make trance and buyd equitment for more than 5.000 $ ! So they got the best machines but didnt know anything about their processes and possibilities, they just fall down with their expensive high-end-studio, cause they hadnt the time to check evry synth and module realy out. its like a maze.

The people wich start with just one PC or Software made the best results, cause they spend much time with only one soundmodule and learned so much about this, and after then they buyd the next.

Its like in the music "keep minimal !!!" even with your equitment. Its a fake to think u get the best sound out with best equitment, the opposite is the right, cause it will realy make you learning and motivating.

keep this!:;)
 
Fumbling: I think it's funny that you say how you never hear Mac people saying their systems are just as good as PC's, and then contradict yourself in the very next sentence and continue to do so throughout the rest of the post. And I know, I'm probably coming off like a total pr!*k, but:

I don't know who you've been talking to or where you buy your hardware, but I built a 1GHz Athlon system with all brand-new hardware (high-budg video and sound, nice Ethernet card, Zip Drive, etc...) along with a boatload of RAM, and it was still half the price of any of the new G4's we have in my office. Plus, any one of the Macs locks up 10x as much as my machine.

That, however, I would agree with you on that it's most likely fault of the OS. Mac OS has needed work from the very beginning, and the Windows series just seems to get worse. (Ever used Windows ME? What a piece!!)

Anyways, didn't mean to sound like an a$$ about the whole thing.

:cheers:
 
YucK! It's so cheesy it makes me want to puke. :eek:
The whole thing's a kiddies' toy, that's what it is and looks like as well.
You're entitled to your own opinion ofcourse. :cool:

Toni
www.mp3.com/NativeAlien
 
ok an old green monitor is cool.
a win 95/ 98/ 2000/ xp/ nt/ me/ os GUI is cool.

NOT.

OS X is so so COOL it's unix + a cool GUI = :cool:
 
Best setup

I reckon the best setup to start off with is a PC P3, with some monitors, a drum machine, and REASON. Reason rocks!! I'm newbie at making music and I have been producing really cool music that I enjoy.

So good luck...:angel:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top