Samples, VST Instruments, Drum Machines?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bguzaldo
  • Start date Start date

How often do you use artificial sounds or instruments?

  • Almost always for the entire song

    Votes: 13 31.7%

  • Sometimes depending on the Genre

    Votes: 6 14.6%

  • Never

    Votes: 5 12.2%

  • Here and there in most of my recordings

    Votes: 17 41.5%
  • Total voters
    41
B

Bguzaldo

New member
Just wondering how often people here use samples, modulators, or just anything artificial really. I have no experience in any of this type of recording because I haven't even begun to master acoustic recording so I'm taking things one at a time for now.

Let's hear it
-barrett
 
If you got em' and want em' use em'

I use them to make sounds that I can't already make on my own.

This enhances my recording's because I'm taking my weak signal chain out of the equation for some sounds. I'm going to say that it depends on the genre. But by no means am I a purist. Good luck.
 
I had to vote always because I make electronica/industrial music.
 
I use a drum machine to track, but then ask someone else to do the live drums for me. I am not a good drummer, and I don't have the room to mic a kit anyhow.
 
If I'm location recording live bands then no. If I'm in my little studio yes. We use roland V drums with superior 2.0 as the VSTi and we have a fatar studio 90 that triggers a selection of VSTi synths
 
I have an issue with the word "artificial" in this context.... I didn't realise guitars, pianos and violins just grow in nature.

Electronic and artificial are not the same thing. Electronically generated sound is still natural, otherwise it wouldn't exist ;)

Samples... what makes them artificial?
 
noisewreck said:
I have an issue with the word "artificial" in this context.... I didn't realise guitars, pianos and violins just grow in nature.

Electronic and artificial are not the same thing. Electronically generated sound is still natural, otherwise it wouldn't exist ;)

Samples... what makes them artificial?
Click to expand...

I didn't aim to offend anyone I just didn't know how else to put it!:(

Sorry about that
-Barrett
 
noisewreck said:
Samples... what makes them artificial?
Click to expand...

Nothing is artificial about the samples themselves. But sequencing them to create a tune or beat or whatever is an artificial performance of the instrument sampled. Of course, there may be exceptions.

I use VST instruments all the time because I don't have the ability to make the sounds otherwise. For example, I used to play and record drums but I no longer have a place to play them. Hence, I don't own drums anymore.
 
Bguzaldo said:
I didn't aim to offend anyone I just didn't know how else to put it!:(

Sorry about that
-Barrett
Click to expand...

Oh, man sorry. Not offended at all. Just a pet peeve of mine when people start calling certain sound sources artificial. Although, I did come across rather harsh. My wife did say that I woke up on two left feet today though :D
 
GOYA said:
Nothing is artificial about the samples themselves. But sequencing them to create a tune or beat or whatever is an artificial performance of the instrument sampled. Of course, there may be exceptions.
Click to expand...

I think I understand your point of view. So, if someone banged out the beat on the keyboard playing the sampler "live" into the sequencer and left it unquantized then that would be a natural performance using artificial sounds? :confused: :D

OK, how about taking an otherwise fine vocal performance that has some timing issues and then "fixing" it in ProTools or some DAW by cutting and pasting some words and syllables here and there to nudge them to line up perfectly on the beat... would that then be considered "artificialization" of a natural performance? :confused: :D

I am sooo confused now.
 
The only real/acoustic thing I record is the human vocal, once the backing track is done, using synths and samples.

I only play the piano/keyboards, so obviouslu all drums, guitars, orchestras etc. are synthesized or sample-based...
 
noisewreck said:
So, if someone banged out the beat on the keyboard playing the sampler "live" into the sequencer and left it unquantized then that would be a natural performance using artificial sounds? :confused: :D

OK, how about taking an otherwise fine vocal performance that has some timing issues and then "fixing" it in ProTools or some DAW by cutting and pasting some words and syllables here and there to nudge them to line up perfectly on the beat... would that then be considered "artificialization" of a natural performance? :confused: :D

I am sooo confused now.
Click to expand...

Don't be confused. #1 is a sampler performance and #2 is an artificially enhanced vocal performance. I wouldn't be too hung up on the word artificial because every recording is artificial.
 
I produce hip-hop and dance music. Lots of synthetic instruments here.:D
 
If you think about it, something being described as artificial could be a good thing.... hear me out :):

"Artificially - not according to nature; not by natural means"
"An imitation of an expensive material using a cheap one"

For something to be described as artificial, we must have a comparison or baseline in the first place. For example, Bach played on a synth orchestra sound fake compared to a real orchestra, because our benchmark is for it is a real orchestra.

If you play Bach on an electric guitar, I would not describe it as "artificial", even though sonically it’s further from the orchestral version of the original music than the sampled orchestra.

So, in a way, an artificial sound is 90% of the way to being a 'natural' sound. It’s distinguishable enough that we can tell what it’s trying to be, but is lacking the finishing touches to make it realistic. These finishing touches could be the natural reverb of the room, instrument noises such as fret slide and clicks or just simply the furthest audible harmonics. In a home recording environment, 90% of the way to perfection is normally good enough for most! It’s certainly good enough for me.
 
Would it help at all if i would have said "who mic's their instruments and who programs them?" I didn't mean for this to become an argument on the actually meaning of artifical, though arguements can be healthy and helpful. I really was just interested to know who records with a drum set, a few guitar and amps versus a drum machine and samples.

Sorry for all the confusion and or if I've offended anyone.
-Barrett
 
Bguzaldo said:
Would it help at all if i would have said "who mic's their instruments and who programs them?" I didn't mean for this to become an argument on the actually meaning of artifical, though arguements can be healthy and helpful. I really was just interested to know who records with a drum set, a few guitar and amps versus a drum machine and samples.

Sorry for all the confusion and or if I've offended anyone.
-Barrett
Click to expand...

Haha no one is offended dude, everyone is cool here :)
 
Hahaha ok good, I just didn't want to look like some Ignorant asshole
 
Hah! This is the first time I've derailed a thread on this forum. I guess there is a first for everything.

Sorry man :)

OK, I voted "Almost always for the entire song". Even if it's a sound that I've recorded with a mic, it usually gets the royal treatment with all kinds of sound manglers, probably passing through Reaktor and my trusty Kurzweil K2600 in some fashion or another. We're not talking gentle EQ or compression here, we're talking about things like waveshaping, loading an entire 1 or 2 minute vocal take and pitch-shift it in the sampler, granular deconstructions, pitch modulation with lfo... things like that.
 
Not that there's anything wrong with using them, but I'm proud to say that I use no loops, samples, sequencers, or drum machines, ever. I play everything myself with real instruments. To each their own according to their needs and style, but that's my story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top