I don’t own any at the moment, but I’m on the verge of buying some hardware effects for hands-on jamming/tweaking. Looking at reverbs initially but also considering something like the Eventide H90 for more variety.
I own some great VST effects but have always struggled to use them effectively in a jamming scenario. Despite my intentions to set things up/map MIDI controllers and then turn off the screen, I always seem to get sucked in to the computer and all its associated distractions. And MIDI mapping always feels incomplete, like a work in progress.
Am I wrong in thinking that hardware effects will help streamline the creation process and lead to more music making?
I thought something similar, i.e. getting some modular FX to have them as insert, and for hands on tweaking. If the plan is to use them as fx in Abelton etc - i dont know if that makes sense - a rack with some fx, and a random LFO to the rack selector gets me miles ahead what any modular fx can do.
I dont know, the abelton live effects are really good once learned.
For a hw rig - i would maybe get 2 fx, one for the drums, and one for the main voice, to have more variety - the empress zoia is the most complete device, and compared to others also cheaper. (But needs setup time, as its not a simple device.)
If you have a midi-controller with some knobs to twiddle, try to map some of them via midi-learning to one of your favourite VST-FX and give it a try. Check out whether working with a real knob or slider makes you more creative.
If you like it, and want to use hardware FX instead, you should look out for particular boxes providing an user interface for jamming the FX.
Good example IMO for an interface for FX jamming:
Not so good example:
… just to have it mentioned - I have and use two h9 FX pedals. They sound excellent and the FX algorithms are geat, but the set-up without the OS-App is nearly a nightmare for me and I would never think about jamming it’s FXs
There’s a grain of truth in that, but it’s mostly mental gymnastics. Unless there is a neuro divergence at play, one can learn to manage their workflow and focus to make using plugin effects more effectively. You recognize you get distracted with screens? Good! Now do something about it. Be kind to yourself of course, but try to manage your behavior a little better. If the pipe is leaking, replace it once, don’t patch it every month…
Cool, yeah this would be for hardware jams specifically. The alternative (and what I’ve been trying to do) is using the computer/VSTs as the FX box, either as a send or insert.
I dislike using VSTs for jamming too, but so far effect pedals haven’t convinced me. I found Collider and Zoom MS-70CDR quite fiddly for live use and lacking in midi for things like tempo sync, presets… It shows they’re primary geared towards guitarist/pedalboards. Korg NTS-3 is pretty cool though.
So far I actually liked iPad the best for this, even though I dislike touch screen for synths and sequencing. But it works quite well for effects and just like VSTs it’s extremely flexible.
I have a h9, but didnt bother to map it, but that would make it a bit more peeformative, when mapped on a sequencer, like hapax or oxi, or a hands on controller.
Somebody was asking about that “human touch”. I think hardware give you exactly that. Using VST and drawing those straight lines in Ableton is exactly how you lose the touch in my opinion.
Fwiw easily 90% of the effects I use in general and 100% when mixing are plugins and I basically never draw automation. It’s easy to get a cheap midi controller, set up and map the effect in a couple of minutes - I use intech grid 16 pot/encoder ones and they’re great. I don’t find this any less playable than the El Cap, Zoia and couple of Chase Bliss pedals that I have, if anything it gives you more scope to set up your effects the way you want to play the way you want.
With the pedals it’s more of a lucky dip based on what the designers chose for you - obviously Zoia is an expeption here - which I also like, but really the point of outboard / pedal effects for me is that they’re printed as part of the performance from the get go and you adapt your playing to them, not that they’re per se more performable than plugins. Probably the opposite is the case tbh, I tend to set and forget with pedals and do a lot more realtime tweaking with plugins.
Honestly, I can’t imagine more of a buzz kill than spending hours moving lines around on the screen - usually I’ll just map the parameters within usable ranges in whatever context in an Ableton / Bitwig rack and do a few passes until I land on something I like.
I do love playing effects, there’s something meditative about it maybe even more so than playing instruments, but hardware vs plugins doesn’t really bother me at all so long as I have a decent controller - don’t think one is better than the other except that I tend to prefer hardware when baking in effects as part of an initial performance.
Edit, I think it also depends a lot on the plugin / pedal involved, this one is definitely at the top of my list for whenever the next Goodherz sale rolls around:
hardware effects are cool, and playable, but if you’re used to a DAW and the infinite possibilities you can have, you might run into limitations with hardware effects. wherein Ableton you can just double click another effect whenever you like, for hardware its like, one effects for one channel. you can of course bus things, but then I guess that’s not far what’s inside an Elektron box.
you can start to get into a situation where you’re thinking about mixing desks, patch bays and so forth. actually a friend of mine develop some small boxes for this, DF Audio is his thing. you can look it up. so if you get in the mood for mixing and matching effects with effects, you can easily do so with a quick desktop patch box. otherwise, you might start to look at buying more effects, and have them for different purposes.
I’ve successfully had sessions in the past with certain things midi mapped, sometimes it’s good just to setup and get on with it, know what you want to achieve, then go back and hit record and start jamming. for a long time this was the way and Ableton was quite exciting for this reason. you don’t have to automate everything manually with a pen tool.
but then hardware is super nice also, you can really feel into it. lots of fun, great sounds, in my case I tend to think of things simply or it can get out of hand. same as with a DAW - make a setup, find the settings, then have a jam
I run my hybrid setup through my Novation Circuit Rhythm and the punch in effects on that are really good fun. I don’t really think I’d use them all the time though on a finished track, although I have in the past.
But now that I’ve bought an Ableton Move. I’m going to go down the Faderfox route and map some racks and probably variations to an EC4. I think that although hardware is great, the flexibility of building your own racks in Ableton gives many more options.
Hardware fx are great in terms of lessening cognitive load during jamming/performing, but ITB is ultimately infinitely more flexible and configurable. Also, ITB fx are usually trivial to gainstage whereas with some pedal fx, you might need to resort to reamping boxes etc for ideal results…
What I dislike most about hardware fx is the amount of Aux sends I need in order to use them across a mix, and their return channels usually requiring stereo, can eat up a lot of mixer channels quickly
That i why there is an LFO effect in Live, i use that instead of drawing lines. I automate reverb times, use envelope followers to cut them out when i donr want the fx, i try to use them as if they are synth. Lfo the Lfo rate, random it, resample the best bits.
(I have static sends) But usiung the sends as fewdbaxk loop is also possible, it comes down to mapping the stuff, and recording your knob twists.
I have really enjoyed reading all the thoughtful replies. I suppose this is another instance for me in recent times where I’ve realized the power of UI.
For example, I just got Ableton Move and I have taken to it immediately and made dozens and dozens of sets on it already. Prior to that, I had messed around with Note, which is essentially the same thing as Move in 2D software form, and never jelled with it at all.
I’ve had similar experiences, like with Elektron boxes vs Opal, or soft synths vs something like a Reface CS. I have found that for me, in terms of getting into a creative flow state there’s a meaningful difference between software and well-thought out, dedicated hardware. Still, the computer is of course an invaluable and uber powerful tool.
I suppose this feeling may be in part due to my background as a classical instrumentalist. I am most at home creatively when I’m using all or most of my fingers and playing an instrument (that someone else designed).
However, when making this kind of music with these kinds of tools, even something as simple as mapping a controller requires the me, as performer, to simultaneously think as an instrument maker (while also thinking as a recording engineer if I want to capture what I’m doing). Rapidly switching between these ways of thinking is relatively new and challenging for me, which is why I think I tend to get on better with less powerful pre-designed hardware.
I totally get the hands on feel of hardware desire. I too feel exactly the same in the Note vs Move paradigm. I have written a few tracks with Note, but the experience just isn’t as much fun as the tactile feeling from the Move hardware.
That’s why I’m definitely going to go down the dedicated controller route for Ableton effects. I’m also hoping that using another controller paired with the Move for effects control will be an option in the future.
Oh yeah, obviously I also use modulation. But what I’m taking this thread to refer to really is more along the line of dub style effects work, i.e. playing effects as an instrument pretty much. Things like feedback routing of delays works surprisingly well in the box these days.
Re cognitive load, I really don’t see how hardware is per se any better for this. In software you have the advantage of being able to set up a small number of controls specific to what you’re trying to achieve in that scenario - e.g. you can map multiple parameters to one control in Ableton and set up guardrails so that any manipulation stays within your chosen sweet spot. Usually 3 or 4 pots are plenty for me. I don’t see how that’s any more involved or off-putting than getting hardware box(es) set up, gain-staged and dialled in.
Hardware: it’s easy to nudge a knob or fader very slightly, or make a big move.
Software: After more than two decades of messing around with DAWs and VSTs, it is still difficult to manipulate VST controls precisely with a mouse. If I’m working purely ITB, I need to pick a controller, plug it in and then map the control before I can use a physical knob. And then it is almost always 7-bit resolution.
Where DAWs win is automation. I rarely touch the knobs in my VSTs, instead I edit automation.
I find hardware better for play and experimentation, software better for producing a repeatable result.
