Has anyone ever felt that you could slim down your gear down into something much more streamlined? Maybe you have a drum machine, a sampler and some synths, but you get that all down into something standalone like MPC One or a Maschine + or the newer items like the Push 3. Or perhaps you go for Logic Pro on both desktop and iPad.
These all seem to be either sketchpads and workstations (or a combination) that can in theory take the place of multiple devices, allowing you to use it in multiple scenarios (eg: making patches, sketching, building muscle memory.) The upside of simplifying right down is using one device, and so you firm up your process around a single device for the most part.
Has anyone successfully replaced 2-3 (or more) devices with one, and did it work for you? Or did you do it and then find that it’s a better idea on paper than in practice?
Be interested to see if anyone has thought about this, whatever setup moves you’ve made over time.
Last year I sold everything except for my monitoring and started to do it all in abelton+push, and more recently bitwig. So far the only downside has been not doing this earlier. I enjoy making music and sounds way more, and I’m learning much more. I can do heaps of experiments which don’t cost money and everything is always available as soon as I open my laptop. 10/10 would recommend to a friend
I’ve definitely found myself more productive with smaller setups. Part of that is because I usually focus on it being a “live” setup and like having all my hardware going at once.
In the end I think it comes down a lot to goals, genre and workflow. But having less hardware out at once has encouraged me to work within the limitation of what I have.
I would agree, but my issue is that when i make music I want to stay away from my pc as much as possible, being in front of it everyday all day already.
It’s been crucial for me to use multiple sound sources, which are also multiple interfaces–usually guitar and bass, keyboard synth (usually analog), drum machine with pads, and a DAW itself. I’ve struggled to achieve a depth to the sound when using much fewer instruments.
That is my approach for making studio recordings; OTOH, I want to create a very minimalist set up for live performance, which I think will be via Live and/or Push, maybe occasionally with one additional instrument. This project is in progress, not completed yet.
TLDR: Current approach is multiple instruments for composition/studio work, and then slimming down to a minimal live setup to perform those works later.
I’m constantly chasing this idea. My issue is that no single device contains all of the tools I need, so I flip flop between multiple devices.
The smallest setup I had that worked was Octatrack (main sequencer, samples), Digitakt (drum machine), and a polyphonic synth. Then I tried to just use Octatrack + synth, but I need more tracks (drums + melodic samples).
My hope with Digitakt II was that it would allow me to finally have that one device to rule them all, but it’s still missing a couple features, so I’m right back in the constant cycle. For the last week I’ve been beating myself up for the excessiveness of having a Digitakt, Digitakt II, and Octatrack. I’m feeling like a gluttonous asshole, which isn’t a productive mindset.
I’m still working out which bit of kit I want to make the centrepiece of my setup in future and then build up around that.
I’m constantly debating between focusing on the DT2 (I have the DT1 already plus a Syntakt) and focusing on the Push 3 (I have Push 2 already).
It is a first world problem requiring the world’s tiniest violin for sure. Both bits of kit are amazing and the only real limitation here is my lack of talent.
I keep leaning towards DT2 as the centrepiece but the shortcomings that are frustrating in the DT1 (no adjustable slices when chopping beats, can’t zoom into samples on the SRC page to get exactly the right start and end times) are still present in the DT2. Firmware updates may fix those issues of course.
Meanwhile Push pretty much covers most bases I need (and Push 3 even more so) especially as a sampler (Simpler on Push is great). But I love the Elektron workflow and form factor.
I’m going to give it a few more months to see how the DT2 evolves and wait for the last remaining bugs to be squashed.
Still making music with what I do have in the meantime though, so all good.
i went through my fair share of gear experimentation last year, tried a handful of standalone synths and standalone drum machines to sample into my sp404 and eventually my ep133.
once i realized i couldnt tell the difference between synthesized drums and samples of those same types of drum sounds (shouts out to the CR78) i completely lost all interest in drum machines. i had an MC-101 but when i realized i really didnt care about “in-depth” sound design, i sampled my favorite presets and sold it. then i got a yahama reface cs and it was so easy and quick compared to every other synth i tried, i felt set on the synth front.
then i got an op-1f after completing a long term side job and that kinda replaced the reface cs. i still have the reface and i do still use it, but the extra portability of the op-1f makes it a no brainer when im packing my bag to go make a tune in a park.
so now when im actively making a tune i am only ever using two things at the same time. the ep133 is the main centerpiece most often, then i choose either the op-1f, the reface cs, or my digital piano as the main sound source. once the sounds are sampled in, im down to only the ep133. once i finish the song on the ep133, i will track it into the sp404mk2. then im just focusing on the 404. having these set stages of my process helps keep me focused and having fun rather than wrestling with different workflows and mixing up my brain. im sure i could further consolidate down to just the ep133 and op-1f, but i appreciate the variety of keyboard sizes for different applications.
I bought the Ableton Live 12 upgrade. I have a Push 2, APC40 mkII, Keystep, Syntakt, Digitone, Nord Lead 2x, MS-20 mini, MicroFreak.
But I find myself exclusively using the OG Digitakt these days. I have barely touched any other gear. Something just clicked with the DT and my brain. Who knows if it will last, but for many months I have been content to just play with the DT on my lap.
In my opinion, I am creating some of the best music I have ever made. I think cutting back and simplifying has been wonderful for concentrating first on songs, arrangement, structure, emotional impact, etc., as opposed to getting bogged down in sound design, reading manuals, endlessly tweaking in the DAW, etc.
I can imagine recording these songs into Ableton Live at a certain point, via OverBridge, and mixing, adding parts maybe, but the main bulk of the song is already there. Having one device and working within its limitations has really been freeing for me.
I’m also allergic to computers (which probably has the highest consolidation potential)
And portability is super important to me.
The best setup I’ve “achieved” was one drum machine + one multitimbral synth (4 parts) - I obviously loved the sound of both devices.
At the moment I’m tinkering with a M8 to replace this (partly for portability), but I’m having a hard time - regardless the greatness of this device.
I’m at a point where I think that I need at least 2 machines to feel at ease. Maybe because it matches the number of hands I’ve got?
Yes, this is pretty much exactly my journey in the past 3 years. (Thanks for the tag @shigginpit.)
I (re)started my music making journey by buying a Digitone first, and then a Digitakt. Very quickly I realized that I got distracted with configuring midi and audio routing when dealing with a multi-device setup and while it sounded awesome and was fun to jam on, I never felt like it allowed me to achieve my goals around finishing full song compositions. It turned more into cool jams and inspiring surprises. Lots of fun, but not really what I was looking for.
I then switched to the MPC One and initially fell in love with the workflow. Suddenly I had one device that could be used to produce a full song with no dependencies on other hardware. I was getting rather quick with the MPC workflow. It also opened up the world of sampling and more importantly resampling, which contributed to making the music more interesting to me.
Due to my lack of sound design skills however, I found some of the sounds to be somewhat lacking, so I couldn’t help myself and started to search for additional synths again to complete the sound palette - completely forgetting what I didn’t like about dealing with multiple pieces of hardware. I went through a JX-08, a Minilogue XD and a Hydrasynth Explorer. Connecting those to the MPC was just as messy as plugging a Digitakt into a Digitone: midi cables, audio cables, midi errors, figuring out how to automate via midi cc, etc etc. But it did make the music sound better!
I then started to question why I’m working on the MPC when the DAW has better synths and reverbs, so I sold the MPC and committed to the DAW… for about a month. Then I felt like something was lacking. Maybe I needed a simpler form of groovebox just to get that creative spark, and then I could carry on in the DAW?
So I got the Syntakt. And that opened up a world of opportunities for me. My friend and I started a Youtube channel where the key focus was supposed to be Syntakt jams. It’s a camera friendly groovebox, there’s some focus on live performance, and it’s really fun to use, so it was the perfect choice for it.
But - and this is probably more about me and my quirks than something that applies to other - I found that Syntakt on its own was pretty challenging to use to build complete sounding songs. That wasn’t even the point initially, as I wrote above, but somehow in the Youtube process, it felt more important to be more “genuine” by not introducing additional elements in the DAW. To keep the jams “clean”, so to speak.
I finally picked up an MPC again and immediately remembered the parts I didn’t like about it, that reverb isn’t so great and those synths aren’t amazing (though they’re good).
But then I finally had the epiphany: the MPC can be run as a plugin inside of the DAW too! You can replace any element there and create a truly hybrid workflow. I then discovered the Juno synth plugin and at that point we were completely hooked. I was already mighty fast on the MPC as far as workflow goes. It’s a constantly evolving process for me, but building up a song on the MPC is a breeze for me. And now, with Jura (and also OPx4), I no longer feel that there’s anything lacking in the sound department. In fact, our latest song we’ve made uses the reverbs built into those synth plugins and it sounds great to our ears.
So in the end, the answer, to me, is the MPC. It’s nearly the perfect groovebox and/or production center. The built-in synths sound good, but the paid plugins sound great. And the workflow, once you take the time to truly learn it, is so much faster than working in a DAW, to me at least. And also more immersive. I can pick it up, put it on my lap and make music free from distractions with zero cables plugged in, not even headphones. It’s extremely liberating.
I still love the Syntakt, but the more I’ve gravitated back to the MPC, the more I’ve come to realize just how limiting it is to work with “just” 12 monophonic synth tracks. I enjoy to create atmospheric textures in the stereo field through resampling. But if you’re cool with layering other things on top of the Syntakt rather than being dogmatic about using it mainly in standalone, that’s a mighty fun synth-based groovebox. Then there’s the Digitakt 2, which I haven’t tried, but that offers a workflow similar to the Syntakt but with samples instead.
But that’s the thing about the MPC: it just offers so much in one package: fast and versatile stereo sampling, several types of synthesis, polyphony, arps, song arrangement, mixing, 50+ effects, built-in battery, built-in speakers, the ability to be tactile and record automations and “jam” on it, play the pads live, loop, even play harmonies on the pads in scale mode.
So in the end, I wholeheartedly recommend trying it out. But remember, it’s a very different workflow and there’s a learning curve. I’ve seen too many people jump on the MPC only to be completely let down by the interface and workflow. Akai is working on a big software update (MPC3) that will be compatible and run on all current-gen MPCs as a free upgrade, so that’s also worth mentioning. The platform will only get better with time.
A few added notes on picking the ideal one-device-to-rule-them-all:
Elektron grooveboxes all seem to suffer from that problem that there’s always something missing. Either it’s samples without synthesis, or it’s the other way around. Or there’s a lack of polyphony, or not enough effects. They’re fun, but more instruments than full-blown production environments. I’ve come to learn that I appreciate both polyphony, samples and synthesis in the early sketching of a new song idea, so not having access to all of those aspects upfront is an unnecessary limitation that I prefer to avoid.
I also have the Push 3 Standalone. I never use it. Sadly, the workflow just isn’t that fun and I find myself to be so much more efficient working directly in Ableton Live with the mouse and keyboard. It misses the mark as a groovebox and standlone production environment, and it’s already been out for an entire year and it hasn’t markedly improved.
I also own the Polyend Tracker Mini and Tracker+. They are sort of like that theoretical marriage between the Syntakt and the Digitakt, but it has its own limitations (e.g. no EQing, which is important to me at least). I do appreciate the Mini for its portability and as an alternative groovebox to tinker with, but I don’t really see it ever replacing the MPC as the center in my setup.
I owned the Roland MC-101 and the SP-404 MK2 and wouldn’t recommend either of them as a centerpiece music making platform. Too fiddly, too limited, too frustrating to use.
I haven’t tried the Maschine+. Some people like @CCMP and @hausland swear by it and describe it as superior to the MPC.
I personally love the MPC so much now that I have very little appetite for trying a new platform. It’s my choice and I’ve decided to stick with it.
I’ve created 99% of the music accompaniments I make for students…on the Digitone. The only post processing is audio normalization, run by a simple script on my computer, so that all my videos have roughly the same loudness.
I’ve bought a few bits of other gear which I regret because they’re gathering dust. I pulled out one of those items, the other day, only to find out I’d completely forgotten how to use it. That is despite putting hours into learning it in the first place and completing a few projects on it.
People talk about how bad GAS is financially, psychologically, environmentally. True. But artistically… for any user with a limited brain capacity such as myself, having more gear means understanding each bit of gear less deeply. A mile wide and a millimeter deep, so the saying goes. And, as systems of interlinked gear become more complex, our ignorance of the system grows exponentially in relation to our knowledge. Then we rationalize our ignorance by glorifying “happy accidents.”
I think I understand why people go (back) “in the box”. It creates a vanilla interface for dealing with a variety of sound sources, effects and techniques. Learning a DAW (just guessing, never did it) seems harder than learning a piece of hardware, but once you learn the DAW, there is, I assume, a kind of multiplier effect of your knowledge. Whereas, each bit of hardware has its own quirky behavior and may or may not play well with other hardware.
I think once you become a DAW expert there is no going back to hardware. It just makes no sense. If you play live yes but not if your a bedroom producer.
