musicproduction

"An early BBC experiment in radiophonic sound, predating the establishment of the Radiophonic Workshop, created by Frederick Bradnum and Daphne Oram (pictured) and produced by Donald McWhinnie. TX BBC Third Programme, 07/10/1957."

luanna is a beautiful new application out of Tokyo-based visual/sound collective Phontwerp_. Amidst a wave of audiovisual iPad toys, luanna is notable for its elegance, connecting swirling flurries of particles with gestures for manipulation. I imagine I’m not alone when I say I have various sample manipulation patches lying around, many in Pd, lacking visualization, and wonder what I might use in place of a knob or fader to manipulate them. In the case of luanna, these developers find one way of “touching” the sound.

As the developers put it:

luanna is an audio-visual application designed for the iPad that allows you to create and control music through the manipulation of moving images.

The luanna app has been designed to be visually simple and intuitive, whilst retaining a set of rich and comprehensive functions. Through hand gestures you can touch, tap and manipulate the image, as if you were touching the sound. The image changes dynamically with your hand movements, engaging you with the iPad’s environment.

The interface is multi-modal, with gestures activating different modes. This allows you to select samples, play in reverse, swap different playback options, mute, and add a rhythm track or crashing noises. It’s sort of half-instrument, half-generative.

Phontwerp_ themselves are an interesting shop, descibed as a “unit” that will “create tangible/intangible products all related to sound.” Cleverly naming each as chord symbols, ∆7, -7, add9, and +5 handle sound art, merch, music performance / composition / sound design, and code, respectively. That nexus of four dimensions sounds a familiar one for our age.

Sadly, this particular creation is one of a growing number of applications that skips over the first-generation iPad and its lower-powered processor and less-ample RAM. Given Apple can make some hefty apps run on that hardware, though, I hope that if independent developers find success supporting the later models, they back-port some of their apps.

See the tutorial for more (including a reminder that Apple’s multitasking gestures are a no-no).

US$16.99 on the App Store. (Interested to see the higher price, as price points have been low for this sort of app – but I wonder if going higher will eventually be a trend, given that some of the audiovisual stuff we love has a more limited audience!)

Find it on our own directory, CDM Apps: http://apps.createdigitalmusic.com/apps/luanna

http://phontwerp.jp/luanna/

See also, in a similar vein, Julien Bayle’s US$4.99 Digital Collisions:

http://julienbayle.net/2012/04/07/digital-collisions-1-1-new-features/

http://apps.createdigitalmusic.com/apps/digital-collisions-hd

I made this track, titled Crowd Dance, almost entirely using the Korg Monotribe synced in Ableton Live. There are 8 layers of the instrument plus a subtle analog drum pattern that includes the wood block, sampled from an old organ. This is one of several works in progress commissioned by the American Composers Forum for a collaboration with a choreographer. It is music for the opening vignette of “In Habit” that will be performed by the Aniccha Arts Dance Company at Northern Spark on June 9, 2012.

Benga’s latest video was released early last month and made the blog rounds, but it’s worth considering as we continue our ongoing thread on visual music and how sound can go from invisible to tangible. A stunning video whets fans appetite for the upcoming Benga full-length Chapter 2, constructing a wave shape in physical form as a series of vinyl records. Using some 960 hand-cut vinyl records, the track’s waveform materializes in stop motion-filmed animation.

Physical as it may be, the inspiration, say the creative team, was SoundCloud. UK-based creative team Us, consisting of Christopher Barrett and Luke Taylor, explain:

When we were asked to pitch on the promo they sent us the track as a ‘Soundcloud’ link, we usually get it sent as an MP3. For the first time we were not just listening to the track we were also watching it. There was something mesmerising about this in its simplicity. This ignited the idea to create a real life three dimensional waveform. We started to think about the fact that a vast amount of our music is consumed online and has lost a sense of physicality this lead us to the idea of using vinyl records. We also loved the way it related to Benga as an artist who’s background comes from using records as a DJ or producer.

The maths worked we would need 960 records to create 1 minute and 20 seconds worth of wave form. Each one had to be individually cut to a specific size, hand labeled, hand numbered and then finally polished. This prep took 7 full working days and then the animation process took around 30 hours.

No 3D printers here: the process of making the individual, differently-sized records sounds painstaking. Us tells Creative Review:

To animate the wave form, we built it and then carefully removed each individual record. This had to be done very gently as any shift in the position of the sculpture would result in the failure of the animation and as we had to literally destroy each piece of vinyl to get it off, there was only one chance to get it right. Once the sculpture was finally built, the animation process took about 30 hours.

As you can see in the behind-the-scenes photos, actually working those records onto the pipe involved removing the far end, making this still more challenging (though adding a great deal to the impact of the effect).

This is all quite similar to another radial, sample-by-sample waveform made of physical circles we saw earlier this year: Voice Messages Become 3D Paper Waveform Sculptures: Paper Note

Making a waveform view in the digital realm is dead-simple. But something about going to physical media makes that decision more than just afterthought, as though these creators really are touching frozen sound.

Having Benga as your soundtrack doesn’t hurt, either. You can grab this single on iTunes.

Full credits:

Directors – Us Producer – Liz Kessler Line Producer – Connor Hollman DoP – Matt Fox Gaffer – Ben Fordesman Editor – Vid Price Grade – Mark Horrobin Animation – Alice Dupre Structural consultant – Jorge Betancor Runners – Tayo Rapoport, Paul Mckelvie, Chaelyn Allcock Production Company – A+ Commissioner – Dan Millar Management – Phil Hutcheon / Andrew Foggin

Behind-the-scenes photos courtesy Us.

See the full project page for lots of additional images and details:

http://www.weareus.co.uk/projects/benga-i-will-never-change

Thanks, Andrew Cavette!

Create Digital Music has an interview with an artist whose work I've been enjoying a lot recently,  John Tejada.  If you're into the more minimal, melodic side of house, definitely give his stuff a listen.  In the meantime, read about his 15 year career, thoughts on performance, and the future of music distribution.

Info at the listing...

How well do you know your soft synths? Test your knowledge with this quiz that focuses on synths that come with popular DAWs.

This track has been submitted for your friendly, constructive criticism. What useful feedback can you give the artist? The floor is yours to talk about the track and how they can fix problems in and improve upon the mix and the song.

Download audio file (ManicForMixdown.mp3)

Description of the track:

I’m trying to merge two of my loves: melodic trance and distorted choppy electro à la Porter Robinson / Wolfgang Gartner. I feel okay with my arrangement, but need a lot of help on the mixdown. It doesn’t have that defined clarity and space. Please help in any way you can.

Terms of Use: Users can stream the track for the purposes of giving feedback but cannot download or redistribute it.

---

Have a listen to the track and offer your constructive criticism for this Workshop in the comments section. Feel free to offer any type of advice – arrangement, mix, lyrics, performance. And remember to play nice – be constructive!

Need constructive criticism on your own tracks? Submit them for a workshop using this form. Most but not all submissions are published. There may be a wait of up to two months.

From his home in LA to the global scene, John Tejada is a planet-navigating techno ambassador and one of our favorite electronic musicians. He’s one of a handful of artists successful today who has managed to cross eras, whose experience isn’t just of this moment but who has touched the evolution of that scene. We turn to guest writer Alex Brandmeyer, who interviews Mr. Tejada about his own work as well as where the music scene is headed. What I like about Alex’s interview is that he asks some really fundamental questions about the evolution of the international audience for this music and tools – and Mr. Tejada is just the sort of person whose answers are worth reading. -PK

John Tejada’s music has been raising the bar for more than fifteen years. Alongside an intense schedule of performances all across the world, he’s managed a steady stream of high-quality releases on dozens of labels, including his own baby (now fully-grown), Palette Recordings. Add to this some high-profile DJ mixes for outlets like Fabric, along with strong support for his music from top international DJs, and what you’ve got is one of the highest-calibre electronic artists around. Despite this success, he remains a very friendly, down-to-earth guy who’s instantly approachable, and whose love and enthusiasm for electronic music and performance immediately comes across. I caught up with him following one of his recent live shows at Studio 80 in Amsterdam.

One thing that interests me most about dance music, and about house and techno music in particular, is the fact that its appeal traverses national and geographic boundaries. What do you think the common thread is? Psychology? Biology? Culture? And what is it about four-on-the-floor electronic beats and sounds between 120-130 BPM that allows dance music to tap into these things?

I feel these days it has become such a global movement, with everyone around the world linked together through social media and other sources on the net. My experience in the early 90s, however, was much different. These avenues didn’t exist yet, and you had to grab magazines to find out about what was going on abroad and order new releases with your local shop. These days it is so instant. Most of my friends and I still can’t wrap our heads around it. Back then, it was such a treat to find the thing you were looking for or hear an artist you loved live, because you couldn’t just do an MP3 search and have it instantly or watch clips on YouTube from last night’s concert half way around the world. I see all these new developments as mostly a positive.

The sound seems to spread to all cultures at this point. Everyone likes to dance all over the world and many want that moment of hearing a new sound for the first time and wondering what it is. For these reasons, I don’t think it is all that unique that the music is loved the world over now. Many genres of music exist worldwide because people love music and keep all these scenes going.

Of course there are differences, too. As someone coming from California with strong connections to Europe, how do you feel about moving between these places, between the different audiences and cities? Does it matter in the sense that it pulls music and music communities in different directions over time? Or does the music itself make this type of question less important?

I still have a tie to Vienna with my father still being there, and being able to travel to Europe on a regular basis, so I feel connected to both places. I feel when it comes to audiences being different, it’s usually a case of a venue or the people you meet that can have a big impact on your opinion of that place. You may have a good or bad experience in a certain city and your whole experience might rely just on that one club night, when down the street at another club could have been potentially a completely different good or bad experience. It took me repeat visits to cities to realize this and to try not to make up my mind about a place just because of one night. I think the music will keep evolving, as it always does.

Every year, there are new pieces of gear, new bits of software, new labels, new clubs, and new ways of spreading music. Apart from the internet and social media culture you mentioned before, what have been the most important evolutions in your own music making over the years? Have there been specific ideas or techniques which really opened up new creative possibilities for you? 

I feel while technology comes along and makes many things easier and options pretty much limitless, it also turns the same solutions into problems. Music has become more of a “paint by numbers” type of process for many people, which has made lots of new music less interesting for myself. The difference between imposing limitations on one’s creative process and actually having limitations is a different thing. When we were all starting out, the creative process was different than it is now. We now basically have limitless options, which can keep you second-guessing your work. At the same time, sure, it’s great to have new tools working more the way they were intended, and the resurgence of analog has made quite an impact in my workflow and sound. Generally, computer programs have developed mostly in positive ways, making music creation a lot more straightforward.

Again on the subject of evolution… an interesting question is always where this is all headed. People predicted a lot of different outcomes of the digital revolution, but underground clubs, labels, and to some extent, vinyl, all still seem to be doing pretty well, hand-in-hand with the ‘new era’ of Beatport, laptop DJs ,and commercial dubstep. What are your feelings about where the underground dance music scene is headed? Do you have any hopes or fears for the music? Does history repeat itself?

Things do seem to go in circles. I think we’re at the beginning of the next phase in the way music is being distributed. I have a strong belief that physical media will in some form make a comeback, wether it will be records or something else. I just can’t imagine a future where one’s music and book collection are only digital. It sort of misses the point of having a collection. Part of the fun of collecting is finding these physical objects that are tangible. While watching the new Comic-Con documentary, I had this thought that no one values PDFs of classic comic books, or JPEGs of hard-to-find baseball cards. The real physical item has great importance. This is why we love to collect records. I think people will start to miss that the more it disappears. 

The past year I’ve been lucky enough to catch a couple of your live shows, and have enjoyed seeing you perform some of the tracks which I’ve come to love over the years. I’ve also really enjoyed listening to some of your DJ mixes. What for you is the difference between playing out as a DJ and playing using your live setup? Do you have a preference for one or the other? What are the challenges in each type of performance?

DJing can be stressful in the way that I’m looking to make a playlist with the goal of being an entertainer. Sometimes I don’t want to bother with that, and just concentrate on my own art and being creative that way. Playing live limits me to my own ideas which is a little easier for me, but can also be stressful, because if the set isn’t going down well I’ve got nowhere to go, really. I may have the ability to change my set list and arrangements live, but for the most part, it’s just me. At the moment, I’ve been enjoying the live sets quite a bit more. I’d love to bring more gear, but I’m usually shoved in a DJ booth, so for now, it’s a small synth and computer mixer set up.

I think distinguishing between a DJ as entertainer and a live performer as artist taps into something interesting about the way in which electronic music is performed and consumed these days. How important is your connection to the audience when you perform? Do you notice a difference in this connection when you perform live as compared to when you DJ?

When DJing, I have a stronger connection to the audience, because I’m choosing songs based on what I perceive to be their reactions. When playing live, I am really involved making sure I am doing all the right things and controlling the right parameters; I hardly have time to take a look around. That can also be a good thing, as I’m less influenced by people’s reactions. I’m limited to my own compositions, so my main goal is to perform those pieces that as best as I can.

Do you notice differences in the types of crowds that will come to see a live PA as opposed to those who come out for a DJ set? 

The crowds can be different, more in the US I think. In the States you’ll have more “concert” shows, and that’s where people are more open to what a live performer will do. If I’m just shoved into a DJ booth in Europe and asked to make it work somehow, and the crowd is just a party crowd, then there is no difference there. I find in those spaces a DJ set is more appropriate.

You’ve been involved with electronic music for quite a while now. Do you have any particular achievements or peak moments that really pop out from the rest?

I’ve had some really unique opportunities including doing some shows here in LA at the Disney Hall which were really special. Checking out most of the planet has been quite great as well.

Could you tell me a bit more about the shows you did at the Disney Hall? How different is performing in a proper concert hall from performing in a club?

I got to play there twice. Once opening for The Orb at an all night event, where I played a hardware set and covered a table full of synths. The other time was when I got to play my piece “The End Of It All” with a 100 piece male chorus. The piece was reinterpreted by myself as well as adding all the vocal harmonies.

What was it like performing with a choir?

It was quite an experience to be able to do that, especially in that space. 

Did the acoustics kick ass?

The acoustics are really tailored for acoustic performances. It was designed for the LA Philharmonic. While they have a really high-end PA, it is not really geared towards electronic shows. However, the space below the hall, The Red Cat Theater, hosts a big variety of very cool synth shows and avant garde programs. I’ve seen tons of shows at both recently. Definitely LA’s best venue.

Can you amuse us with any anecdotes about bizzare/amusing/plain weird things that have happened to you so far during your career as an electronic musician? No need to name any names.

There’s just so much and of course nothing comes to mind immediately. It’s usually disasters that end up being a little bit funny later on, but at the time they are not amusing, unless someone just says something completely ridiculous at dinner like the Italian promoter who was repeatedly asking Arian (Leviste) and I “don’t you think my wife is beautiful?” I remember in Tokyo, a good friend from Germany was playing and asked if I could start immediately. I said “sure,” and he went off to a corner of the stage and huddled on the ground in fetal position and just stayed there, apparently a bit food poisoned. He was soon OK.

For the coming years, what are the things that keep you motivated to make new music? Do you have any projects or ideas that you’re really excited about? Are you still looking for the perfect beat?

I’m always striving for something, tweaking my technique, my mixdowns, quality of sounds, stripping things away, the list goes on and on. I’ve just completed work on a new full length. Hopefully details on that will be announced soon.

http://www.paletterecordings.com/

Composing the sounds of an animal’s life cycle and ultimate consumption into a musical portrait, Matthew Herbert’s “One Pig” is in turns grotesque and sentimental, rock and opera. I expected squeamishness and vegetarian conversions when I saw it on tour, but instead, the crowd eagerly devoured the creature at the end. (Make of that what you will.)

One Pig is in Manchester, UK tonight before continuing to Brighton and Portugal.

As my own incurable appetite is for musical instruments, for me a highlight of the show is Scotland-based, American artist Yann Seznec’s Sty Harp. (See also our coverage of his iPad music game development work.) Gut strings in historical instruments already make use of animal parts, so a stringed instruments seems appropriate. But by dissecting obsolete, forgotten technology – a bit of a theme in these parts lately – Yann is able to make an effective, expressive instrument.

Sadly, there’s not much video of the instrument in action, but seeing it is a highlight of the live show. Yann’s performance has its own theatricality, rocking out on these extended strings around the “pig pen” like a boxer swinging against the ropes of a ring. First, Yann shares some notes on the show itself:

The album is an elegy to a life lived for the benefit of humans and raises complex questions about our relationship to these often-maligned and misunderstood creatures.

The album is made entirely out of sounds from the pig and its surroundings – the first squeals, the sound of it being alone for the first time, and the dripping of its blood after being butchered. The result is a delicate, beautiful, and occasionally terrifying musical composition with a profundity rarely heard in electronic music.

The live show debuted at the Royal Opera House, London, in September 2011 and has since toured the world, performing at Berghain Berlin, STRP Eindhoven, Club Silencio Paris, Liquid Room Tokyo, Ancienne Belgique Brussels, and more. Future dates include headlining at Future Everything in Manchester, the Queen Elizabeth Hall in London, Palais de Tokyo in Paris.

The show explores and questions the life, death, and consumption of the pig. A chef cooking onstage brings the sound and smell of cooking pig, and the performance features a brand new custom instrument – the “Sty Harp”, built and performed by Edinburgh-based artist Yann Seznec. This representation of the pig’s home is used to trigger and control elements of music, forming an integral part of the 5 piece band. The rest of the band is comprised of Sam Beste on keyboards, Tom Skinner on SPDS, Hugh Jones on samplers, and Matthew on various keyboards and samples and things.

Yann explains how the instrument itself is constructed:

In terms of the Sty Harp, the instrument is built using hacked Gametraks, which were a failed proto-motion controller from around 2003. They were sold only in the UK, and worked by using two joysticks with strings attached that you clipped onto your hands. These could then sense the distance and vague location of your hands …a few terrible games were released on PS2, Xbox, and PC for the Gametrak before they were pulled from the market.

In any case, I took apart a whole load of these (I probably have owned more gametraks than anyone in the world, ever) and used their innards for the string/joystick controllers, which are totally great! I built a whole system with Jon (from Lucky Frame) to hook up twelve of these controllers into my computer at once. I’m using an Arduino with a mux shield to handle the 36 analog inputs (x/y/string for 12 controllers) at once, converting them into MIDI and sending them over to Ableton.

In Ableton the controllers are doing a number of different things, slightly different for each song. In the Max patch I made I can send out 5 individual MIDI notes from each string, one for general movement above a threshold, and one each for a push, pull, up, or down movement. These movements are also sending out CC values, as is the pulling of the string. So each string controller is sending a whole pile of MIDI data at all times, and I pick and choose for each song which gestures to use. So in some cases I’m just triggering individual sounds using the strings, but in others I am using some strings to trigger clips, others to control effects on those clips, and still other effects to do master play/stop/effects/etc.

The climax of the Sty Harp happens about 2/3rds of the way through the show, when the whole band joins me in the sty for the symbolic butchering of the pig. For that song each band member controls different strings, building a huge sound wall.

You can read more about my building of the sty harp here: http://theamazingrolo.net/styharp/

We’re playing in Manchester on Friday the 18th, Brighton on Monday the 21st, then in Lisbon on June 29th and Porto on June 30th.

http://www.matthewherbert.com/ Matthew Herbert – One Pig: exclusive album stream [The Guardian]

Daft PlastiCZ Sounds does NOT try to reproduce vintage old sounds, instead brings to the table fresh digital sounds with emotions inside

Today's free sample is a multi-sampled pulse width modulation pad with a very analog sound to it.  The sound was sourced from u-he's DIVA and consists of 6 multi-samples weighing in around 8mb GO GET THEM!

Info at the listing...

Info at the listing...

Tenori-On and iPad apps, hardware designs and visual creations: set against the beautifully-generative mind of Japanese/New York artist Yayoi Kusama, the flurries of dots and circles and patterns in musical interfaces take on a richer meaning. This video, from a workshop hosted at the Tate Modern alongside an exhibition of Kusama’s work, needs little introduction. Instead, the dizzying cuts of geometric abstraction, the array of visual ideas for musical interface begin to take on the same personality of her expansive creations. The galaxies produced out of the minds of musicians somehow overlap with this iconic artist. I hadn’t really made the connection before, even as a fan of her work, but with this workshop, the sympathetic vibrations – intentional or not – become clear. Description:

Sonic Kusama: Workshop exploring connections between the work of Yayoi Kusama and creation and representation of new music & sound art through visual audio interfaces. Presented by Simon Little and Kelvin Brown with Chase Lane. Audio track by Capstone Music Video production by Territory Studio

If you’re in London, Infinite Kusama is on view now at the Tate Modern.

Today, I’m in London doing a hands-on workshop on visual metaphors for music, and covering various topics filed under “synesthesia” at Music Tech Fest. It seems appropriate, with the subject matter on the brain, to revisit the topic of visuals and music in a series of posts.

When you make hardware, with knobs and faders, you’re constrained by physical space – the amount of room on a circuit board, the radius of a knob cap, the size of your fingers. But before you get there, the first step is to sketch an idea. Imagine if you could do that with a marker and paper and ink.

SketchSynth is the latest attempt at a drawable set of controls, letting you turn an illustration on paper into something you can actually use to make music. It’s not the first – this dream of being able to make things come alive with nothing more than a magical pen is an old one – but the execution looks superb. There are two basic approaches to the idea: one is to use some sort of conductive ink to turn the drawing itself into a sensor, and the other is to point a camera at the drawing and calculate where a user makes contact with the drawing. SketchSynth opts for the computer vision approach, by way of OpenFrameworks and the old standby of free and open source vision, OpenCV. (Kyle McDonald’s ofxCV does the heavy lifting.)

Conventional vision fits the task well: faders and knobs respond as expected, even though they’re only ink on paper. While it’s a drawn interface, and could look like anything, the behavioral metaphors all come from hardware: there are sliders, momentary buttons, and pots. Place the tool in “edit” mode, and the computer analyzes what you’re drawing; in “play” mode, the camera tracks your finger as you manipulate what you’ve drawn. The project goes one step further than many that have come before, by overlaying a projection calibrated with your drawing for interactive visual feedback as well as sonic. Sound in this case is provided by Pd, but OpenSoundControl (OSC) messages let you connect to other musical (or visual) tools. See more in the making-of vid, at bottom.

Creator Billy Keyes is working with the right mentor, too, completing this as research for Golan Levin, who has long explored the relationship of drawing and musical gesture. His Sonic Wire Sculptor was a seminal creation in connecting drawings to sound, using a tablet to produce three-dimensional “wire” structures and corresponding sound synthesis. His Messe di Voce performance piece neatly reversed the relationship, using the voice as the input to animate drawings and illustrations. More of Levin’s work at flong.com. See also: composer Xenakis’ UPIC, which lives on today as IanniX, a tool getting a lot of development attention.

Keyes’ project, already getting lots of blog buzz, is notable for its practicality and immediacy; it seems a tool many others might use and build upon rather than a single piece of art.

It’s lovely to see projects, particularly academic projects, come to some form of completion and clarity. Speaking of completion and clarity, at some point a proper survey of drawn musical interfaces seems a must, but that will have to come another day. Where can I get a nice full English breakfast?

I’m late to the party, but hat tip in particular to Creative Applications

Project Page at golancourses.net; Linux source is promised soon

I’ve covered a number of these sorts of projects over recent years.

Paper, Drawing as Musical Controller: A Round-Up (including a number of paper examples)

Drawing Sound: Crazy Touch Interface Sound Experiments with Usine, PC (using only a screen – and thus producing a very different experience of drawing

Imaginary Instruments: Marker and Paper as Controller (this 2009 project is almost a direct analog to SketchSynth, minus the projection)

iPhones, Pencils: Hand-Drawn Music Interactions, Tokyo Subway Mobile Jam (this one isn’t quite the same as the others, using pencil and paper to design an interface for a screen – but it’s nice to recall that you can do that, as well)

If you want to get into audio production, then you’ll almost definitely want to use a computer-based digital audio workstation. What does a beginner need to know when purchasing a computer for audio? There’s no one answer, and this article will help you think the issue through. This post has been put together with a lot of help. At the beginning of the year I asked the Audiotuts+ readers in an Open Mic post, “What advice would you give a beginner about computers?” This article is based largely on the answers given to that post.

But it doesn’t have to end there. Please feel free to add your own advice and experiences in the comments. Or if you are a beginner with a question that we don’t give an answer for, please ask!

The choice of a computer and computer software are among the first important questions a new audio producer will need to answer. We’ve already answered the software part. If you haven’t read it yet, make sure you check out our article, What Is the Best DAW for Beginners?

And now to the task of choosing your computer hardware…

---

Start With What You Have

It’s extremely likely that the computer you already own is good enough to get started with. That’s good to know. It will give you some time to decide whether music production is really what you want to spend your time and money on. It will also give you time to save some money, and do some thinking about the hardware and software you want to spend your money on.

If you own a Mac, it’s extremely likely that it came with GarageBand, which is arguably the best software to get started on. If you are running Windows, there are some free or cheap audio programs that you can get started on.

Here are some articles you should check out when deciding which app to install on your computer:

• What Is the Best DAW for Beginners?
• 20 Windows DAWs Worth Using>
• 7 Free Digital Recording Apps for Windows
• 8 Free, Cross-Platform Apps for Musicians

Are you strongly considering starting with the computer you already own? Here are some reader comments that may help you decide:

• Remember that it’s not the computer that makes music! It’s you! (Pedro)
• While it’s great to max out the spec of your machine as far as your budget will allow, it’s worth remembering that it’s perfectly possible to get started on a machine which, by current standards, is relatively low spec. I’m running Logic 9 on a 2.16 GHz Dual Core iMac, with 3 GB of RAM, and it’s served me very well. (Glynn)

---

Check the System Requirements of Your DAW Software

When you get down to it, your computer is there to run your audio software. What type of computer does that software need in order to run effectively?

Does it run on a Mac, or Windows? Or either? How much hard drive space will it use? And make sure you have plenty of space left over. Does it run best with a faster processor? How much RAM does it need to run without lag? Don’t forget to allow for extra RAM for any plugins you install. And if you’re planning on using more than 4 GB of RAM, make sure you’re running a 64-bit operating system, and that your DAW is also 64-bit.

In short you’ll want to buy the best machine you can afford. As a minimum, get something with at least 4 GB of RAM, a few hundred gigs of hard drive space, and 2-3 GHz of processor speed.

Here are some system requirement tips left by our readers:

• Depending on the DAW, check what the computer system requirements are. This is a no brainer! …but beginners tend to forget. (dan)
• For beginners, 4 GB of RAM should be good enough when starting out. (dan)
• Choose a fast processor! Software Instruments are getting more and more demanding in terms of CPU power. (Phil)
• Max out the memory of your machine. RAM prices have hit rock bottom, so go for at least 8GB, better yet 16GB! (Phil)
• Minimum system for today I would say: 2 GHz CPU Dual Core, 4 GB RAM, 512 MB Graphics Memory I try to afford myself the latest and best system. Maybe I don’t need the power everyday, but when I need it I am happy to have it.

  4 GB RAM is minimum/fine 8 GB RAM is very good – my current and quad core cpu with 2 GHz 16 GB RAM is great – could be my next (kenibu)

• Once you have your PC, make sure it has enough RAM to do what you want it to do. If you’re recording, you’re going to want 2 harddrives (this is a good idea regardless), but a huge amount of RAM isn’t necessarily a top priority. If you’re doing sample or effects heavy work, then more RAM is going to be vital.

  A good processor is needed for effects processing, multicore is pretty much standard these days, and for good reason. (Fleb)

• I would say that the more CPU Hz you can get, the better. The RAM isn’t as much of a concern to me. If you’re recording a lot I could see RAM being an issue but if you’re using mostly synths then CPU is what’s going to be important. (Sean Duncan)
• Hi there, I would suggest there is merit in getting a machine built for the job if you are a using a PC. It can be rewarding to build your own PC but it can also be a complete headache as well. The people who build them professionally know about details, often obscure, annoying details that can put a kink in your day if you do not know what you are doing. I also recommend physically cloning system (C) drives with the Integral SATA copy station, a low costs bullet proof way of getting your system running very quickly if (read : when) your system hard drive breaks. (online mastering)

---

Desktop or Laptop?

Desktop or laptop? Big or small? Portable or not? Important questions. When you get down to it, desktops tend to be more upgradable, and laptops more portable. And it’s no longer the case that a laptop need cost you a lot more.

One important consideration is the size of your screen. A big monitor is a very good thing to have when dealing with lots of audio tracks. Two big monitors is even better.

If you need a mobile setup, then choose a laptop. If you’ll mainly be recording in your studio, then either is fine. But if you choose a laptop, I strongly recommend a big external monitor.

Would an iPad or other tablet make a reasonable alternative? That’s not a question for this article, but if you have any thoughts, feel free to leave them in the comments.

Here’s one reader’s take on the desktop/laptop question:

• Also worth pointing out that you get a lot more bang for your buck with a desktop than a laptop, and they’re easier to upgrade…I use a laptop for non-studio based stuff and keep my desktop exclusively for studio use. (Nick)

---

Windows or Mac?

This is a big question with strong feelings on both sides. And if you have strong feelings, you’ve already answered the question!

In short, either is acceptable. There are two things to consider: Are you more comfortable with one operating system or the other? Does the DAW you’re planning to use only work on one or the other.

In a recent Open Mic we asked our readers whether they use Mac or Windows. Here are the results (505 people voted):

• Apple’s OS X – 57.43%
• Microsoft Windows – 40.00%
• Linux – 2.18%
• Other – 0.4%

So we have more Mac readers than Windows readers, but not by a huge margin.

We had more responses on this issue than any other. Here are the comments left by those who prefer Macs:

• While cost of entry for those who want to go the Mac route may look high, usability and reliability are much better in my experience. Also, check out the used market, and Apple’s own refurbished products store: there’s no need for a beginner to buy the very latest, top spec machines, and you can save a lot of money by avoiding that temptation. Ideally, though, buy something with a little room to upgrade when you’re ready. (Glynn)
• I thought myself that mac’s are too expensive, but I saw that it comes with many software programs which windows doesn’t. For example garage band and the word like program. (kenibu)
• I used a Mac mini for years but found as soon as I started pushing Logic to any extent it just ran out of CPU and fell over.

  Go for an Imac if you can and at least 4GB of RAM – Towers don’t give you as much value for you $ as the Imac currently. I also bought non-apple RAM fairly cheaply and installed it myself for about 1/3 the cost.

  My upgrade was to a Core I7 with 16GB RAM and Logic hasn’t batted an eyelid! (Niggles)

• In general I would recommend a Mac, but that is really a personal preference. But in going that route I would suggest going to eBay for a used option. You don’t necessarily need a powerhouse. My son and I spend a lot time running Reason on a 2006 model Mac mini with 2GB of RAM that ran about $300. It’s easy for him to learn, and the machine handles well enough. (Ken)
• Personally I’d also recommend Macs. They are expensive but worth of price if you are thinking of making music professionally. Mac’s tend to get the reputation of being more stable than PC’s. Why? Because they are built on the same components. If you decide to buy a PC, I suggest checking out this link. These units are specially designed for making music and what’s very important they’re super quiet. My loud PC completely ruined many of my recordings. (TTR2)
• get a mac! (yon)
• Here is the advice I would give to beginners:

  Putting everything aside, after more than eleven years of being involved with audio (and graphics) if you hear nothing else, hear this:

  Get. A. Mac.

  Mac “Fanboys”, the whole “PC vs. Mac” thing, all that aside, I can not tell you how much easier life is since I went to Mac computers. I used to use PCs, I used to build them, I can still build them, I can still tech them, but your musical experience is going to be so much easier, headache free, and just plain more fun with a Mac. Why? Because the stupid things work. I don’t care how good your PC is, how spec’ed out it is; it is going to slow down.

  Yes they cost more for the “same specs” compared to PCs. I wonder why that is? Fact of life, you get what you pay for. They work. Period.

  The last thing you want is for your computer to be butting heads with you when your trying to become a music based musician or producer. You have enough as is trying to learn about the music and software, the last thing you need to have happen is it be a coin toss every time you start you computer if it is going to even turn on.

  Macs get the computer out of the way so you can focus on making music.

  I’m not talking out of arrogance or ignorance, I’m talking out of experience. Nine years of teeth grinding, hair pulling experience. (Robert Anthony)

Here are the comments left by someone who prefers Windows:

• For PCs try to get yourself one that is the most recent and most powerful you can afford. I say that because I saw that a 2.2 GHz Intel core i3 was faster than a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 processor. Then your ram: 4 GB or higher would be good. And also recent computers have faster hard disk drives most now come with a 7200 rpm drive. The faster your hard disk spins the faster it exchanges with ram and better your PC will perform. (Arsene)

And many commenters have found that either option is an acceptable solution:

• If you can afford a Mac, get one. If not, that’s fine! PC’s are just as good…and most of the time cheaper! (dan)
• Mac or PC makes no difference any more. Both systems are stable, and many DAWs are running on both systems (recently, MOTU published its Digital Performer 8 DAW for Windows too). (Phil)
• There is actually no difference between getting a Mac, Sony, HP, Dell or any other kind of PC, other than the fact that Mac is supremely more expensive and has OSX.

  If you like windows, get any brand of PC other than Mac, if you like OSX, get any brand of PC and either hackintosh or get an authentic Mac. There is literally no difference as far as music production is concerned other than the minor differences between the operating systems. Personal preference and all that. (Fleb)

---

Get a Dedicated Production Machine if Possible

If you’re serious about music production, then you’ll want to consider having a separate machine dedicated to just music production. You’ll have more system resources available for audio, and your hard drive won’t get bogged down by all the other rubbish that finds its way onto computers.

We asked this question on an Open Mic almost three years ago, and received some brilliant and detailed answers. If you’re considering going down this track, you really should check out the comments left there as part of your decision-making process.

In the meantime, here’s one comment left by an Audiotuts+ reader:

• If you can afford it, keep one machine exclusively for music production. Don’t use your everyday system. (Phil)

Well, that’s my advice about buying an audio computer. Feel free to use yours in the comments!

Info at the listing...

Info at the listing...