Nathanael_I

I can't recall anyone saying anything but very positive things about the RME products. The stability of the drivers is constantly commented on. nat Oh, I completely agree! I had a great experience with RME. I just ran out of ports, and then out of ports on the ADAT expansion. They are rumored to have the best USB drivers in the industry - it is why I bought it in the first place. But I don't miss USB and wouldn't go back. It is also true that the world of 8ch + ADAT interfaces no longer meets my needs, so it is a bit academic. I still have an RME UCX as the audio I/O for the laptop rig, however.

Yeah, PCIe is where it is at. On any modern CPU, there are PCIe lanes that are handled directly by the CPU, and some that are serviced through the South Bridge chip. The South Bridge is basically a multiplexer. It uses a few high-speed connection lines to the CPU and then breaks out smaller chunks for lower speed things like USB, SATA, etc. Typically, there are more ports than there is bandwidth to the CPU, but no one notices this. I put my Dante PCIe card in slot #2. Slot #1 is the video card. This means that my audio interface is a first class citizen. It is directly connected to the CPU's memory space and there is only the latency of electrons moving at the speed of light. I'm with Craig. This is the best way to interface that there is. I get that Thunderbolt and things are fast. But PCIe is the fastest, most direct connection. I'm sure that RME's PCIe interface works splendidly. And Lynx and the few others that make them. AVID's HDX cards are also super stable. These are more expensive, it is true. But they are also massively expandable and yet still maintain the same latency. Wonderful for those that care.

When I installed my Dante setup, I wrote a detailed post elsewhere. A shorter summary is this: When the RME UFX no longer had enough ports, I was ready to be done with USB and its distance/cable/bandwidth limitations. I wanted something that sat directly on the PCIe buss or Thunderbolt. I chose the Focusrite Dante interfaces. The PCIe card is rock solid and 3.3 ms of latency @ 48khz. There is the ~$500-$700 Dante "tax" in the form of adapter cards for some boxes, but I love the modularity. I can no longer "outgrow" my interface. I can just add another one to the network in whatever capacity or configuration I need - even from different vendors. I run about 40 channels across it between the synths and then all the feeds back into a Dante-connected Midas M32 for monitors, clicks, cues, etc. It is rock solid and "just works". The digital patch bay is wonderful and having Ethernet for audio distribution let me pull up a huge stack of cables and stick them back in drawers. My studio wiring got simpler for sure, despite gaining more channels of IO. I have three Ethernet networks in the studio: I have a Dante audio network (on a dedicated POE switch for the AM-2 headphone amps), a VEP network for samples, and an Internet network in the studio. All run on separate physical ports into the DAW (4 port Intel PCIe NIC cards work great and no DPC latency issues). My Genelec monitors all connect their control network via Ethernet cables too. These cables are SO much cheaper than Canare or Mogami! So at least at my place, it appears Ethernet is the future.

What Korg seems to have done is locate the point of adequacy for most musical tasks where a portable keyboard would be required. It isn't that you can't do better, it is that this is the simplest way to get the job done, almost no matter what the job is. Because it can be re-configured for personal needs, it is pretty much evergreen. Audio files are not getting larger, and at some point, there is adequate storage for what most musicians use. It appears they found it and got there first. It really doesn't need "double the capacity" for most people, and so it just keeps going. The same is true on the laptop rig side. They have been adequate for 10 years. Pianos have been adequate for a long time too.... It happens, and then working toward mastery can begin. It is a great time to be making music.

This is a solid thread. It is especially true once you need more than 8 channels. There are a LOT of 8ch over USB/Thunderbolt/whatever boxes. But if you need 24 or 32 or more channels, the field thins tremendously (and there are no budget solutions). The input/output list is critical, along with anything else you need done - monitor control, etc. You start getting into situations where there aren't "all-in-one" solutions and you have to plan outside of built in digital mixers, volume controls, etc. Running surround speakers is another example of a requirement that most interfaces can't solve without external help for volume offsets, volume control, etc. I had worked up to an RME UFX, which had all the expected driver stability benefits. Over time, I used all its inputs, then all the inputs on an ADAT expansion, the AES inputs were in use, most of the outputs were in use, and I was noticing that the length of the USB2 cable mattered, and which one I pulled out of the drawer. The upgrade took careful planning. I was done with USB. I wanted something that didn't have to live 6' from my DAW. I wanted something expandable that I could grow over time. I settled on a Focusrite Dante setup. I put the PCIe card in one of the motherboard slots that directly connects to the CPU - not even a trip through the motherboard bridge chips! 128ch of I/O at minuscule latency. My studio went from all kinds of analog snakes and cables to simple Ethernet runs. I could put any box anywhere. I can add boxes 8ch or 16ch at a time whenever I want. I finally got to where mic pre's hit converters and the signal is digital all the way to my Genelec speakers. The improvement in imaging was not subtle - my whole family noticed the clarity when all the analog stuff went out of the monitor chain. (And I had been using a high end Grace Design monitor control box). I went with a Midas M32 to run monitor mixes to Dante headphone amps (Focusrite AM2s), that was later upgraded to a Allen & Heath SQ-5 which lets me run the whole studio at 96Khz if desired. At any given point in time there are just shy of 40ch of audio routing into the DAW and it is rock solid. But to your point, this is a "designed" system. It was carefully assembled, tested, and deployed. All the hardware is "off the shelf", but it didn't come "assembled" if you will. Dante has become a digital patch-bay for me, and I can put any signal in the studio anywhere, which is very cool. An analog patch bay would be faster and easier, but the digital one is more flexible. Until I can afford a real analog console, this has been a wonderful setup. I'm sold on Ethernet interfaces, the expansion and scale is fantastic. The latency of the transport itself is sub 1ms, so I've essentially got ProTools HDX kinds of latency, even in the monitor path. One AD and one DA - all through FPGA hardware and no software drivers. So drummers have been happy. It is possible, but it took thought, and there are definitely other ways..

I don't know either. I know that if I am recording a band's worth of tracks, nothing needs to be louder than -15 or -18dbFS to make the mix work. If I am working with dozens of tracks of orchestral samples, this is definitely true! I'm turning things down! The more sounds you add, the louder it gets. Apply some compression and it can be as loud as you want it. Digital gain is pretty much free from an artifact perspective. If it needs to be louder, it isn't hard. When mixing live I'll let the drum transients hit -12dbFS because it helps the drummer have more level in the monitor mix. In my studio, I have it calibrated to -20dbFS is 78dB SPL at the mix position. Uncompressed mixes sound amazing - things like high-end acoustic recordings of pianos, acoustic guitars, etc. It is easy to tell how much compression is put on tracks, because I have to adjust the monitor gain. I got the idea from mastering engineer Bob Katz and have worked this way for years. I suspect those tracks came from someone trying to get "color" out of their mic preamps, but didn't have the ability to attenuate the signal back down. (A great argument for an inline console - those small fader paths solve this problem neatly). Most digital converters top out at +18dBu or maybe +24dBu. Both classic and modern high end preamps from Neve and others put out +28dBu. If you want to wind them up to get the "color", then the signal will be louder than most audio interfaces. Unless there is attenuation handy, I could see this being the reason. But I'm just speculating.

Sonoma County is now mandatory "Shelter-at-Home". No going out except drugstores, groceries, etc. Everything else shut. Even the grocery stores are on reduced hours.

I feel bad that no one in engaging your thoughtful post. I suspect it is because it is a hard topic with no obvious answers (or at least none that aren't as much work as making the album itself). I'll give it a try. With Spotify offering 31M+ tracks for $10/mo, the economic value of recorded music to most music lovers has gone effectively to zero. There is a massive oversupply relative to most consumers needs. Sadly, as a fellow creative, none of those 31M tracks stop me from needing to play, create, and express myself. And therein lies the rub - unless we have built an audience awaiting our product, there is no general purpose audience waiting patiently and expectantly - their every need is met, even without meeting us. If only they knew.... Nightwish (a symphonic metal band I like) is releasing a new album - they fill stadiums in some parts of the world. I pre-ordered the double or triple CD set, but its just to support them. I have a CD player in the studio, but probably won't listen to it that way past the first time. After that, it will be streamed from Spotify on my phone. I don't even want the CD, or a USB - the music is digital! (I ripped all my CD's onto an SSD drive years ago). The version I bought does come with a 40-page booklet, so that is cool - in effect, I bought a booklet with a free (and unnecessary) CD. But they also sell T-shirts, so that's what I bought, along with concert tickets. As a musician, I want to support them. I know how it works. As a customer of their "store", I have to buy things that I either don't really want or need in order to do so. Think about that for a second, the wrong thing is getting monetized. People want to support artists, but have to accumulate stuff to do it? That's where some artists have utilized Patreon - you can "subscribe" to a favorite artist. They agree to make content (that's what artists do anyway), and people pay them directly for it, and people can be more generous than the profit margin of a CD. This involves constantly "singing for one's supper" and building an online following. If you have a local following, would this enable you monetize more dollars and more frequently? It seems you record regularly, perhaps a stream of content would allow you to retain a monthly audience vs. trying for a "big release" once a year? But I get how that could be very unsatisfying creatively - we want to make complete statements... an album. I get it. Many who use Spotify, YouTube, and other large online social platforms effectively give the music away. It is an advertisement, or a teaser. The people making money are generally making it off-site by directing people back to their own websites where they are mostly not selling the recording, but other things. Lessons, merch, books, tickets to live shows, instructional courses, etc. The bigger names also get money and gear from sponsors who want access to their audience. Unless you have tens of millions of views a month, the streaming payments are not worth discussing - the money is made off-platform, sometimes in significant quantities (live e-sports videos anyone?). Another alternative would be to see if you can license your tracks to a music library. That is a also a very crowded space. But synchronization licenses are a valid way to monetize. If the recordings are audiophile grade and you have hi-resolution (96Khz or DSD) masters, you may be able to appeal to that market. But the recording quality will need to be superb - some of these folks listen to the recording just as much as the music. Its a different kind of thing.... It sounds like you have a plan to generate some interest with your guest artists, some influencers you know, your website, and that is all great! Working out a monetization plan will be as much work as the immense effort to select, arrange, write, record, etc. Here's some alternate perspective from some people in the North American music industry. I've seen similar things elsewhere, so the perspective isn't unique. 6 Crucial Steps to Planning an Album Release Don't Record an Album, Do This Instead How to Get Your Music Heard By Actual People What I am certain of is that your playing and artistry are much better than the reception your last album got. It isn't likely an artistic failing. I once had an author tell me that there was only one difference between a best-writing author and a best-selling author, and it was the "selling".... I wish it were different, but we are largely on our own to promote and figure out how to distribute a release. The "recommended plans" take a year or more of effort - just like recording an album. Essentially, its a project called "find your own audience". And it is very different work than playing or performing. It is building a business - and that is hard work, with payoff well down the road. Making music is inherently fun and satisfying. Figuring out how to make it pay anything is real work. This is a hard topic for creatives. It is a hard topic for business people. It takes real creativity and diligence to make it work, but there are people who make it work. They don't seem to have the sorts of careers available in the 1970's though. Its heavily online, and multiple streams from online sources. And constant hustle.

You should give this guy a call: [video:youtube]

California cancelled all gatherings of 250 people or more through the end of March at least. Every concert venue I've ever been to is emailing me that all shows are cancelled.

So glad you will eventually be OK! Scary stuff!

Are you willing to use your computer for the sequencer? I don't think the DP sequencers record external devices. P515 action is very nice. If you like it, I wouldn't hesitate. The CFX sample is very well done. I have it and use it regularly. Amazing board at any price, but for the price, wonderful. I can't help on the other boards, but all are quite competent. I think you'll get people here who use them to help with that.

If you haven't EQ'd the Kronos, much is possible. The default presets are very bright and hyped. Taking all that off gives (to my ears) a much more natural sound. Reverb to taste and then making sure that the volume is not louder than a real acoustic piano, and decent results should be available. But yes, it is hard to amplify pianos...

The Clavinova sounded better up close because the engineers could design to a known environment. The sound only needs to go to the player, and getting it to sound like "player position" is defined. Having the audio from some mic'd position go out the jacks to an unknown environment means that whether it works or not is entirely unpredictable. The reverb may or may not work for the size room, it may be too bright or too dull... and so on. Amplifying piano samples is a big topic. Reverb and EQ are the two main things you can control at no cost by editing your presets. You may find it useful to make ones that are specific to your room and setup. Sadly, getting any better than the speakers you have in "PA-speaker-land" will be big $$ for increasingly small gains. Studio monitors might help, but good ones are not cheap. There are no excellent full-range, affordable speakers that go down to 28Hz (the bottom of the piano keyboard). But something like the Mackie 828's (or whatever they call them these days) would be very good indeed. I used them for 15 years and they are quite hard to beat. There are similar options from other vendors.

I don't get it. Acoustic instruments are meant to resonate. It's the point. To each his own, but my snares are always tuned to resonate and have a full, open sound. No choking here.

Silicon Valley is significantly affected. Many companies are mandating work-from-home, all but closing offices, eliminating all but the most critical customer related travel, cancelling event hosting and attendance. There is community spread in some towns. Schools are still saying "no one is infected, we are continuing", but I don't believe that will hold. Things are changing daily here, but there is little one can do for "social distancing" if you have kids in school. That pretty much eliminates any "distance".

Exactly. I'm sure they can get something "Garage Band" like up and going quickly. But anyone doing serious production depends on dozens of features in Logic/Cubase/Pro Tools that really don't exist in any other than the top three DAWs. I know there's lots of others, and that they all sound the same. But there are real workflow differences.

Or, you could get the adhesive sandpaper, and stick that on the bottom of the pedal. It might increase the friction by enough...

Well, just think how much less expensive than a Kronos it is... But there isn't any cheaper way to get that quality of sounds that easily. Omnisphere simply sounds good, and all the common sounds are well-represented. There are so many samples from old keyboards in there, you can even learn some of what they are good for! I discovered that a lot of the pads I liked best all came from old PPG samples. I didn't know what that was, looked it up, listened to samples, and it was, "Yes, that is the sound!". So I learned something just from picking favorites. Although the samples are undeniably excellent, the synth capabilities are over the top. It's all there. In terms of value for money, it is not at all expensive. You could have Omnisphere plus Keyscape and VB3 (if you need Hammond) and never need anything else for gigs. I've chosen to use UVI's Falcon as my sampler because I can import samples into it (unlike Omnisphere). But for Rompler duties, Omnisphere is what I wished the Kronos could be. It is wonderful.

I love his playing. It feels the same as YoYo Ma - effortless mastery that becomes completely consumed in the expression of the music. There is no technical barrier or impediment. He literally just becomes the piece of music. When I saw YoYo Ma the first time, I was in the fourth row in Chicago. Not 30 seconds in, I felt my whole body relax. It was immediately apparent that the music would be pure and perfect all night. Nothing would be strained. Too hard, too fast or too slow. Every note would be played with care and complete attention. I literally watched a man become the music, and I was blown away by his generosity of spirit. Surely he had already played each piece hundreds of times, and yet, it was fresh and alive, and he was willing to become that music yet one more time, pure and free. It is an amazing thing. Many excellent concert performers do their job very well, but yet, it isn't art every time. Sometimes its work. You never get that feeling with Mr. Trifonov or Mr. Ma. Gifts to humanity. Thanks for posting. Every once in a while I'll binge on Daniel's recordings. Shockingly good. They just feel so right - every phrase is lovely, the transitions are completely smooth. Just astonishing.

My thoughts in a different thread are here. I own a P515, which is on my composing desk as the main keyboard. The Nord Grand (and its Kawai action) is my preference, but is in the live rig. It is not as good a form-factor for my desk. I do, strangely, also like the built in speakers. Sometimes, when some other sound is up in the DAW, I just raise the fader on the speakers, and I can play piano quickly. The only thing I haven't mentioned elsewhere in other threads is that the edges of the P515 keys are sharper than the Kawai or my RX-7 acoustic grand. The Nord Grand are rounded over and smooth like butter. The P515 are "crisp". I don't prefer that. The P515 is heavily damped, and much quieter than the Nord Grand, but this makes the action feel heavier and sluggish. Both are capable of expressive, nuanced playing. I do prefer the Nord Grand. I do not like Fatar actions if that is helpful to know my biases. I can be happy on either the Kawai or Yamaha actions. I prefer to play other samples with either than what is inside. The P515 sample is better than any of the Nord samples. The sampling has real pianissimo samples. The Nord piano library pianos start at mp and don't have pp or p samples. This may or may not matter. Playing the Synchron Steinway with the surround speakers on and everything at acoustic volume level is quite satisfying. Not selling the RX-7. But its the samples and amplification that keep the slab pianos from much greater success. The raw keyboard mechanisms on these triple sensor keyboards are quite good.

Clearly, playing music is only tangentially connected to gear - one does need an instrument/amp/whatever-makes-the-noise! But playing is mostly about the player - the word tells its own story. For a long time that was it. If you wanted to "produce music", you grabbed what you had and played it for anyone in earshot. If lots of people needed to play, you wrote it all down on paper and hired a conductor to keep everyone together. Interestingly, this same idea of "use what you have" is still true today with most music creators. We have top 40 hits produced entirely on an iPad - it isn't the instrument, its the person. This will always occur. People are creative and can create with anything... Hollow logs become drums. It doesn't take much... But now we also have the separate idea of "producing music", and not necessarily in linear, continuous, time. It can be "recorded", "packaged", even "sold", "streamed" and "synchronized to picture". One can do all of these things creatively, and even artistically. But unlike playing, these music-related activities are VERY gear dependent, and getting paid professionally involves some investment. Few long-term, career producers or mixers have inexpensive gear. They start there, but don't end there. It isn't that they can't work with basic tools; its just easier and faster to use nicer things, and one can afford them, and the good stuff doesn't go bad very quickly, and therefore, builds up. And so everyone who looks at production-oriented musicians sees nice, expensive, luscious gear and wants to be like that - successful people have gear. There are, of course, still levels of "adequacy", but the more you want "that sound", the more the specific tech matters. And there the confusion sets in. The manufacturers would love us to associate "that result" with "that gear", and we have enough history and videos to see that, yes, "that gear" was indeed used to make "that sound". (even if the player was actually 95% of it). We also live in an unprecedented time of musical plenty. Never in history have good instruments, amps, effects, or gear of every kind been this accessible. Never have we been so able to look in our neighbors windows, garages and studios and see just how much neat stuff they bought! Modern production is now a creative expression in its own right. So we have sound-designers that give concerts with huge modular synths that show off that creativity, largely without traditional "playing" in a keyboard sense. We have DJ's that actively re-shape, re-contextualize, and modify sound to keep a dance floor pumping, we have electronic artists that only make art with tables or stands full of gear, deeply customized and programmed for specific needs. We have bands that take studio equipment on stage, or in their racks, or at FoH. It's all blurring, and if any of us are not clear around what we value, what we are trying to do, or what our needs are, it is very easy to get lost in the noise. But, it is an amazing time to make music. A $100 USB interface has higher objective sound quality than all but the wealthiest could afford in 1973. We are still in the stage where a lot of people that could never afford to buy instruments, or make a recording can now afford to make music. This is exploding what is possible. Over time, it will all sort itself out. Digital photography went through this fad, and now most people use their phones not a DSLR. But for the photographers? They have the best cameras ever made. We live in our own audio version of that. If you are a pure player, the most amazing instruments are available at historically low prices. If you are a production-oriented creative, the tools have never been better or more affordable. Quality is through the roof as CNC machining and other advances have applied even to instruments. I guess as always, it is "know thyself", and in the spirit of the thread, "don't assume that everyone else thinks of playing, production or music-making in the same way you do!".

Band T-shirts are my work-from-home wear if I'm not going to be on video conferences. Nightwish features heavily....Mostly symphonic metal bands.

This is all gold. (I didn't buy the PA for personal amplification, it is FOH... I use IEMs). Huge believer in ISO cabs for guitar amps if modeling is not an option. I have a Jackson Ampworks ISO cab: Celestion Gold inside, with two microphone stalks wired to XLR terminations on the outside of the cab. Real tube tone, and yes, you can turn up your amp, but everyone else gets 30db of reduction! One can talk over a raging amp easily, and it sounds fantastic. Cleans up a stage like magic. If the only thing making noise on stage is the drums, the mixer person can give a GREAT sound to the room/audience. And totally agreed that recording is the secret to progress and band craft in general.

Ah, yes, you are right! I bet that is market feedback from their pro sound companies - they voted with their wallets. The pro sound companies do not prefer built in amps. They vastly prefer amp racks. That way they always ship one more amp to a gig than they need - instant spare if there is a problem and you don't lose a whole cabinet. Pro sound companies often stock drivers, so if there is a problem, they fix it back at the shop and never have to ship an entire cabinet. I on, the other hand, wanted the active speaker, with a built in amp so I DIDN'T need an amp rack. I chose subs with built in amps as well, and DSP onboard. When designers know what they are doing, they can make truly exceptional sound happen. Even very loud! I knew that I wouldn't be pushing them into the limiter EVER, and was pretty unconcerned.