I think in your case it make sense to just stick to a keyboard, but not for me. I create orchestral mock-ups and even if you own all the keyboards in the universe, you won't have access to convincing articulations and techniques to record something. You need specialized libraries for that kind of job. Keyboard is great if you want to record quick ideas though.biggrime wrote: After reading this loonng thread(I read most of it) This is the reason I like hardware. People talking bout this software that software. You got to have this many cores. Oh no the software only supports a certain amount of core.Give me a good workstation that allows me to program and make that keyboard my own. This is why I own a Korg m3. I do agree that software sounds good and you have a lot of options. Some people may enjoy figuring out all this computer stuff. I did it for years. However now I want to make music. I am a musician not a nerd.
Oh by the way I have a 1 core computer lol
Kronos (hardware) vs Komplete8 (software)
Moderators: Sharp, X-Trade, Pepperpotty, karmathanever
Re: Kronos (hardware) vs Komplete8 (software)
-
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1992
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:18 pm
- Location: Croatia
- BasariStudios
- Approved Merchant
- Posts: 6511
- Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 4:56 am
- Location: NYC, USA
- Contact:
I use a regular Caviar Black at 7200RPMs, i do projects up to 40 Tracks and
using multiple Sampled Libraries at the same time...never ran into a problem.
using multiple Sampled Libraries at the same time...never ran into a problem.
http://www.basaristudios.com
Cubase 8.5 Pro. Windows 7 X64. ASUS SaberTooth X99. Intel I7 5820K. ASUS GTX 960 Strix OC 2GB. 4x8 GB G.SKILL.
2 850 PRO 256GB SSDs. 1 850 EVO 1TB SSD. Acustica: Nebula Server 3 Ultimate, Murano, Magenta 3, Navy, Titanium.
Cubase 8.5 Pro. Windows 7 X64. ASUS SaberTooth X99. Intel I7 5820K. ASUS GTX 960 Strix OC 2GB. 4x8 GB G.SKILL.
2 850 PRO 256GB SSDs. 1 850 EVO 1TB SSD. Acustica: Nebula Server 3 Ultimate, Murano, Magenta 3, Navy, Titanium.
-
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:16 pm
The dual SSDs I am using in my MacBook are ridiculously fast but hey also cost almost more than the MacBook. The new Macs can take advantage of the 6g too. Can't wait for thunderbolt external storage for high speed external storage.EvilDragon wrote:SSDs are the BEST choice for sample streaming. Period.
Check out OCZ RevoDrives. Depending how deep your pockets are - they go from 400-1400 MB/s! That's an OBSCENE speed for sample streaming!
Shigeru Kawai SK5
Roland Jupiter 80
Vintage Vibe 64
Roland Jupiter 80
Vintage Vibe 64
- biggrime
- Senior Member
- Posts: 409
- Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: Richmond, Virginia
- Contact:
Re: Kronos (hardware) vs Komplete8 (software)
Yea if you are really trying to do orchestral stuff that have a bunch of articulations then software would be the way to go. I produce back tracks for artist to sing on. I do not need all that. Give me some nice strings, brass, woodwinds I can work with and I am good. Then by some chance I need something more real I will get players for that.Assyrianpianist wrote:I think in your case it make sense to just stick to a keyboard, but not for me. I create orchestral mock-ups and even if you own all the keyboards in the universe, you won't have access to convincing articulations and techniques to record something. You need specialized libraries for that kind of job. Keyboard is great if you want to record quick ideas though.biggrime wrote: After reading this loonng thread(I read most of it) This is the reason I like hardware. People talking bout this software that software. You got to have this many cores. Oh no the software only supports a certain amount of core.Give me a good workstation that allows me to program and make that keyboard my own. This is why I own a Korg m3. I do agree that software sounds good and you have a lot of options. Some people may enjoy figuring out all this computer stuff. I did it for years. However now I want to make music. I am a musician not a nerd.
Oh by the way I have a 1 core computer lol
Making beats is not a hobby it's a life style
Proud korg kronos 2 owner
Proud korg kronos 2 owner
You can get much less expensive SSD's, which are smaller (128 gig, for example), and which are perhaps not the "latest" technology....yet are still blistering fast, for far less money. And as EvilDragon said....there is NOTHING better for sample streaming than SSD. The "latest" tech would be more relevant to using SSD as a system drive...than it would to using it as a sample streaming container. The previous gen tech, which is now heavily discounted, is unbelievably fast for sample streaming.
However, you can build up a system with these smaller drives at a much lower cost, and put only your most intensive samples on them. I have found that you can split almost any library this way......for example...in EW Hollywood Strings, which is generally accepted as perhaps the most intensive library on the market today....it contains patches with varying streaming requirements. There are some trimmed down "light" patches, which are intended to work on slower systems....some mid patches for moderate systems...and then the real HOGs which require the fastest hardware. Even though the full library is utterly huge altogether.....you can move only the HOG's onto your SSD's (to save valuable cost and space....at the SSD cost per gigabyte), and leave the rest of the library, which requires less power to run, on a conventional HDD. Those "lighter" patches are indistinguishable on the HDD vs SSD. All that is required is to point PLAY (the interface) to the file locations the first time you select them. It will remember the directory assignment thereafter.
Same can be done with almost any library.....sometimes using an alias, but usually the interface will remember the location. So even though you may have 500 gig of samples, I bet if you carefully review what is what, you may only need 250 gig of it to run from SSD....thus 2x128 gig SSDs will suffice, and cost much less, and the resulting performance will be virtually equal to having purchased 500 gig of SSD.
However, you can build up a system with these smaller drives at a much lower cost, and put only your most intensive samples on them. I have found that you can split almost any library this way......for example...in EW Hollywood Strings, which is generally accepted as perhaps the most intensive library on the market today....it contains patches with varying streaming requirements. There are some trimmed down "light" patches, which are intended to work on slower systems....some mid patches for moderate systems...and then the real HOGs which require the fastest hardware. Even though the full library is utterly huge altogether.....you can move only the HOG's onto your SSD's (to save valuable cost and space....at the SSD cost per gigabyte), and leave the rest of the library, which requires less power to run, on a conventional HDD. Those "lighter" patches are indistinguishable on the HDD vs SSD. All that is required is to point PLAY (the interface) to the file locations the first time you select them. It will remember the directory assignment thereafter.
Same can be done with almost any library.....sometimes using an alias, but usually the interface will remember the location. So even though you may have 500 gig of samples, I bet if you carefully review what is what, you may only need 250 gig of it to run from SSD....thus 2x128 gig SSDs will suffice, and cost much less, and the resulting performance will be virtually equal to having purchased 500 gig of SSD.
http://soundcloud.com/ronf-3/sets/ronf-music
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr1zAK ... LQZrUYGPQA
Favorite Gear: Kronos 61, M3, Z1, Radias, KPro, KP3, Moog Voyager, Foogers, Virus TI, Jupiter 80, Integra7, GAIA, SPD-30, Kiwi 106, RE-201, MC808, RC505, MV8800, DSI P6 and OB6 and P12, Ensoniq SQ80, EMU MP-7, Eventide H7600, Eclipse, SPACE, Pitchfactor, Timefactor, Looperlative LP-1, Axe FX Ultra, Nord Modular, DSI Tetra, Tempest, PEK, JDXA, Eurorack Modular, Octatrack, MDUW, Monomachine, A4, RYTM, Waldorf Q Phoenix, MWXTk, Blofeld, TR8.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr1zAK ... LQZrUYGPQA
Favorite Gear: Kronos 61, M3, Z1, Radias, KPro, KP3, Moog Voyager, Foogers, Virus TI, Jupiter 80, Integra7, GAIA, SPD-30, Kiwi 106, RE-201, MC808, RC505, MV8800, DSI P6 and OB6 and P12, Ensoniq SQ80, EMU MP-7, Eventide H7600, Eclipse, SPACE, Pitchfactor, Timefactor, Looperlative LP-1, Axe FX Ultra, Nord Modular, DSI Tetra, Tempest, PEK, JDXA, Eurorack Modular, Octatrack, MDUW, Monomachine, A4, RYTM, Waldorf Q Phoenix, MWXTk, Blofeld, TR8.
> You can run Windows NATIVELY
Are you sure about this?
From their website:
"Run Windows programs like they were native to your Mac"
"Use Run Windows programs like they were native to your Mac"
It's been a while since I ran Parallels. It was so buggy that I gave up. Maybe it's way better now.
Are you sure about this?
From their website:
"Run Windows programs like they were native to your Mac"
"Use Run Windows programs like they were native to your Mac"
It's been a while since I ran Parallels. It was so buggy that I gave up. Maybe it's way better now.
Korg Kronos, RD-88, Yamaha VL1, Deep Mind 6, Korg Kross, author of unrealBook for iPad.
-
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 7860
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:23 am
You can run parallels, meaning you pretty much run Windows within a Mac environment - while you're actually running Windows, Windows doesn't have full access to system resources and thus it doesn't qualify as "natively". You can, however, use Boot Camp (a computer boot up application) to create a dual boot on your Mac, which means you can choose at start up whether to run Windows or OSX. That would be the native running of Windows which Sina is talking about.
You can, however, with some googling, do the same on a PC, ever since Mac switched to Intel CPUs. Not that I would know anything about that *cough* google "hackintosh" *cough*. Steve Jobs isn't overly enthused with the idea of people running his precious OS on hardware costing a third as much.
You can, however, with some googling, do the same on a PC, ever since Mac switched to Intel CPUs. Not that I would know anything about that *cough* google "hackintosh" *cough*. Steve Jobs isn't overly enthused with the idea of people running his precious OS on hardware costing a third as much.
That's my plan. To get a few smaller size SSDs and load only certain instruments.RonF wrote: Same can be done with almost any library.....sometimes using an alias, but usually the interface will remember the location. So even though you may have 500 gig of samples, I bet if you carefully review what is what, you may only need 250 gig of it to run from SSD....thus 2x128 gig SSDs will suffice, and cost much less, and the resulting performance will be virtually equal to having purchased 500 gig of SSD.
Aside from these SSD drives, what do you think of this drive:
http://www.google.com/products/catalog? ... CFEQ8wIwAA#
-
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 7860
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:23 am
Sina, I think generally "natively" in the OS-world is construed to mean "with full access to hardware resources and no go-in-between". That's not the case with parallels. While running parallels, your MacOS is still there in the background, and you can always close parallels and shut down Windows. You can't really "shut down" MacOS (though it might appear that way) because parallels is running on it. Running Windows natively requires booting in Windows (through Boot Camp for instance) and therefore of course buying and installing Windows.
And using a dual boot system to run both OS's can also be done on a PC.
And using a dual boot system to run both OS's can also be done on a PC.
-
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1992
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:18 pm
- Location: Croatia
-
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:16 pm