> Cubase is, in principle, far more sophisticated. You can set up effects
> processors and automate level changes. And of course, I'm using it to
> drive a bank of samplers and synthesizers. I've got a library of 120 GB
> of sample data covering drum kits, grand pianos, choir, pipe organs,
> just about every orchestral instrument you can think of a name for, all
> with multiple velocity layers, different articulations, and so on. I've
> got dozens of synthesizers, each with hundreds of presets, and a
> bazillion macro parameters to tweak on each one, not even mentioning the
> possibilities for editing the underlying data.
>
> It's actually possible to just spend 2 hours trying to find / construct
> the right sound, and ever actually record anything!
>
> But more than that, it's possible to be too much of a perfectionist. To
> spend so much time tweaking that you don't produce very much. My latest
> piece, Distant Lands (which, I notice, is now well over a year old) saw
> me spending about 2 days tweaking the volume controls trying to get the
> level as near to maximum as possible without clipping, and trying to get
> the sound balance right.
>

As a music-producing friend of mine once said "Be careful, if you 
twiddle your knob for too long, you'll go blind!"


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message