griffin avid wrote:
1) Are synths of a certain type/caliber/complexity/ability reserved for certain types of users/uses?
Initially targeted but I assume that developers have an idea of who else can get use from the product.
2) Do you consider this when looking at future purchases?
I should say no but this and hype can ruin first impressions which can be annoying.
3) Do you check the alignment of a particular product in relation to your chosen genre(s)?
No, I try and look past the facade and see what parameters could be useful to me but the above can colour judgement.
4a) How important are live-song-making product demos as selling points?
Very, Most of the time you can see past the music/genre it is being represented with and can give clues to how well the interface will work for you.
4b) Compared to sound-cloud links or a patch by patch roll through?
I am not concerned with these too much as they give nothing but subjective sounds.
5) Does the preset amount (high or low or no patch memory) influence your purchase?
I delete most if not all of the presets straight away so I can learn the machine from the ground. I would prefer small preset numbers and more init patches because then there is more room for individual sounds and ones that could be close in sound to a preset would still be usable by people who are strict against using presets.
6) Does who else uses it matter? Like if it's already popular for your intended genre?
No, a synth can be used in any genre (pretty much) individual units being pigeonholed can ruin (whichever way you look at it) second hand sales.
moremagic wrote:if i didnt want a machine that automatically makes anything i play sound awesome why would i have so many delays
commodorejohn wrote:...you said stuff...
Attainability and user ability are different things. Who is to say you can/cannot use it? Unless the synth at hand is so complex to use, requires special skill/talent/dexterity, etc, to the point which it influences the acquisition outcome, I see no direct link between synth versus user types.
See above. Anything goes. Affordability and space are my pressing concerns when it comes to hobbies.
I would check to minimise overlap with existing gear.
These products generate sound/music so such videos must be helpful, to say the least. Specifications alone would not make a product. Through observation and a keen mind, one can grasp a feel "how I would/could use this" myself.
Concerning patch run-throughs, it gives a "general idea" how the synth sounds (so you know if it is your cup of tea) and the next thing to look at is the amount of "tweak-ability" away from this "general idea" (so you know if it is worth your investment). Audio links are usually less inspiring and often contain minimal information how/what was used.
Absolutely not. I play synths for my own leisure/goals.
phesago wrote:Not trying to sound like a dick, but you fail to understand that he's taking some pointless bickering and turning it into decent food for thought, stuff to talk about. You may feel incline(naturally i might add) to think it's aimed at you, but I argue that instead it was casued by you(not necessarily in a negative context).
Stab Frenzy wrote:If you're thinking about what genre you're making then you're not a real artist, you're just copying what other people have already done. Real artists just make the music and let other people worry about what genre to put things into afterwards.
Music seems to be a weird thing because everybody is convinced that they're some great artist that hasn't been discovered yet and looks down on hobbyists even though that's exactly what they are. Is it such a tough thing to admit that you're not some hidden talent and you're just part of the 99% of instrument buyers who are just making up the numbers so the manufacturers can stay in business?
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], vcs3 and 10 guests