Music Production software

[Sketchrender]

Hi

 

I am thinking of getting in to some music production for animations.

I have very little experience, but would like to get some references for software.

 

Dose anybody have any suggestions that they use, and work well.

 

Thank you

 

philip

[Chris MacDonald]

The main ones are Steinberg Cubase, Logic and Ableton Live.

 

All of them have their own advantages and disadvantages, and all of them come with their own proprietary VST's (instruments) that can be used straight out of the box; but if you really get into producing you will soon find yourself spending small fortunes on various different VST's and sample libraries.

 

Ultimately they are all very capable pieces of software and the main differences are down to how you like to work. I spent 2 years using Logic and hated every second of it; though I suspect that 50% of the reason was it being on a Mac.

 

I personally use Cubase and have done for over a decade now. I love it.

[Francisco Penaloza]

Personally I used Nuendo, Logic, Live, and Cakewalk Sonar.

I am now staying with Sonar, seems to have an overall good package for me, besides now you can rent it, and if you like it you can keep it. The "renting" price are actually payment for the final price, good deal if you are not sure. With this payment method updates in the software are very consistent.

Nuendo is great, but it was a little intimidating to start to use, the initial price it make a commitment for sure.

Live has it own stile to work, but to me, it seems better designed to do live playing than recording, besides I felt the entry level version are very castrated.

Logic is very user friendly and has a good output, I am not in Mac any more so I have to look for something else. Needless to say the latest version of Logic seems a little domed down, not sure how I feelt about that.

 

How Chris mentioned, all of them can make great sound, the difference will be the VST that you use and of course the talent you put on it

[michalfranczak]

I am using cockos Reaper and I recommend it to everyone. I used Cubase, Sonar and Nuendo but they are OVERPRICED. Hugely. they cost hundreds of dollars, Cockos Reaper costs $60. And it is capable of doing everything that its competition in a faster, more convenient and flexible way. More and more people are switching to Reaper. I switched for following reasons:

- ultra-flexible routing - you can easily make folders, route signal between tracks, very useful in mixing, side-chain compression, unusual signal paths.

- You are not limited to make "audio", "midi" or "fx" tracks, each track can hold any data, any number of audio channels or even mixed data. It speeds up workflow

- Flexible UI - you can make your own toolbars, place them where you want and make some custom commands (in reaper they are called "actions") - the software adapts to your workflow, it does not limit you to the workflow that designers wanted.

- Theming possibility

- Very light weight (ab. 10 MB), written in Python, like Blender.

- very stable and it isn't resource-hog. You can mix much more complicated projects on reaper than on Cubase on the same machine.

 

Of course, Reaper is not all you need. You need either real instruments, microphones, preamps and audio interface with ASIO drivers or VST instruments + audio interface with ASIO drivers and controller keyboard. But that's another story.

 

What I use and I recommend is:

- Reaper as DAW

- Native Instruments Kontakt as sampler (+ libraries for piano, strings, etc.)

- Reveal Sound Spire as substractive synth

- Omnisphere as all-round sound library

- Slate FG-X as mastering limiter / compressor

- Fabfilter Pro-Q2 as all-round EQ

 

It's a biiig topic and cannot be covered here. I recommend to learn more on gearslutz.com and search for interesting plugins on kvraudio.com.

 

And don't expect that you will make studio-grade stuff without decent monitors like for eg. Adam Audio AX7 or higher. Making music is much more expensive than making 3d graphics

[Chris MacDonald]

I really don't recommend Reaper if it is something you want to take seriously. It's the music equivalent of using GIMP over photoshop to save yourself a few pennies.

 

Another thing that I forgot to mention in my first reply was soundcards. Generally speaking PC soundcards are noisy and not worth a penny, so I would definitely invest in a decent one. Ignore the gamer brands such as "creative" and so on. Check out soundcards from M-Audio (cheap), MOTU, Focusrite, Lexicon, Presonus... or if you are feeling flush with cash Prism Sound, Universal Audio & Apogee.

 

Ultimately all you want is something with the relevant I/O options and low latency; even the cheapest "pro" soundcards will give you this.

 

Music production is an absolutely vast topic, it really is.

[michalfranczak]

Chris Macdonald - you haven't used Reaper if you say that it's just a soft "to save a few pennies". Reaper can do everything that is needed when it comes to music production. Tell me what you can't do with this software before you make such bold statements. I used Cubase for years, it is not even close to reaper capabilities when it comes to workflow speed and flexibility. It's better to "save a few pennies" on overbloated Cubase DAW and spend them on VSTis and FX or hardware.

[Chris MacDonald]

Calm down fella, there's no need to get your panties in a bunch.

 

- ultra-flexible routing - you can easily make folders, route signal between tracks, very useful in mixing, side-chain compression, unusual signal paths.

 

You can make folders in Cubase, route signals between tracks and sidechain signal paths.

 

You are not limited to make "audio", "midi" or "fx" tracks, each track can hold any data, any number of audio channels or even mixed data. It speeds up workflow

 

I don't really see how you would class this as a pro for Reaper, or a con for any other DAW? It's merely a different workflow.

 

- Flexible UI - you can make your own toolbars, place them where you want and make some custom commands (in reaper they are called "actions") - the software adapts to your workflow, it does not limit you to the workflow that designers wanted.

 

You can do this in Cubase (and most other DAWs), plus Cubase has the powerful MIDI logical editor and project logical editor.

 

- Theming possibility

 

Inspirational.

 

- Very light weight (ab. 10 MB), written in Python, like Blender.

 

Can't argue with that, though I fail to see the benefits of having a small install given the size of hard drives these days?

 

- very stable and it isn't resource-hog. You can mix much more complicated projects on reaper than on Cubase on the same machine.

 

Stats? The latest Cubase engine has been rewritten and is much quicker; not that I ever found it to be slow at all. When I hit play; it plays. This isn't 1990.

 

It is worth remembering that this chap is starting out and isn't going to be interested in sidechaining, mastering or crazy signal routing. I remember when I first started out and the biggest challenge I faced was getting the sound from my head into the software, let alone anything else.

 

I just find the whole experience working within Cubase to be so well refined (and so it should be, it's been around long enough) and well thought out, with dozens of high quality plugins straight out of the box.

 

Also every recording studio I've been to has run Cubase so it's nice to be able to get straight into producing elsewhere and collaborating with the people. The user base is huge.

 

There are also several versions of Cubase too, so he doesn't have to go for the "full fat" option with all the bells and whistles, there are versions tailored to people that are just starting out.

 

https://www.steinberg.net/en/products/cubase/line_up.html

Edited July 7, 2015 by Macker

[michalfranczak]

You can make folders in Cubase, route signals between tracks and sidechain signal paths.

 

Not even remotely that fast as in case of Reaper, when it comes to simple drag and drop or one-click action to make folder, assign or unassign tracks to it, color them automatically according to track name, automate any parameter, etc. Possible in Cubase, but slow.

 

I don't really see how you would class this as a pro for Reaper, or a con for any other DAW? It's merely a different workflow.

I'll emphasise: you tell Reaper what your favorite workflow is, not the opposite. You cannot change Cubase workflow, you have to adapt to it. Reaper is a different beast and it really makes it faster. Id does not stand in a way of creation. I spend thousands of hours - both in Cubase and Reaper. I don't want to return to Steinberg's software - it's pre-designed workflow has too many flaws.

 

I fail to see the benefits of having a small install given the size of hard drives these days?

It's simple: Reaper has very fair licensing system and can be installed portable. You can install it on pendrive or any machine you own and activate it with single license. Buy once, install everywhere. And installation does not require a dongle. It takes literally 10 seconds. Ultra-mobile solution.

 

Stats? The latest Cubase engine has been rewritten and is much quicker; not that I ever found it to be slow at all. When I hit play; it plays. This isn't 1990.

I would need to dwell little longer, but there were some tests with "how many plugin instances can you enable before drop-out" and Reaper wins in this kind of competition. If you have plugin-heavy project every CPU cycle counts. If you are performing live, you need big headroom to be safe from any drop-outs. Reaper shines here.

 

It is worth remembering that this chap is starting out and isn't going to be interested in sidechaining, mastering or crazy signal routing. I remember when I first started out and the biggest challenge I faced was getting the sound from my head into the software, let alone anything else.

It's better to have more (and cheaper) tools than expensive, limited software.

 

Now for some unique features, that are not in Cubase:

- parameter modulation - a unique Reaper feature that can automate any parameter according to built-in LFO or signal from any track. It can lead to many creative effects with just bunch of clicks. You can make dynamic eq from a simplest eq plugin. Many possibilities there.

- mass-track actions - you can with two-clicks make changes to selected or all tracks - change volume (relative or absolute) by give value, remove all fx, reroute tracks, etc. Cubase does not allow fast way for that.

- custom action - you can chain actions in strings and make your own. It means that in one click you could order Reaper to change multiple track or items parameters, just like custom actions in Photoshop.

- super-fast stem rendering,

- multi-stage freezing,

- wildcards of rendered files,

- flexible backup system,

- region rendering queue

 

...and coming in v5:

- VCA groups

- more video features

- scripting

 

 

Also every recording studio I've been to has run Cubase so it's nice to be able to get straight into producing elsewhere and collaborating with the people. The user base is huge.

The userbase of Reaper is huge also. And when it comes to exchanging tracks between studios, you always need to render stems, because you cannot be sure if studio has all plugins and instruments you used. It does not matter in which software you prepare those stems. They are in standard WAV format.

 

There are also several versions of Cubase too, so he doesn't have to go for the "full fat" option with all the bells and whistles, there are versions tailored to people that are just starting out.

Yes, multiple versions, like Cubasis, even more crippled than main version.

 

Last but not least - there is no need to take my words for granted, see for yourself - download uncrippled, fully functional free version of Reaper. You need to buy it after 60 days, it's more than enough to decide if it's good or not: http://www.reaper.fm

Edited July 7, 2015 by michalfranczak

[Chris MacDonald]

I see what you're saying but I still totally disagree purely because I have literally never run into any of the problems you are highlighting with Cubase.

 

The best thing to do is to trial as many bits of software as you feel is necessary and go with whatever you feel works best for you. All of them are capable of producing professional results if you are willing to put the time in.

 

I also forgot to mention Propellerheads Reason; I used this for a couple of years and enjoyed every second of using it, however never actually managed to get anything decent out of it.

[michalfranczak]

I see what you're saying but I still totally disagree purely because I have literally never run into any of the problems you are highlighting with Cubase.

 

Yet you *do not* recommend Reaper. That statement was the reason of my rant, because I know both apps very well and I think that's most unfair thing to say about Reaper.

[Chris MacDonald]

It felt uncomfortably basic when I used it, that's why I can't recommend it.

[michalfranczak]

That only means that you didn't take time to learn it. Manual is the answer. I cannot name one thing I couldn't do in Reaper in my daily music production and I use it for MIDI, audio, some simple video tasks, used it in the studio, on the stage, for lectures, complicated electronic music, rock music, etc...

[Chris MacDonald]

Well the same with me and Cubase. So what we can agree on at least is that the software you choose is likely to produce professional results, but you need to simply be able to "get along with it".

[michalfranczak]

Well the same with me and Cubase. So what we can agree on at least is that the software you choose is likely to produce professional results, but you need to simply be able to "get along with it".

 

Yes, both Reaper and Cubase can do advanced stuff. I prefer Reaper and it's cheaper, so it's obvious choice for me. But it wasn't money that convinced me - I don't like compromises in music - I like it to be as 'pro-grade' as it is possible. Reaper does not stand in the way of this task, I was tired with some Cubase limitations. That was the point. Of course, I cannot deny that you can make good record with Cubase, in fact my first LP was mixed entirely in Cubase. But I cannot justifiy this expense anymore. There is much more expensive stuff that is needed in music production - interface, monitors, microphones, keys, audio treatment, silent and fast PC, not to mention stands, cables and all minor stuff...

[DouonSeuban]

i'll chime in since before going into architecture, I got my first degree in music composition in the late 90's.

 

since you're just starting out, i'd say the two easiest, and most cost effective options for you will be:

Reason

Fruity Loops Studio

 

they both started as loop-based systems but can handle audio recording now. they're super intuitive, and you can make music out of the box. FL studio is used by Avicii, BT, DeadMau5, so you can use it to make professional quality. I use Reason myself (started witih v8 after a 10 year+ hiatus) and it's amazing how far the packages have come).

 

bottom line, pick up software that works for you. pro tools, abelton, cubase, live, garageband, reaper, et al can each do great things but if you don't feel comfortable using it, who cares about all the features? It's like arguing which render package is the best.

[Sketchrender]

Michal and Chris

 

Lads don't fall out over my question.

Thank you both very much for the advise.

I have no music back ground, I blame my parents, but I will try one of the the software packages.

I have been listening to Tony Anderson's work on Music bed and love it .

I would very much like to get int to that end of the business.

I personally want to produce music for animations for myself.

 

Thats were this is coming from.

 

So thank you both very much.

 

Phil

[Nic H]

i would pay a composer / producer to make your music and charge a fee on top of that

 

 

then in your spare time you can make banging techno in ableton

[michalfranczak]

Philip, music is very entertaining creative field, but hard and expensive one if you want to do it right It took me years to understand the rules of composing, mixing, arranging tracks, so if you want hear the music in your animations, I think the fastest way is to hire someone, as nicnic said. But iIf you are truly convinced to make music, start learning. Some essential skills (in my opinion):

 

1. Playing keys, even in a basic way. Learning chords, improvisation etc. 1-2 years for begginer level.

2. Arranging - lots and lots of listening to tracks that you like, finding key elements, learning how it was all assembled together, where are culmination points, what are tricks to rise tension, direct the feelings of the listeners of your music

3. Chosing the right sound and knowing when your sound is bad - lots of testing different drum libraries, bass sounds, synth sounds, finding what works together and what does not.

4. Recording and mixing - mainly EQ, compression, modulation fx and reverb. You need to master those tools. There are other topics like side-chain compression, double tracking, fx automation, but there are not needed in every track - it's good to know them, though.

5. Final touch or "home-mastering", especially needed for albums - controlling volume and eq of different tracks so they sound equally loud.

 

Essential gear:

- studio monitors - take the most expensive you can get

- keyboard

- pc or mac with DAW software

- some VST fx and instruments

- audio interface with ASIO drivers

 

if you plan to record vocals, you will also need

- microphone (even decent dynamic like Shure SM) + stand

- closed headphones

 

Some resources:

http://www.musictech.net/2013/06/beginners-guide/

https://makingmusic.ableton.com/

https://www.musicradar.com

[Sketchrender]

i would pay a composer / producer to make your music and charge a fee on top of that

 

 

then in your spare time you can make banging techno in ableton

 

Been there and done that and bought the t shirt literally.

Mayday techno festival in Germany many many years ago.

[Chris MacDonald]

Ahhh, remember Members Of Mayday - 10 in 01?

[Francisco Penaloza]

Just to trow there an other valid option is, Garageband. if you don't have any music background or previews music creation background, Garage band will be a very easy to start software. Quality wise is great. The only limitation, if we can call it that way is that it run in MAC only so unless you have already a mac, it may be worth to try.

 

If you don't play any instrument, you should at the same time learn keyboard or guitar or something, without knowing how to play anything it will make it hard, also tempo and melody should be experienced to make successful music, just pushing buttons and creating beat does not make the cut really.

 

You can search the net, there is hundred of free VSTs and sound to make you start without emptying your pocket , later on, your ear will tell you what's need to be undated or ungraded. kvraudio.com is a great resource for sounds and everything music production.

[Jon Berntsen]

I have been producing music for 17 years and also am performing. I have a fairly good studio now, with a lot of good plugs (including all from slate, which rocks) and also some hardware. I do also have a full time job in archviz. Yet I do pay for music for our presentations/animations. It is simply not sustainable to spend company time making music. You also cannot drink red wine at work.

 

Asking for daw tips is waste if time. It is so much about what you start learning. All systems have the options you need. Just make sure it has plug support. My personal preference is ableton.

Edited July 11, 2015 by chroma

[Chris MacDonald]

Don't do what I did and get really, really in to producing and make purchases that you don't need. Especially hardware.

 

I've owned a lot of various bits of hardware over the years and it all definitely comes with certain snob value; firstly it just looks cool having racks and racks of gear all lit up but you also get to say "oh yah, I made that using my hardware synth, it sounds better than software".

 

I had (still have, in the garage) a novation KS rack synth that took pride of place in my setup for years. How many times did I use it in an actual track? None. Zero. Zilch. The same goes for a summing mixer I have, and a mic preamp. It's not that it's bad equipment it's that the "working in the box" workflow is what I absolutely love - so make damn sure you weigh up any potential purchases very carefully first. I could have saved myself hundreds of pounds, or spent it on equipment that I actually WILL use.

[Jon Berntsen]

Don't do what I did and get really, really in to producing and make purchases that you don't need. Especially hardware.

 

I've owned a lot of various bits of hardware over the years and it all definitely comes with certain snob value; firstly it just looks cool having racks and racks of gear all lit up but you also get to say "oh yah, I made that using my hardware synth, it sounds better than software".

 

I had (still have, in the garage) a novation KS rack synth that took pride of place in my setup for years. How many times did I use it in an actual track? None. Zero. Zilch. The same goes for a summing mixer I have, and a mic preamp. It's not that it's bad equipment it's that the "working in the box" workflow is what I absolutely love - so make damn sure you weigh up any potential purchases very carefully first. I could have saved myself hundreds of pounds, or spent it on equipment that I actually WILL use.

 

Good points there Chris. Hardware tend to be very tempting, but in almost every cases that's where you get stuck. I had a new round with hardware stuff prett recently (they tend to come in batches ) and I am selling most of it again now, in favor of further investments in software solutions. I always forget how much hardware kills creativity.

 

For electronic music of all aspects (from movie tracks to electronica and even pop productions) I can recommend the new book: https://makingmusic.ableton.com. It does not target Ableton users only and has a great deal of tips you won't find in the stupid youtube tutorials.

[Sketchrender]

I just wanted to say thank you again.

Its a long road I know, a hobby at first I am sure.

 

A lot of reading to do, and listening, and learning.

 

phil