4 ms·

I've been saying this to the people I teach for years... And bear in mind that you can run multiple copies of an effect (providing your computer has the cpu pow

I've been saying this to the people I teach for years... And bear in mind that you can run multiple copies of an effect (providing your computer has the cpu power to do so), whereas back in the day you would get only the physical effect you actually bought. Mixdown with multiple compressors was just a dream - typically you'd have a couple of good channels of compression, then maybe a few more 'workhorse' units such as alesis 3630, and everyone else would have to go without. This also doesn't take into account the improvement of much equipment today. I used to dream of a seck 1882, back in the day. I finally owned one about 10 years ago. It was bloody awful! Noisy as hell, and the EQ wasn't any good. Never meet your heroes!

nxpnsv 6y ago
I still use my 3630 for a lot of my stuff.
puranjay 6y ago
It goes to show how good producers before the digital era were. Albums you'd consider 20th century masterpieces were recorded on 4-track recorders. They'd record a section, bounce it to one track. Record another section on the second track, then merge the two tracks. And so on. Incredible amount of hard work.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
Those Secks were utter crap in every possible way - nowhere near pro performance, and a poor match for that 16 track. You had to spend twice as much to get something that wasn't bad bedroom demo quality. In fact most beginners made demos on a Tascam Portastudio or equivalent - 4 tracks, more with bouncing - with a synth or two and guitar pedal effects. You couldn't afford a 16-channel reel-to-reel multitrack unless you had a proper job - unlikely for most wannabe musicians - or a record deal, or you were trying to run a low-end pro studio. The equipment has improved and become a lot more affordable, but limited access made people hungry and that kept the music more interesting. Now a lot of people seem to buy sample packs and mix them in FL, or buy a giant modular to make the same old square proto-techno as everyone else, and it's more conformist music-by-numbers with much less risk-taking and adventure.
afandian 6y ago
My abiding memory of the seck 1882 is how heavy and ungainly to move it was. That fits in a laptop now, many times over, with extra space for an 8-track.
sickcodebruh 6y ago
I sold my hardware Distressor last week because the UAD version is just as good to my ears and significantly more flexible and pleasant to work with. I feel spoiled by it!
- radiowave 6y ago
  I bet the plugin version doesn't introduce buzz on single-coil pickups, either.

nxpnsv 6y ago

I still use my 3630 for a lot of my stuff.

puranjay 6y ago

It goes to show how good producers before the digital era were. Albums you'd consider 20th century masterpieces were recorded on 4-track recorders. They'd record a section, bounce it to one track. Record another section on the second track, then merge the two tracks. And so on. Incredible amount of hard work.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

TheOtherHobbes 6y ago

Those Secks were utter crap in every possible way - nowhere near pro performance, and a poor match for that 16 track. You had to spend twice as much to get something that wasn't bad bedroom demo quality. In fact most beginners made demos on a Tascam Portastudio or equivalent - 4 tracks, more with bouncing - with a synth or two and guitar pedal effects. You couldn't afford a 16-channel reel-to-reel multitrack unless you had a proper job - unlikely for most wannabe musicians - or a record deal, or you were trying to run a low-end pro studio. The equipment has improved and become a lot more affordable, but limited access made people hungry and that kept the music more interesting. Now a lot of people seem to buy sample packs and mix them in FL, or buy a giant modular to make the same old square proto-techno as everyone else, and it's more conformist music-by-numbers with much less risk-taking and adventure.

afandian 6y ago

My abiding memory of the seck 1882 is how heavy and ungainly to move it was. That fits in a laptop now, many times over, with extra space for an 8-track.

sickcodebruh 6y ago

I sold my hardware Distressor last week because the UAD version is just as good to my ears and significantly more flexible and pleasant to work with. I feel spoiled by it!

radiowave 6y ago
I bet the plugin version doesn't introduce buzz on single-coil pickups, either.