It is not the tools that limit the artist, but only the imagination.

Sincerely,
Everett James
http://www.murdakillproductions.com
info@murdakill.com

torq MIXLAB

No physical spinning/scratching (there’s no real cheap solution for that), but it could still be a lot of fun and a decent start.

As for the issue of how critical we should be when I write, I think these are all good points. As I think you know from my reviews, I don’t hesitate to raise issues I find, assuming I find them. (Now, I haven’t done as many full-out reviews on CDM — but I hope that will change soon.) I haven’t run into this DXi/VSTi issue, but I haven’t done as much heavy work in SONAR because it’s not my primary host. I also haven’t formally reviewed that product (partly because I don’t know it as well as I’d like and at Keyboard people like Craig Anderton do know it very, very well).

Previewing new gear and apps, I do try to figure out what the story of a product is, whether it merits closer examination. In a review, yes, we should be more critical, and I agree that we should be talking about the things that don’t work — and every single music product has stuff that doesn’t work, or doesn’t work the way we’d like, so there’s no reason to be shy about that.

But I think the more important point is not that people see things more positively or negatively, but that we never see a product in exactly the same way. That goes both ways: I’ve been negative about some things only to find out from people using a product that they simply use it in a different way than I’d imagine. And I’m constantly learning from all the software you’re enthusiastic about, Adrian.

So I think blogs, while we’re still figuring out how this format will work, promise two opportunities. One is to start more discussion, and let people immediately talk back when we write. The other is to deal with flaws (or strengths) on a more ongoing basis, since it’s not always possible to cover (or find) everything in a single review.

And I certainly think we should rant and rave liberally. After all, we feel pretty strongly about the way stuff works in our music.

For instance, i’ve gotten in trouble at times with cakewalk by complaining about Sonar’s still sucky plug-in support. Did you know that if you install too many VSTis into Sonar (or P5v.2) that your Cakewalk and some 3rd party DXis will start to disappear from your plug-in drop-down menu? The DXis aren’t unintalled, rather cakewalk sequencers won’t make them available for use for some reason. FLStudio can still find the missing plugs and use them alright however… I find this bug rather annoying, and a major hurdle to using cakewalk products, especially considering all the killer freebee VSTis out there. Recently, I’ve decided to stop using DXis entirely for this reason, as my 100s of VSTis mean much more to my music making that the half-dozen DXis that I have from cakewalk among others. I like a few of them, like PSYNII, but not enough to give up most of my wide range of VSTis that I have collected in order to use them in Sonar.

On the other hand, my other favorite sequencer, FLStudio has a serious CPU usage problem. Less in version 6 than previous ones, but still when using SynthEdit made VSTi synths in FL the CPU meter goes off the charts with just a few key strikes. A royal pain in the ass when I’m trying to make an IDM track with some xoxos plugs.

My point is that both are great programs, and both make me want to kick my screen in sometimes because of bugs that mostly only power-users will notice…hence they rarely get fixed. It’s important for journalists, especially bloggers like you Peter to bring up these issues as often times this is the only way that these sorts of issues get fixed.

Hell, it took many years of complaining by KVR members among others to have cakewalk finally include VST-midi support in their products. Gushing over the pluses helps nobody, especially the software company. A critical press helps make software better over time, more so than one that’s always upbeat.

That’s what I think at least.