2452440336_a79ac14316[1]

Drum Machines Have No Soul.” Wait — “Drum Machines Have Soul, Ableton Has No Soul.” Photo: Leo-setä.

Given a choice between boring and crazy, I always choose crazy. After all, craziness is part of the artistic persona. So bring it on.

It’s been a while since we had a celebrity saying things that didn’t really make sense. It’d be unfair to ask Ricardo Villalobos live up to some of the titans – Bob Dylan saying CDs have “no stature” and “have sound all over them,” and Elton’ John’s classic call to “tear down the Internet.” (Not to mention, in the end I think we wound up agreeing with them and turned Elton’s quote into a brand-new verb.) As with Elton John and Bob Dylan, I love and respect Villalobos’ work, no less so as he says things with which I disagree. But Ricardo Villalobos does get special credit for claiming in a recent Resident Advisor interview, among other things, that what has really hurt sound quality today is the lack of cheap drum machines from the 80s, because they were analog. Or they weren’t, but it was as if they were. Or something. (If you think this might earn some ire from Ableton loyalists, you’re right.)

No. I think the development is going in the opposite direction because everyone is making tracks in programs like Ableton, which has an OK sound engine. When I started making music 20 years ago, you had to at least buy a mixer, then some synthesizers, a drum machine—which is the best quality possible of a sampled drum. There was a pureness of the source of the music. It was analog, direct.

Ah, yes, the good old days. Back in the day, digital samples of acoustic instruments played through digital-to-analog-converters were real digital samples of acoustic instruments played through digital -to-analog-converters. It was analog, direct – well, aside from the fact that it was digital and not direct, but it was real … um … analog … digital. Pulse code modulation was real, pure pulse code modulation, not like the pulse code modulation you kids have today. Not like now, when people don’t … own… mixers. It’s not like you kids today, you people who use Ableton, people like… Ricardo Villalobos. (Villalobos is, in fact, a notable Live user.)

I mean, at least it’s a novel argument. Usually, you get the “mixing in the box is bad” and “computers aren’t real” argument from crusty audio engineers with massive outboard analog mixing boards, not electronic musicians. Recently, many experienced engineers I’ve talked to have come to the side of accepting that “in-the-box” recordings in software can be just as good as their analog counterparts. So, we may have reached a real landmark, a world in which electronic musicians claim digital’s no good and turntables are the only way to listen, while engineers experienced with analog claim just the opposite.

Let’s go back in time. For the record, twenty years ago by my calculations would be 1989.

The drum machine you might have bought then could be the Alesis HR-16, or perhaps a Roland TR-707. They’re fantastic, unique-sounding instruments. But “the best quality possible” is not generally a phrase associated with instruments of this era. We love them because they aren’t 192kHz, 64-bit multisamples recorded from 30 microphones and shipped on a 100 GB hard drive, because “quality” isn’t actually everything. And if you bought a new mixer in 1989, I assume you picked up something like Mackie’s just-released LM-1602, rather than an SSL. Of course, you really could go do that now. In fact, Ableton Live recently added 64-bit processing in the signal chain; the software that does more aliasing to account for lower bitrates is actually Pro Tools.

1340262701_91c14106bc[1]

Fear for the ghost not in the machine. Photo: Marco Raaphorst

He goes on:

The thing is, you have the limitation of the program, the limitation of the digital mixing which is happening inside the computer, you have the limitation of the sound sources of the synthesizers—the virtual synthesizers. Even the sound engine is playing a very big role in the whole sound of the product. If you have a good turntable and good speakers, you can hear it is made in Ableton. Logic, for example, is very neutral in sound but Ableton…you can hear it in two seconds.

It’s hard to know where to begin. Live does have an overused sound – but that comes from people using effects presets as-is, people not knowing how to mix, people time stretching and warping without adjusting settings or taking care to think about the impact on its sound.

The idea that you have to use a turntable to hear these things, or generally to hear quality issues in a track produced entirely digitally is… well, an interesting theory. (It’d be like testing the fidelity of your inkjet printer by first taking a Polaroid of the output.)

They have all of these virtual instruments that are calculated by a computer, and you have a certain space where you have to put everything. And when you want to leave this space, you have to live with compromises, the compromises of digital mixes and recordings.

Now, perhaps I’m wrong, but I thought that if for some reason you thought you needed to mix on an analog board and record to, say, analog reel-to-reel, you were no less able to do that with the analog outs of your MacBook Pro than with your 606.

And what exactly was in those vintage drum machines, if not a computer making  calculations? Eleven secret herbs and spices? Elves with slide rules?

But this is the beauty of interviews – you can say whatever you want. And it definitely beats boring.

There is also one statement with which I wholeheartedly agree:

People are finding it easy to publish something without any controls. And this is the problem with the internet in general. There is so much information, and no one knows if it’s true or not. It’s just there. It’s an information monster.

It’s almost as though the Internet is a place in which people can make any wild claim they wish, without anyone questioning its basis in reality or fact.

http://www.residentadvisor.net/feature.aspx?1128

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

1. Of course the DAW's like Reason and Ableton that are packaged with distinct (and usable) instruments and effects will have the same "sound" to it.

2. Half of you are making an irrelevant argument. For example, the dj who claims a set DOES in fact sound "better" on turntables that cd. Great, that's analog vs. digital. Drum Machines like MPC's are digital. That's digital vs. digital. The variables are bit-rate, hardware vs. ITB......two different things. Analog freaks walk away. This doesn't concern you.

Mr. Lobos is 100% right on this one, he says a lot of crap which isn't right. But the fact that ableton sounds crap is so true!

And no it's not the effect nore people's mixing skills, it's just the sound engine which sounds like a horrible over compressed mp3 file or something!

If you can't hear this right away when setting up your TR drum samples in Ableton i suggest you stop making music right away for you have a really bad understanding of how things should sounds. And you should protect the future electronic music scene from yourself, you got no hearing what so ever!

It is nice for playing live sets!

Incredibly late to the party, and much of the comments were TLDNR, so my apologies. Double apologies because this comment is also ending up to be TLDNR.

The Alesis HR-16 was used by Godflesh for a good long time to make some of my favorite music. And yet he felt he could never get the exact guitar tone he wanted in those years.

I dunno about all the detail-y arguments that went on in this thread. I just know that each piece of kit, computer, piece of software is a tool, and we choose the ones that sound how we want and let us realize our creative output.

I'll spare y'all the examples of different instruments I like to work with and those I pass on. What I will say is each tool is made by people who made choices as to what to include and leave out in its construction at every stage, and we base our personal preferences of what to use on that to a large degree.

Other than listening to friends' music, most of the time composition and production are at the fore of what I care about, and what they used and how they used it is in the background. I'm mostly concerned with "Do they know how to use their tools well?" I could care less if they've actually twisted a knob on a physical mixing board when it's clear they have mastered the virtual one they use.

When doing a tasting of fine booze, if the tasting is blind you get different results than if the people knew which brand they were tasting when.

Peter, thanks for this post. It's in keeping with something I've noticed more and more, and am trying to do better at myself: talking about exactly what I intended to talk about, instead of being indirect, using innuendo or hints, or even being passive-aggressive.

great point Justin. You are spot on with this post. no questions.

jumping on the thread after seeing it linked from stretta.

rv isn't a native english speaker. the issue is simple: ableton's subpar mixing engine, dithering, clipping, etc., and UI that lends to amateurs often distorting, compared with running outputs from gear into desks. old gear has unique character (both good/bad), which we now have countless plugins trying to emulate/simulate/process. i agree with chaircrusher that essentially the only determining factor here is putting a digital recorder in front of someone stating their opinion, famous or not, but RV has a track record that speaks of success in terms of listenership and dj support. my own opinion on his music, and those of commenters here, is largely irrelevant.

this is just jumping on an obviously problematic dialogue, and making a big deal out of nothing. honestly money talks, and we have UAD, SoundToys, D16, AD, etc. making a living off simulating what he's describing. And maybe we'll all buy the UAD Ableton Simulator in 2020 when we want to recall the days where everything had beatsynced granulation and distorted midrange.

In the BBC documentary on the history of electronic music, it was clear that what sold the hitmakers of that era was still topnotch vocals and lyrics, so that qualifies the importance of the music analog or digital right there.

I own a juno106, the poor man's analog winner and it does sound warmer, and purer, and does things software doesn't do, including giving me some hands on time, the real point. Its chorus also throws a bunch of noise, so its permanently off, and the chorus in the DAW is better.

I cant speak to what a 909 or 808 original sound like, because I'm not spending 1500 bucks to find out. I heard a Jupiter 8 and it sounded good, but not 6k of good.

Converters matter, but so does having a good ear for EQ and mixing. I definitely am sticking to real gtr amplification although I did recently get an ok distortion gtr sound out of Reason. I tried GtrRig and thought it sounded awful. I've found Live to be totally useful for real instrument recordings. THe last generation of software effects sounded terrible. I'm sure there are better, but Live's seem reasonable.

WHat do you want really besides, EQ, reverb, compression and delay (live needs a better echo)

I agree Reason solo always sounds canned, but put your own drum samples in the ReDrum, use the mastering and things improve, and the Thor helped a lot as well.

Live drums are always worth having around. Ultimately it still comes down to what you create. Synths are worth going analog if you can afford it, I guess.

The song is the more important than whether your 303 is real, though. That 303 sound is not exactly new, either. Time to check out the new analog gear people are releasing.

Ultimately, the freedom to record multitracks with onboard effects vs the old days of paying through the nose for a clown engineer and stress in the studio is no contest, not to mention tape rewinding, easy editing, yadda yadda. No contest whatsoever on the recording end of things. The computer kicks ass for recording, but you still need some analog bass, drums, gtr, and keys to not sound like mcreason.

I think a lot of people (not all) post their opinion on these matters without ever having gotten their hands on any real vintage (digital even) gear. If someone put and mpc60 or mpc3000 in front of them (I am not talking about akai post HK buyout) and gave them a chance to play with it, they may have a different idea. Older electronic instruments were made for professional musicians with price tags to match, but they were made for quality. The output (analog) electronics for the individual outs on say an akai s950 or mpc60/3000 sound huge. New mpcs don't compare, and if you want to spend the money to get something comparable today to go with your computer, you'll spend a lot more than you would on a vintage sampler. If you're happy with the sounds that you make, however you make, them that's wonderful, but to suggest that there isn't a difference between the quality of design, build, and performance of older electronic music gear and the stuff sold today well I think you're out to lunch. Yes, you could choose to spend the $$$$$ today and buy some boutique instrument that may hold it's weight, but the style of today is quantity over quality -- that goes for the gear, and it translates over to the music as well.

Perhaps a lot of his contradictions come from his command of the language?

Interesting reading all the same!

little bit OT...but!

If I would been around a digitalrecorder in an interview I would have talked about the inflation of minimal techno these days according to DAW:s and MPC:s.

There is monstrous amount of minimal 128 bitrate mp3 out there just waiting to be played, thats our legacy and our future nostalgia...is good or bad!?, I don't know, ask mr villalobos!

As an old fart music making from '79 I've heard the whining 'things were better years ago' argument for thirty years. Ableton Live will eventually be a bit of nostalgia for somebody. Personally I miss the square wave out of a TRS-80.(Most probably wouldn't).

Every era has great stuff, why sort by date?

To all mpc fans: its ok to spend 1000 euros to a hardware drum machine. its always ok since you can afford it. i think you all missed a part here. Digital age. Like Peter says, mpc is still digital, is still a software, is still a daw in a single box and of course you pay for all these. But hey (!), in my studio i have a computer, all the mixing is happening in my daw, whats the darn point on using an mpc over lets say...a ni maschine or guru. its all the same, plus a virtual drum machine nowdays is more feature rich and yet more handy! quality of the samples being used is all that matters. And as a final conclusion i say: Welcome to the digital age. you dont like it? its always ok to go back in time and use your "all analog" process. But digital age offers us not only a more than good and acceptable quality, but also cheaper technology and the right to choose among hundreds of products to find the one that fits our needs. if we lived back in the 80s, i could never imagine my self making music. i would need a fortune and a huge basement to mount and place all the analog gear. i have good memories from the "old" all analog days, but no thanks, i am NOT going back!

ah yes, the TITANS of music... Bob Dylan, Elton John and... Ricardo Villalobos? um, WHO?

A celebrity? Really? OK, if you say so...

I'm not sure which is crazier, his comments or the word 'celebrity' and his name appearing in the same sentence.

There is a major psychological difference between when you hold something in your hand, and when you are only allowed to look at it. I personally think THIS is the major difference between what people think about computer making music versus purely hardware making music.

really easy for him now to say things like that, he's rich, he's got plenty of amazing speakers, gears, and expensive studio tools, he's famous(and in a way he deserves it), and he want to stop dance music buisness soon...But this is a really ridiculous and quiet snobish discussion. Is music all about sound quality? I love some of his work but i won't exachange one of my hieroglyphic being record (who is not really a supreme recording technician) to one villalobos record! Use what you have and use it well, that's all! Madlib! Four Têt! Burial! Ark! Bibio! Kool keith! Daniel Johnston! Pan sonic! Ikeda! Moondog! Allez Ricardo, do you know that 90% of time your music is played in bad mp3 quality! Aaaahaa.

villalobos should shut the fuck up. period. he gets too big for one's britches.

this guy should sell his digital I/O stuff and should start playing congas and bongos and record the stuff via an analog console to a tape machine.

by the way, how much drugs has he already taken?

does he have the time to become a electical engineer? his appointment book is full! he only uses modern technology and is talking shite. that´s all.

peter can publish what he wants, it´s his website here.

over and out!

Well, he of course used all the wrong words for it, but the old gear vs software argument is not shockingly new. if you concede him the benefit of the doubt regarding dates and such he was probably referring to the 909, and if you open that can of worms we can argue for ages and still you won't convince the purists.

The daw summing part i don't agree, but i think that workflow and software features impact the sound in subtle but deep ways. you could hypothetically recreate the same track in logic and ableton, probably yeah, but realistically it wouldn't sound the same, and not for the 'engine' fault, but for what you did differently

@Peter

Reckon there will be a backlash against the direction music technology has been taken. You can get a feel for this from the success of the monome, richie's video a while back, even this villalbos's interview. The industry is based on a business model of paid upgrades, which then drives more features, whether they are needed or not, so as to justify the upgrade price. We are now at a point of feature critical mass with the software, and close to a point where the whole thing just becomes too much. Sure if your in from the start you understand it as you evolved with the software, but new users? Guarantee you show any of the current software from the usual suspects to a guitar playing friend and he/she will go wtf!

hahahaha what an idiot

"People are finding it easy to publish something without any controls. And this is the problem with the internet in general. There is so much information, and no one knows if it’s true or not. It’s just there. It’s an information monster."

...sounds like he's aiming at the fact that no-one finds his music for purchase.

or

"In the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes."

Andy Warhol

@Fintain

and if i use Ableton only as a MIDI sequencer is it okay or not ? come on people , the problem is the people using the software , not the software itself

@cooptrol

it may sound good , but what if one doesnt like the genre ? at the end of the day , what matters is what you are doing , not the gear you are using , that is why what Villallobos is saying is so stupid , i dont like house and it doesnt matter for me if Villallobos does its crap on MPC or Ableton ...

check out the album troublemakers - express way , it was 100% made with Ableton live , and mastered with it.

This two tracks were made, one with an Akai mpc2000 and mixed with Cubase, and the other totally in Ableton. Guess what track Villalobos identify in two seconds!

http://bit.ly/villalobos0 http://bit.ly/villalobos1

:)) and hey that's my old Sony laptop now running Ubuntu with it's yellow screen

Solution 1: Listen to things you like.

Solution 2: Use instruments, tools, and software that you like.

Solution 3: Argue on the internet.

@Fintain: Okay, maybe I will really sound naive, but if we assume the "peak" is now in the past, there's our first problem.

i don't know about all of this.

i will be buying a goat for my studio however

I think the problem is that while software like Live is great, it is now more an engineering tool more than anything else.

House/Techno was at its peak when people just had boxes, there was no automation curves, warp markers, max/msp, just real musical instruments. You turned the knobs in real time, recorded it with than human element of groove as you messed around and the results were amazing. We need to get back to this and forget all the rest which is only a distraction and makes the music sterile.

The article is over-commented already, but I wanted to share my comments too.

I have been using Live to make music for years, and I think it is the best music editing software there is.

Thing is, I not always use it as a sound or music source. I have always played live with Reaktor, Max, and some hardware. Recently I have switched completely to hardware for live, and now I'm composing exclusively on my machines, and recording them and mastering in Live.

I agree the machines sound different to software, its up to each one to tell which one they like the most. I still use Live to compose music for commercials, which is my job, and I'm sure no one can tell which software was used to compose my ads music. There are thousands of people who use Live to make music that isn't "electronic music" and I'm sure their music doesn't sound like "made with Live". I have made rock music, classical, folk, ethnic, and lots of ohter genres with Live. My artistic music? I do it with machines, and I can tell I achieve much better results with machines than composing in Live. This is a video of a track I made recently with hardware: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzrFEtjA6fk

I just bought a Tetra, it sounds loads better than any of the analogue vsts in ableton...

Oh, just a min, could it be my perception has been coloured by the fact that it cost loads more than any of the analgue vsts?

PS joking aside the Tetra is pretty awesome

If there is a problem with Live, it´s not about the sound quality or software vs. hardware, but how the loop-centric paradigm makes everything sound the same. The complexity and uncompatability of previous software and hardware forced people to invent their own ways of coupling it all together, thus becoming more inventive or at least open for new ways of imagining structure in music.

Windows sounds better than MAC

Wow, it didn't take long for the debate to swoop into undisguised racism, there. Still, when the debate starts with someone being ridiculed for an idiosyncratically-expressed, but legitimate and oft-heard, difference of opinion...

here we go again ...

as there is good and bad harware there is good and bad software too ...

does a mc303 sounds good ? no

but maybe a tr606 or a tb303 does , the same thing goes for software.

aarg, its not about what software or harware you use to make music, its about how creative and original you are. And for me, villalobos lacks this last two points.

wowsers... this is like the adult equivalent of PS3 vs XBOX flame wars that are so abundant in comments on the internet. This has gone off the rails.

I'm only contributing one thing to this conversation, read the Ableton manual there's an entire chapter that is a paper on their approach to sound quality and the why/how they designed the sound engine the way they did.

Work with what you got, you will make it sound good.

Thank you Peter, you can get people fired up and off topic like no other. Please keep em coming!

What ever happened to the good old days when real men made music without electricity? You spoiled kids have no idea what it is to be an artist. Now if you will excuse me, I have to fix the wheel on the cart I use to carry hay to the barn raising.

okay, maybe all you "analog"(no it's digital)-lovers think a bicycle is much more beautiful than a car, but your totaly wrong by saying its faster than a formula 1- car!

...hm, since i'm all into recording my own samples for everything (and maybe should have down that instead of reading through this "discussion":) and don't have the $ to buy top gear, i'm stuck with comparing a casio rz-1 drummachine which can sample 0,2 on each of four pads and my laptop set of ableton live + tascam us-122 (obsolete model) + korg padkontrol. for field recordings i use an edirol rs-9 (also the now obsolete model), most of the time with its build-in mics.

with the rs9 digital recorder + laptop setup i recorded a lockpicking session in a foyer with an incredible, disgusting reverb and made a deliciously clicking ticking scratching tender software-sampler instrument out of it.

with the casio rz-1 (i think it was shitty when it came out and didn't improve / get a nostalgia boost for 20 years +) i can not record tiny quiet clicks since the mic-in just doesn't recognize the sounds :)

hence i had to overexaggerate smashing my zippo lighter open/close to get its sounds into the machine.

the zippo sounds processed DO NOT sound like a zippo at all, but that's interessting about it.

AND i can hit myself with the mic or strike it along my arms and get really punchy sounds out of the rz-1 instantly...

hm...actually i'm surrounded by shitty equipment, analog, digital and digital in disguise. whenever i try abletons soft synth operator it will sound like my circuit bend casio sk-1 craziness, same with reasons thor, same with automat1 plug-in. BUT none of those sound generators (including the sk-1, which feels sooo analog :) did EVER sound exactly like one of the others...why would i want that anyway?

i do spend most of my money for "shitty" equipment and instruments since the so called bad ones are the only ones i can afford. without industrialisation / digital revolution / cheap production / decadence of western world i would never have got the cance to make electronic music, which would have not only been a loss for me but for everyone listening to my music.

music is not about tools, it's about expression and passion. without the passion (translate - the will to suffer in order to achieve greatness :) and the need to express something you will be lost in front of ableton live as much as in front of 80s drummachines, an mpc, turntables or an orchestra harp.

when someone starts telling you something about "hey you know 20 years ago you had to buy this and this and this and i took hours to set it up and weeks to programm it and you know it was music back then not computer gaming, you know..." HE OR SHE IS AN OLD FUCK!

i got to know a group of experimental conductors who were born in the 30s of the last century and they invited a berlin noise musician with a MINI KAOSS PAD preset drone sound used within his in my opinion uninspired and lame performance. they listened through his whole damn performance and in the discussion afterwards they didn't ask ONE question about the gadgets/instruments he used but about what he's trying to express with his MUSIC. those people ARE OPEN MINDED CONTEMPORARY FUCKS who...sadly...hardly get interviewed.

so...get over it, make the best music you can do and DO NOT load it up on myspace as 128kbit mp3 :)

I thought i could die while reading...um...laughing actually! Thanks for really funny post))) that's coool))))

Villalobos is right. But his claim is nothing new to me.

Although I don t hear his claims in his own music or his mixcompilation for fabric. But that might be a taste issue.

Just did a test. D16 neph , audio realism drummachine in an AB comparison with a real 808. The software sounds good but it is something totally different. I prefer the real thing when it comes to the sound.

For instance my Roland system 100 has a better sounding bass than any software synth I ve heard so far. It has identity!

Lately I find myself buying all the vintage synths I can get my hands on.

With the current tape plug in software emulations it is the same.

Just try a real taperecorder....

Who cares what Villalobos says or thinks, he's just a DJ.

live is bad ass.

i like your spunk today peter ;)

haha - good one peter.

There's only one thing to do now - challenge Mr Villalobos to a blind test.

ok, the guys first language is not english. we kind of get what he was trying to say. so he said it wrong, big deal. like someone mentioned he has also used ableton in the past. whatever.

most times with inexperienced producers using live you're going to get a sub par production. with pros like the scion cd someone mentioned you're going to get a pro product.

nowadays with digital killing vinyl because anyone can start a label with no risk is causing a giant tsunami of boring music. i think that's the point these guys are trying to make, but in the process screwing up the message a bit. people who press records are protective of their dying businesses. i grew up on vinyl and nothing can replace it.

ableton know they have work to do on their mix bus. no surprise.

in capable hands amazing hardware instruments and mixing tools will probably create a better result. there's a reason these units still cost a lot of money.

on the other side of this debate you've got people like omar s, who's production is all hardware based but the quality makes reason sound like the most amazing sound engine on the planet in comparison.

so it all just comes down to what you know and what you do with it.

Frankly, Ricardo doesn't speak proper english. Anything he said is wrong. There's no debate here about gear quality nor creativity.

1 - "in programs like Ableton, which has an OK sound engine" / The debate is never ending about this, but clearly, too much people say Live does not have an even OK audio engine at all.

2 - "drum machine—which is the best quality possible of a sampled drum" / Is this a joke ? Best quality of sampled drum is obviously not a drum machine, but a 96khz 32bits high-end mics + converters recording

3 - "It was analog, direct" / Obviously not. It was digital.

4 - "Logic, for example, is very neutral in sound but Ableton" / No DAW is neutral. Nothing is neutral.

5 - "you have a certain space where you have to put everything" / Tell me what was the space before i get my first win98, samplitude 4 and sound forge 3.5, back in the nineties... God, these hours on my 8 tracks recorder, i don't want it back at all.

People complaining about Ableton sounding shit on a live mix... have obviously never heard Scion's "Arrange And Process Basic Channel Tracks".

Peter Kim is actually a Robot from the future propagating a pro binary utopian dream. To sway consciousness towards what WILL becomes of this all. We will 'think' music into a suspension gel chambers and try not to hate it.

CDM<3

Contemporarily( and an overall good decision ubiquitous of time,) i feel HYBRIDIZATION charms my fancy.

I simply cannot enjoy music unless it it made with a variety of converters.

FFS people pay attention. One of Peter's points was that Ricardo's first comment doesn't even qualify as a "digital vs. analog" debate.

Break it down: Villalobos said, "drum machines from 20 years ago." "It was analog, direct."

Then Peter points out: the popular drum machines from 20 years ago weren't analog.

That's where the ridicule comes in. Because some guy said, "Oh, those drum machines sounded so good because they were analog." And then someone raised their hand and said, "...uh, they actually weren't analog."

In my book, that's good enough for a bit of ball busting. It's CDM, not CNN. Stop crying.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] La alarma de la noticia la vi en CDM donde se ha comenzado a presentar un intenso debate. En los foros de Ableton ya podrás imaginar como está la gente, está que arde la situación. [...]

  2. Find Remix says:

    Friday! Interesting links October 30th, 2009…

    Some nice links to share with you:

    Crazy Celebrity Quotes File: Ricardo Villalobos Trashes Ableton, Recalls “Purer” Digital at createdigitalmusic.com
    Expectation, anticipation and the power of pentatonics at productionadvice.co.uk
    Mini MIDI Battle: KO…

  3. [...] think this is the point people are missing when they argue (on CDMu comments last week) about whether hardware gear is “better” than software. [...]