Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 61 posts

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#21

Post by adamkl »

pierrec wrote: post #15

Trackers are underrated. In a way, I'm a bit sad that most of the time I see them mentioned, it seems to be in a historical context. Modern production tools have mostly settled on the combination of pianoroll, automation curves, and visual placement of samples on the project timeline. That's great for some types of music, but becomes really awkward in other cases. As a basic example, making a breakbeat sequence makes…

I remember using Buzz back when I was in university around the turn of the century. Lots of great memories with that one.

I came across an excellent modern alternative when my kids started getting into electronic music. It’s called SunVox [0]. Still under active development and runs on just about anything! Lots of fun!

[0] https://warmplace.ru/soft/sunvox/

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#23

Post by EvanAnderson »

pierrec wrote: post #15

Trackers are underrated. In a way, I'm a bit sad that most of the time I see them mentioned, it seems to be in a historical context. Modern production tools have mostly settled on the combination of pianoroll, automation curves, and visual placement of samples on the project timeline. That's great for some types of music, but becomes really awkward in other cases. As a basic example, making a breakbeat sequence makes…

I find Buzz a joy to use as a programmable / repeatable mixer, too. I love the tracker's ability to record knob/slider positions and play it back faithfully. Quantized recordings of parameters just make so much sense to me.

I think about my Buzz files as the "source code" that will eventually be mixed-down to PCM audio. I can always go back to the "source" if I want to make modifications and re-render. I think of it a little like non-destructive editing layers in a bitmap editor, or like editing graphics in a vector format and rendering-down to raster for presentation.

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#24

Post by sen »

Impulse Tracker was such a hugely influential part of my younger years. Met some great people in the local scene who’d dial in to a BBS to share IT files and samples, give advice and feedback to each other, etc.

I still use OpenMPT to listen to old IT files or play with some new track ideas every now and then, but nothing like the hours-and-hours-a-day feverish obsession of back then.

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#25

Post by kube-system »

adamkl wrote: post #21
pierrec wrote: post #15

Trackers are underrated. In a way, I'm a bit sad that most of the time I see them mentioned, it seems to be in a historical context. Modern production tools have mostly settled on the combination of pianoroll, automation curves, and visual placement of samples on the project timeline. That's great for some types of music, but becomes really awkward in other cases. As a basic example, making a breakbeat sequence makes…

I remember using Buzz back when I was in university around the turn of the century. Lots of great memories with that one. I came across an excellent modern alternative when my kids started getting into electronic music. It’s called SunVox [0]. Still under active development and runs on just about anything! Lots of fun! [0] https://warmplace.ru/soft/sunvox/

Same here. I wish I still had some of the tracks I wrote in Buzz 20 years ago. I had a way better creative ear for music back then. I tried SunVox but I can't quite get the same inspiration that I had.

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#27

Post by lanamo »

lanamo wrote: post #26

Trackers are making a comeback: check out M8 Tracker, a fantastic hardware device, celebrated by the music making community. https://dirtywave.com (it's in very high demand and sold out quickly every time a new batch is available)

addendum: You can run this M8 Tracker as a "headless" version with a Teensy 4.1 on your computer. https://github.com/Dirtywave/M8HeadlessFirmware (might be a good option for tracker fans since this hardware is really "hard to get" at the moment.) M8 Tracker seems like a perfect device. In the meantime, you can try the above DIY version and practice with that.

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#29

Post by chithanh »

nyanpasu64 wrote: post #14

Corrections on "MIDI Soundcards" ( https://youtu.be/roBkg-iPrbw?t=1704 ): re. "their instrument banks were effectively hard-coded", the Creative Music System was a PSG-like chip with only square waves and no sample ROM at all, the AdLib was a FM synthesizer with no ROM banks either (though some MIDI banks which sounded nothing like sample-based MIDI players like the SC-55), and the GUS had a mix of ROM and RAM (and I…

I remember also that ScreamTracker was able to use Yamaha OPL series FM synthesizers, and the author detested MIDI because it did not give enough control over instrument acoustics.

Re: Trackers: The Sound of 16-Bit [video]

#30

Post by mrob »

nyanpasu64 wrote: post #11
323 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed for trance? Trance has long pads, the supersaw, not sure how you do those on a tracker.

I don't know if the supersaw was built in trackers or not, but you can use it in tracker music by pre-recording the sample and playing it back at various pitches.

A real supersaw uses free-running oscillators, so the phase between them varies with each note. This means the constructive and destructive interference between them is different each time, subtly varying the timbre, which you lose if you play the same sample each time.
Post reply on HN