Anyone using sequencers out there?

[Ubersheist]

So, my band came to the decision to start using a sequencer on a few tracks. We're taking it slow, and just using a right/left mixdown to an mp3 where a click track goes through the left, and all the other sequenced instruments go through the right, and taking the headphone jack and splitting it into two channels into the board. Eventually, I'll bet we'll run a laptop live with either the new ProTools or Fruity Loops with something on our PA rack to split out the channels, but that's a while from now.

Anyone else using sequencers? What's your thoughts? What are the pitfalls (other then the obvious "the computer crashed")? What's your set-up?

Just curious. I searched around TB, but came up empty.

Thanks!

[Coelho]

After working with pretty much everything, since now I play on small places (less than 200 people attending), we settled with the flash based MP3 player splitting L/R for click on one channel and everything else on the other channel. Most reliable solution, we don't have to worry/care about the mix during the performance, etc.
Before seding multiple channels to the board, you need your own (good) sound guy. If you don't have one, keep the MP3 solution, less channels = less headaches.

[Craig_S]

We use an mp3 player with the click in one channel and a mono mix to the mains. There is no need for a stereo mix from the sequence to the mains, unless the mains are at least as far from the audience as they are from each other (side to side). You won't get proper imaging. Honestly, there is no need for stereo, period.

Don't get yourself to a place where you rely on the sequences too much. I'm finding that people are starting to think it's a bit cheesy to use sequences. They view it almost like it's Karaoke. I've even had a guy say I wasn't really singing.

[WalterBush]

Do NOT try to run Pro Tools, Fruity Loops, etc. live and multitracked. No one but the largest tours do this...my guitarist works at one of the local casinos, and sets up for national acts regularly. Most bands use an MP3 player or the occasional MD setup; some have their sequences programmed into a Motif or similar synth workstation so they can run a click track AND a stereo mix of their sequence.

My own band uses a MD player, though I'm trying to convince them that an iPod touch would be a much better way to go.

I've seen a disproportionate number of computers crash live, including mine during an abortive attempt to use it as a monitor mixer; worked fine, until someone turned a coffee maker on the same circuit on the generator, causing a voltage drop that crashed the thing, at a festival with about 1,000 people listening. Suddenly, no monitors. Other times I've watched bands using them as soft synths or workstations mess with them for ages setting up, only to have them crash, stutter, crackle, or make random system message noises at 100 db.

My church successfully uses a laptop as a player, and it works because that's ALL it's doing, being a glorified iPod, and because our soundman is on top of things enough to kill it and accomodate in the mix on the occasion that something goes wrong, which HAS happened.

Keep your live rig as simple as possible, having half your sound die mid show for no apparent reason looks BAD, and feels worse.

Sorry for the length, but I've got plenty of experience with this, and wanted to warn you off multitrack playback quickly! If you must go multitrack, buy a Motif, Korg Oasys, or some other synth/workstation with multiple outs; keyboards are almost failproof.

[Ubersheist]

Originally Posted by WalterBush

Sorry for the length, but I've got plenty of experience with this, and wanted to warn you off multitrack playback quickly! If you must go multitrack, buy a Motif, Korg Oasys, or some other synth/workstation with multiple outs; keyboards are almost failproof.

No need to be sorry. I am a newbie at this. This is all good advice. I'll report back to the band with this, and see what they say. They're ultra perfectists, so I'm sure that the easier route of just using an iPod or an mp3 player won't sit well with them, but I'll see.

Just curious, but who was the biggest band that you saw using an mp3 for their sequencer (if you don't mind blowing their cover)?

[WalterBush]

Originally Posted by Ubersheist

Just curious, but who was the biggest band that you saw using an mp3 for their sequencer (if you don't mind blowing their cover)?

The Jefferson Starship, or at least, the one original band member plus the people he hired to tour with, just earlier this year. Hearing the intro to, "We Built This City" played back rather than performed was, well, disappointing. But it did sound just like the album

[Ubersheist]

Originally Posted by Craig_S

I'm finding that people are starting to think it's a bit cheesy to use sequences. They view it almost like it's Karaoke. I've even had a guy say I wasn't really singing.

I'm guessing that it was another musician, though.

I think that the vast majority of people that have problems with sequencers are other musicians, and not the general populace. Did you find this true, too?

About two years ago,the guitarist and I saw Ozomatli play at a county fair nearby. It wasn't super obvious to everyone, but they used a bit of sequencing. That's when we were won over. They sounded great, and the sequencing just enhanced the sound a bit, not overwhelmed. Then we started really listening for sequencing whenever we saw a live band. We quickly realized that many, many of the bigger acts all used sequencing. A while back, I came to the mindset of playing to entertain the masses, not other musicians, I have no problems using a sequencer.

Heck, if I really thought that I could get butts into seats and really entertain people, I would not be opposed to karaoke-ing the whole band and sit on the side of the stage while doing a crossword puzzle.

[TL5]

[ASIDE and possibly off-topic, for which I apologize in advance]

mp3 as a sequencer? I remember when a sequencer was a sequencer and a MP3 was a recording.

In 1985 I was using Cakewalk DOS 3.1 and Cakewalk Live on an IBM 286 computer running 16 tracks of sequences and it NEVER crashed (not once, in rehearsals or live).
Those sequences were all MIDI and there was no recorded audio.

It's amazing to me how the terminology has been adapted to include audio tracks.

[Craig_S]

Originally Posted by Ubersheist

I'm guessing that it was another musician, though.

Nope, just a patron. It's pretty obvious when the band is three pieces with no keyboard on stage. We don't go overboard with the sequences, either.

Originally Posted by TL5

It's amazing to me how the terminology has been adapted to include audio tracks.

I remember when a sequence was a true sequence, as well.

[AndyLES]

I work on the weekends as a roadie/Stage manager for a U2 tribute band in the NYC area.

Right now we use, mainly, a regular Ipod with the mix on the left, click on the right, sent to the PA via a DI. We have also used, in the past (as technology has caught up - these guys have been around for 14 years) Minidisc players and DAT machines. The latter was the worst - occasionally, the tape itself would jam, and unless the DAT tape itself was played back on the same machine it was "striped" on (i.e., recorded with timecode), we'd have all sorts of sync problems.

Like the fellow above said, stay away from computer/multitrack setups - the pros do this, but they have multiple failsafes, which cost $$$$ and take lots of setup time (which, I presume, you probably don't have on the club level).

Also, make sure your drummer can play comfortably with a click. No clicky-no worky.

[DeluxeRed]

I've been following this thread, and wasn't seeing what I expected. I take it you guys are talking about starting a recording (mp3/iPod/whatever) with a click that covers the entire song that you play along with that provides certain parts of the song when you reach them?

If that's the case--and whatever makes the song work--does anyone have any experience with individually-triggered events during the song? One of the pad devices or something that someone (myself or someone else) can reach over and press/stomp and bring in, oh, a small string part, sound effect, whatever...but NOT as the whole song, but just the samples?

And, actually, what I've been thinking is a good MIDI workstation and a set of midi pedals so I can play either melodic parts (conventionally using the pedals) or use the pedals to trigger, again, samples or sound effects or arpeggios (is that the right term?). Anyone doing that?

[Rob Lewis]

Very tough on the drummer, no room for ad-libs.

[AndyLES]

Originally Posted by DeluxeRed

I've been following this thread, and wasn't seeing what I expected. I take it you guys are talking about starting a recording (mp3/iPod/whatever) with a click that covers the entire song that you play along with that provides certain parts of the song when you reach them?

If that's the case--and whatever makes the song work--does anyone have any experience with individually-triggered events during the song? One of the pad devices or something that someone (myself or someone else) can reach over and press/stomp and bring in, oh, a small string part, sound effect, whatever...but NOT as the whole song, but just the samples?

And, actually, what I've been thinking is a good MIDI workstation and a set of midi pedals so I can play either melodic parts (conventionally using the pedals) or use the pedals to trigger, again, samples or sound effects or arpeggios (is that the right term?). Anyone doing that?

Some bands do this (Def Leppard) while others (Rush, Police, and U2) do both triggers and tracks.

Only problem is that the musicianship, rhythmically, has to be TIGHT, and/or the sample must be triggered PRECISELY on the beat, for the approach you're looking at to work. A beat early/late, and you'll have a trainwreck.