Polyend Tracker - For indie music and songwriting?

The Lounge Other Gear
1

This is my first post here, so hi everyone!

I’m looking to add a new piece of gear to my workflow, which is mostly computer-based (MacBook, Bitwig, Apollo Twin). My style of music is kind of indie-something: regular verse/chorus/bridge structure, mix of acoustic (drums/bass/guitar) and electronic instruments (drums, keyboards), with vocals. Mostly “linear” composition.

My main goal would be to have an “all-in-one” portable solution for creating beats on-the-go, exploring sound design, use as a sketchpad, etc. Something to inspire me to come up with new ideas, away from the computer.

I was looking at the OP-1, because it offers a sampler (with built-in microphone), several synth engines, etc, but its way out of my budget, and I’m not convinced of the “tape” workflow.

I came across the Polyend Tracker, and it seems to tick several boxes, PLUS I know how trackers work, as that’s how I started making music back in 1990’s (Fast Tracker II).

Would you say the Polyend Tracker would work for my use case? I’m particularly looking at the Polyend Tracker Mini, which also has usb audio, built in microphone, larger capacity for samples in memory, etc. Note that, even though my music definitely has an “electronic” flavor, I’m not a dance music producer. That’s the key element. Most videos I’ve found seem to focus on using the tracker for dance/electronica/chiptunes kind of music.

Appreciate your well-informed opinion.

Cheers!

2

This depends very much on your preferred workflow.

I have the Polyend Tracker. I got it to try the tracker-way as hardware and because I was interested to see what I would do with a sampler and this Excel-Sheet like workflow. I liked it, but my sketch-pad for beeing on the road or during holidays is the MPC Live.

What are your major boxes a portable sketch-pad has to tick?

A traditional tracker has quite limited amount of RAM for samples and from its history it was particularly a device or software needing as few resources as possible. Polyend stuck to this concept, at least for the full size tracker.

IMO doing - as an extreme - ambient music with the PT could be a challenge :wink:

3

Have you given Renoise a spin on your computer?

It might be worth seeing what a modern software tracker can do before you jump into hardware. M8 may also be worth considering.

4

Have a peep at Knobs’ video on YouTube about the tracker. Opened my eyes to possibly using for ambient, or not-dance at least.

Update: linked

1 Like
5

Good suggestion for the checking out the workflow and there should be a trial version.

But Renoise is a tracker on steroids - it’s even a DAW. PT is not :wink:

Renoise has access to the RAM of a computer, can use VST plug-ins, offers very complex options for tracks and commands, which can do much more than my PT :wink:

1 Like
6

I wouldn’t think of the PT as an obvious choice for indie and live music but it would be a good choice if you wanted a more leftfield approach to beat making and imo would give an interesting edge to standard indie production.

1 Like
7

Exactly - a tracker enthusiast might want a tracker-DAW or they may prefer minimal hardware. Renoise is cheaper (free to demo?) than a PT, so a good starting point.

2 Likes
8

Yes - here we go: Downloads | Renoise

This was exactly my way into tracker. I didn’t want to buy the PT without checking out the workflow. I got the Renoise demo, okay I got the payed version a couple of days later and then I ordered the PT :wink:

1 Like
9

Thanks for your thoughts. I mean, I already “kind of know” the answer, since I was using trackers back in the 90s, and I was definitely doing a mix of straight electronica/beats and more pop/song-oriented stuff. I guess I’m just looking for validation and possibly first-hand experience by you guys in the 21st century.

I definitely want to go into a more “contained” process than computer. I already have Bitwig for full-on production…With hardware, I’m more looking for “inspiration” and portability.

I don’t have a lot of time to make a decision…I have friends traveling in the US, and they will be back in a few weeks. My intention is for them to bring the goods.

1 Like
10

Thanks! Looking into it!

11

That’s it! My main objectives here are:

  • Expanding the sonic pallette
  • Sparking new ideas, possibly tangential to what I would come up with using my standard DAW workflow
  • Tied to the previous point: portability. I’d like to be able to work on these ideas away from the computer.
1 Like
12

I’m not experienced with trackers beyond very limited messing around on computer and watching tutorials, but coming from a traditional songwriting perspective I feel like it would be infuriating trying to translate my train of thought into that workflow. I’m sure anything can be adapted to anything with enough effort but when I’m writing songs I need as few stumbles as possible or I get distracted, by the workflow, by other things going on around, by tweaking little parts of things that could be approached more rationally later. I just want something that keeps me productive. For some people I think tracker is a good match, if that’s how you work in columns and numeric parameters or whatever, it may work for you.

1 Like
14

I’m not very partial, I think digitakt is the easiest songwriting tool. My impartiality is well founded though.

However, sampling isn’t for everyone.

1 Like
15

Thanks for your perspective. I don’t mean to create full productions here, but to spark unconventional ideas, at least different from what I would do in a DAW. I get the feeling that working in a DAW my brain easily gravitates towards “more is more” approach. Tinkering with effects. Mixing as I write music. And it has this…how do I say this…“office” feeling…“here I am sitting on my desk, all the equipment is wired, I am now SERIOUS and will work on my next song”…it’s kind of heavy…I’m thinking having a different way to approach things could help me explore other sonics…maybe?

16

Will take a look, although I had initially dismissed it, mostly because of form factor. Its bigger/heavier, and appears to be more complex.

17

I think (just from what you’re saying) hardware is probably a good angle, but I don’t know specifically that trackers are the penultimate advancement in non-linear creativity. You should possibly look into generative devices as opposed to different directions to daw. Tracker is daw’ing downwards, if that makes sense. Spreadsheet daw.

1 Like
18

What in your mind is better for this? Sampler vs synth? Many FX inside the box?

Since tracker are computer-based apps from the beginning, and considering the first trackers, I would say that trackers are the predecessors of what is a DAW today. Just with less options. IIRC the first tracker was also the first computer based app for music composition at a cost a private person could afford.

IMO it would not be “tangential” approach - more of a going back to the roots :wink:

Batteries for this would be in the tiny PT, in the MPC Live and some others …

19

For sampling guitars I would also look into MOC live or Maschine+ but that is a little more expensive.
Or Digitakt of course…

20

MPC live 2 would work for you as an all in one box. I used Renoise for years and was tempted by the PT but coming from Renoise the track limit on the PT put me off. I’ve used Renoise for all sorts of stuff including some guitar based stuff following the structure you described. However since I got the MPC it’s been my go to.

22

Is sonics meaning method-of-composition or sound?

A tracker is a sampler and often using quite short one-shots. We can “loop” the samples to create longer lasting sounds, but a traditional tracker will not support long samples with beats or melodic loops like OT, DT, MPC etc.

For sound design on the road we need something more than the PT provides. Have you ever checked out the SP-404 MK II? Has batteries, works with samples, has some basic sequencing, is very intuitive, and comes with a bunch of interesting FX, which can be layered to create unique sounds.

1 Like