Hardware/VST Synth Workflow?

[T-CM11]

I used both an MMT-8 and an MC500mkII for live performance for a long time. I was trained as an audio engineer on Otari 24 track, recorded some stuff to Tascam 8 track, various 4 track cassettes, ADAT, and still own a POS E-mu Darwin. So thank you for the condescending attitude, but I think you’ll find that, by and large, most people were running their synths live under MIDI control in the 80s.

But what's the point of these generalisations? If even a small minority used different production techniques... Are they less interesting? Not even worth mentioning? Pretend that they never existed?

There ARE different hardware workflows, nobody should dictate their way as the only way (=the only real option). And that was my point - I'm sorry if you felt that I worded it in a condescending way.

[deastman]

I used both an MMT-8 and an MC500mkII for live performance for a long time. I was trained as an audio engineer on Otari 24 track, recorded some stuff to Tascam 8 track, various 4 track cassettes, ADAT, and still own a POS E-mu Darwin. So thank you for the condescending attitude, but I think you’ll find that, by and large, most people were running their synths live under MIDI control in the 80s.

But what's the point of these generalisations? If even a small minority used different production techniques... Are they less interesting? Not even worth mentioning? Pretend that they never existed?

There ARE different hardware workflows, nobody should dictate their way as the only way (=the only real option). And that was my point - I'm sorry if you felt that I worded it in a condescending way.

Actually, I wasn't trying to dictate the way anyone should work! I was comparing and contrasting the way I (and most people with a home project studio in the 80's) used to work, as opposed to the way I work with hardware now. I find it much easier these days to just keep a long MIDI cable and a couple of audio cables permanently plugged into my DAW, and then patch into whichever synth I want to use at any given time. That means not having to have everything set up and patched in at all times. No more dealing with mixers or patch bays. This method scales nicely regardless of whether you have one synth or a room full of gear. But again, I'm only describing my current workflow, not dictating the way anyone else should work.

[do_androids_dream]

So I recently decided to upgrade my studio with a few hardware synths. Having never really recorded with hardware I am having difficulty when it comes to committing to audio. With VST's I may have say a bass sound that sounds great, but then after adding other elements I really, hey maybe the bassline needs to have a different attack or something, so I am able to go right into the VST and alter it.


With analog hardware gear, once I dial in a setting and hit record, I am committed (unless I never touch the synth and don't change any parameters). This is especially rough with modular gear. Never gonna get the same sound twice.



Another stupid thing I did was, I played some of these parts by hand... no MIDI track saved. I guess I should always record MIDI, then out to the synth and back in.... is that the typical work flow?



Any help in regards to workflow with hardware (and virtual) synths would be very helpful!


Thank You!

You have just described part of the joy and freedom of hardware. Embrace it!!! Restrictions of some kind or another is what every musician benefits from in my view. Hardware makes you work in a different way - more committal and doubtless more music actually written.

[sjm]

Depends on your synths, but there are VST controller plugins for a lot of them. This means you can save your presets in your project in the controller VST for instant recall.

That makes going back and making small tweaks in context later a lot easier. I find it makes sense to bounce down to audio due to polyphony limitations, so you can free up the synth. Keep the MIDI (muted) in case you want to revisit something, or add another part later.

In the absence of a controller plugin, you can cobble together your own provided the parameters of the synths can be controlled via MIDI.

If your synths don't support automation by MIDI, take a photo of the knob settings on your phone, and if possible, save it (or a link to the file) in your project.

[.jon]

I design the sound, compose and practice the parts and then record straight to audio. While some consider this kind of workflow "limited and cumbersome", it's how most of the music in this world has been made, and I feel like it has improved my result and increased the output. On top of that I enjoy the process a whole lot more than tinkering with MIDI editor and VST plugin settings. It forces one to develop playing skills, and pushes one into a deeper state of focus which is highly rewarding.

There is magic in recording the performance, there are moments where the creative parts of your brain/body makes decisions without your rational mind hindering the process. For some unknown reason this state only activates at the press of the rec button.

I already did this to some extent with VST synths, but with hardware it's even more natural and the advantages of tangible interfaces become quite obvious. My DSI synths have full patch save and recall functions just like plugins, so I can just load my patch and redo the part if required.

[chk071]

Hence: Limiting. And cumbersome.

The same can be said about programming plugins with a mouse or a midi controller (vs. a dedicated knob/slider per function hardware synth).

Actually, that's one of the few things, alongside the (not so rational) relationship you can build up with hardware, opposed to having all that fancy software on your computer, which you can't touch.

I'm lusting quite a bit for a Blofeld at the moment, BTW. It's 356 € in online music stores here ATM. Price of 2 plugins. Very tempting.

[RichieWitch]

1) Always record MIDI with audio.
2) If your DAW allows it, always save the synth's bank/program data on the MIDI clip, so the clip loads the right synth patch when the clip starts.
3) Always save your patches in the synth's memory, if it has it, even if you are modifying factory patches.
4) Keep sysex files of the factory patches in case you need to reload them.
5) For synths with no preset memory (like modular), record numerous copies of the same sequence while tweaking different aspects of the patch. One of them is bound to work in the end.

[wineberry]

Hey you can try Snapshot v2 plugin lets you save a photo inside a vst.

[Jace-BeOS]

I design the sound, compose and practice the parts and then record straight to audio. While some consider this kind of workflow "limited and cumbersome", it's how most of the music in this world has been made, and I feel like it has improved my result and increased the output. On top of that I enjoy the process a whole lot more than tinkering with MIDI editor and VST plugin settings. It forces one to develop playing skills, and pushes one into a deeper state of focus which is highly rewarding.

Granted that this is great for you. However, people without great fine motor skills, or people who have problems like dyslexia, are not apt to benefit from this approach as much as the people with great fine motor skills and no other neurological weirdness. I absolutely respect these skills in other people, but, since i happen to fall into the population segment with the neurological problems that stop me from being a "traditional musician" (problems which aren't going away), I'm pretty much never going to be the kind of "proper" musician that traditional players think i should be.

Frankly, without the ability to record and then fix a performance in MIDI or to repeatedly re-record a small part till i get it right and then loop it (i don't fix my vocals in post, i just re-perform them)... if i was required to read notation and perform all of my musical parts straight through (especially with regard to all the instruments i cannot play) into a multitrack recorder, i wouldn't be a musician. This is why computer music production tools have been such a boon to certain people.

Hopefully the music i create isn't the throwaway garbage that people claim "easy-to-use" software has left us drowning in...

[deastman]

I design the sound, compose and practice the parts and then record straight to audio. While some consider this kind of workflow "limited and cumbersome", it's how most of the music in this world has been made, and I feel like it has improved my result and increased the output. On top of that I enjoy the process a whole lot more than tinkering with MIDI editor and VST plugin settings. It forces one to develop playing skills, and pushes one into a deeper state of focus which is highly rewarding.

Granted that this is great for you. However, people without great fine motor skills, or people who have problems like dyslexia, are not apt to benefit from this approach as much as the people with great fine motor skills and no other neurological weirdness. I absolutely respect these skills in other people, but, since i happen to fall into the population segment with the neurological problems that stop me from being a "traditional musician" (problems which aren't going away), I'm pretty much never going to be the kind of "proper" musician that traditional players think i should be.

Frankly, without the ability to record and then fix a performance in MIDI or to repeatedly re-record a small part till i get it right and then loop it (i don't fix my vocals in post, i just re-perform them)... if i was required to read notation and perform all of my musical parts straight through (especially with regard to all the instruments i cannot play) into a multitrack recorder, i wouldn't be a musician. This is why computer music production tools have been such a boon to certain people.

Hopefully the music i create isn't the throwaway garbage that people claim "easy-to-use" software has left us drowning in...

I completely agree. I have abysmal timing, very slow reflexes, and a seemingly complete lack of fast twitch nerve fibers. I’ve been playing piano and other instruments for forty years now, and practice has not improved what my hands are capable of beyond a certain low threshold. Without the ability to edit my performances, I could never be a musician.

[.jon]

This is why computer music production tools have been such a boon to certain people.

But isn't this just the awesomeness of what we have at our disposal? Accessibility of music is wonderful. We, as listeners, are not limited to hearing what only the trained musicians come up with, but to the products of anyone with the passion and vision.

My hardware synths have full MIDI capacities (designed by the guy who pioneered MIDI in the first place), so I have the option to record MIDI and play them via MIDI from the DAW, I think there's even VST editors for them. The Mopho SE is also my controller for VSTis, and it does that via USB. I really just brought up my chosen workflow, which is quite old-school, but to me it has it's benefits. I'm no Jordan Rudess, so this approach has it's limitations too However, pushing against these limitations lets me tap into something I didn't even know I had and can't seem to coax out of me when creating music via more rational methods. There's a sense of uniqueness, something happening only in that moment which I find valuable.

No way I'm implying this should work for everyone, and composing via other methods certainly allows for more complex stuff to be made. And definitely more polished! These methods also have their challenges that encourage growing as musician.