Need some newbie advice with DAWs?

[James Melody]

Thanks again for the replies. To save time I'm not replying to everyone, but I am sincerely thankful to everyone for all the helpful advice, and I am trying to take it on board.

Just in case anyone thinks I went too quiet again, I have just had the busiest 2 days at work and haven't had a second to get online. Apologies again if my pace of replying does not line up with the general pace of the forum…

How well do you work with a score editor?

Hi Nate, to answer your question, I'm very sorry but I can't use a score editor. I can't really read music.

Budget ?????

Good question, and I really appreciate all your tips there. I don't have a huge budget but basically looking to progress over the years, building up a collection, and investing more if I find it's "working out" so to speak.

Any sampler could load as many samples from your collection as you wish. The only limit is the RAM in your computer. You don't seem to understand what a sampler is.

Well, having been recommended a "standalone sampler" the other day, I googled that and it came back as a piece of hardware. My mistake. It seems clear now that a "sampler" is just a DAW tool which lets you play samples, which is precisely the kind of thing I'm looking for. That's good

Some DAWs has built in sampler, and there are also free sampler VST available, with limitations. Cubase, Tracktion, Ableton Live has built-in sampler. There's also the free Grace and TX16Wx. The limitations are usually no velocity layers and no round robins, search each one for their specific limitations.

If you want a full fledged sampler, there are Kontakt, Halion (not Halion Sonic), Structure, etc. They have full capabilities and usually comes with GBs of usable factory libraries. I'd recommend Kontakt. You must've heard of the name before. It's kind of the industry-standard. Many companies sell sample libraries in Kontakt format, and let's not forget all the freebies.

Very useful information indeed, thank you. Yes, I have heard of Kontakt samples but I was hoping I could buy their samples and just add them to my collection without having to use any VST.

What is your problem with VST exactly? All the plugins in existence, including sampled instruments, are distributed as VST or other format. This is how it works

Well first of all, I realize I'm in a major VST-loving community, so I must apologize for saying anything which seems negative about VSTs here. I mean no offense.

I came across this community on Google and was just impressed with how knowledgeable people seemed here, and there was also plenty of talk about different DAWs, so that's why I chose to make this thread here.

What really swung it for me was the mention of sequencers. Sequencers (praticularly trackers) is something I am familiar with. Back in the 90s I used to use Protracker and Octamed on the Amiga, as well as a few other trackers. Those programs just let you load up a big batch of samples directly into the program and they were all there ready to use - there was no need for each one to be running a VST.

So the "tracker" experience is precisely the kind of experience I am really looking for, which is one of the main reasons I chose to ask here, when I saw references to sequencers.

But with that said, to answer your question, I've just had a think about this and I actually have 7 problems with VSTs. So here they all are...

My 7 basic problems with VSTs
(Based on my limited knowledge and possibly misunderstanding about how VSTs work.)

1. First of all, the fact is that I do have a lot of samples I've collected over the years (which didn't come with a VST) including many sounds I have recorded myself, many old sample packs, a few free samples I've found online, and then I'd also like to record the samples from all my keyboards too so I can perfectly recreate some of my keyboard songs. Put simply, I would like to use my own samples in my music! I had thought that this was impossible in DAWs because every instrument had to be a VST. I now know that you can do it with "samplers". But still, the whole VST way of working is not geared towards people using their own samples.

2. Another concern I've had about VSTs is that they slow you down, since you can't simply "cycle" through all your instruments like with a tracker, instead each instrument must be loaded and accessed through its own interface.

3. Another concern is that I presume each VST uses CPU/memory. Just a personal thing but I hate big software. I like programs to be as lightweight and simple as possible. (My favorite program is Foobar2k - it is incredibly powerful software, vast in scope, yet just over a megabyte in size.)

4. Another personal thing, but I also hate interfaces that are cluttered or use multiple windows, especially anything with floating windows that aren't docked. I've watched videos of people using certain DAWs and noticed that a lot of them require all kinds of large interfaces to be opened/closed/dragged around, including having separate windows for the mixer and the main project, so you can't mix while looking at your composition. As a lover of elegant interfaces, that kind of thing irritates me.

5. Then there's the inconsistency of each VST having a different interface. For many VSTs I'm sure that is necessary, for example soft synths. But if I simply want to play raw samples without changing anything, then it seems kind of disorganized having to use various different interfaces depending on whose samples I'm using.

6. Another thing about me is that I am BIG on organization and like to manage and organize all my files as one big library. However, that is impossible with VSTs. The need to use multiple VST to access all your instruments puts a great big division line between all your instruments and separates them into different partitions. It means you can't manage all your instruments as one big pool. To use an analogy, it's like if I went in my closet and I wasn't allowed to organize all the socks together, or all the sweaters together, but instead I had to keep all the different LABELS together. That kind of thing really irritates me personally.

7. Finally, I really don't like the whole principle of there being some kind of "middle man" program between the DAW and the samples. To me it seems logical for the DAW itself to load the samples directly in memory without the need for an "intercessor". Though I am aware that Steinberg is pretty strongly against piracy, so I can fully imagine why they invented VSTs and why others readily adopted the system. It makes good commercial sense, just not sense to the user (IMHO).

Once again, I don't mean any offence to you VST lovers, just humbly expressing my (probably naive) views based on the little I know about DAWs at this stage. My hope is that my preconceptions can be challenged and corrected, so that I no longer have these problems.

If you are using a daw that comes with a multi-timbral sampler/rompler, then you could set up a template that puts your most commonly used instruments on separate tracks. Maybe you put piano on track 1, strings on 2, flute on 3, etc. Then you load up a drum sampler and place a kit on track 4, some percussion on 5 etc. Lastly, you might want to load up a synth for a pad on 6, and a moog-style lead on 7.

This is how pro composers do it…

Firstly thank you both for all the very useful advice, I really appreciate it.

Though this particular solution of having a 'template' doesn't really address my basic need, which is to have fast access to my entire collection of samples.

For example, if I'm playing a piano piece, I would like to be able to:

1. Cycle through all the pianos (like, by hitting 1 key), and instantly hear the sound changing, so I can pick the piano which fits best for that particular part without having to load anything. What I want is power to quickly change instruments.

2. I'd also like to be able to see a list of all my samples and filter it based on various tags/properties. For example, first I might want to bring up a list of all the samples I've tagged as "Keyboard", then I might want to filter by "Grand Piano" to show just the grand pianos. Perhaps then I only want to see ones I've tagged as "favorites", or I narrow my results by factors like bit depth, sample rate, stereo/mono, source, manufacturer, license etc.

This is how I would (ideally) like to select my instruments, by having instant, powerful access to my entire collection of samples, without the need to load anything, or have to use various different interfaces. I mean, to use a comparison, I have hundreds of thousands of pop songs on my computer, and I can quickly search through my entire library and start playing any one of them instantly, so I don't see why I can't do the same with sample sets.

Though from the responses I am getting, it doesn't seem like the way I want to work is realistic.

if you don't want to load VST , maybe you should consider to play with GM soundbank ?
maybe go for something like guitar pro ?

Not wanting to drag this thread out, but could you give me a little more information on this please? In my naivity, I thought that a GM soundbank was just the extremely limited sets of sounds that come with sound cards and motherboards as a bare minimum to play MIDI music files?

And what is the connection to Guitar Pro? Isn't that just for guitar music? To state the obvious, my own music does not just use guitars. Sorry to be a lamer.

If, for example, I was playing the piano…I would not want to have to stop and "load" more octaves.

That wouldn't be an issue with piano, all VSTi's cover 88 keys…

Very sorry, I was not anticipating this actually happening, just using it as an analogy. My only point is that when I'm in the "creative flow" I want as little resistance as possible, as little to slow me down.

You've actually invented fake problems.
on the 'a millisecond's pause'.

Sorry, I didn't mean a literal millisecond, I just meant having to pause for a slight amount of time.

For example, I play a drum riff which ends with a cymbal crash. I want to hit that crash BANG ON the beat. So if whatever tools I was using to make these noises slowed me down by, like quarter of a second, then I wouldn't be able to hit the crash on time and it would put me off the tune I am composing.

Never mind.

Because he's a troll :sighs:

this thread has all the markings of classic trolling.

That's just a ridiculous accusation. A troll is someone who posts a controversial, inflammatory comment, intended to create a strong reaction, and then leaves the conversation. I did neither of those things.

You accuse people of not knowing what a troll is. If you know what a troll is, you will know that it is, by definition, someone who invests minimum effort in order to cause maximum anger on a board.

Under no circumstances can a person who repeatedly spends a great deal of time in a conversation be a troll. That is not a troll, that would just be a WUM. WUMs are not trolls.

If I were a troll, I would be the worst troll ever, having spent hours carefully reading through these replies, researching things people have told me about, and writing careful replies to everyone.

Not to mention that I haven't said anything inflammatory or controversial, I have merely come here asking how I can achieve what I want to achieve with a DAW. And the things I want to achieve are perfectly reasonable and logical. It's not like I'm asking "how can I get a DAW to interface with my toaster?".

Please, let's have a bit of sanity regarding "trolls". I've been online nearly 25 years and don't think I've ever actually seen anyone who fits the definition of a "troll", all I've ever seen is a bunch of paranoid people who think everyone else is a troll.

If you're going to call bad people out, call out the rude, sarcastic, arrogant people; there are far more of them than there are "trolls".

[Rappo Clappo]

Yeah yeah yeah of course.

[CTStump]

Yeah yeah yeah of course.

Is this a deliberate attempt at closing the thread or do you acknowledge the OP's explanation?... I won't wait for your answer...

Why don't you contribute to the conversation instead of one line taunts. I think your really bored and just poking fun(at least your own that is). The OP has really joined the thread in a very intellegent manner, just because he replied to your useless and demeaning dribble your back to give the guy more trouble.

To the OP google MIDI tracker there are some great ones still out there.

[ghettosynth]

this thread has all the markings of classic trolling.

That's just a ridiculous accusation. A troll is someone who posts a controversial, inflammatory comment, intended to create a strong reaction, and then leaves the conversation. I did neither of those things.

We were asked not to argue, however, since you are the OP, I'm going to respond once, and only once, to clarify and then ask you to refrain from commenting further, or, state explicitly that you would like this topic to be a part of the conversation. I will not respond to anyone else who thinks that this is an invitation to argue, but, I will report the posts of others who attempt to argue with me. This response is for the OP only. If you would like to respond to him, do so without attempting to argue with me.

First, I didn't accuse you of anything, I said that this thread has all the markings of classic trolling, and it does.

You accuse people of not knowing what a troll is. If you know what a troll is, you will know that it is, by definition, someone who invests minimum effort in order to cause maximum anger on a board.

Negative. That is a contemporary misunderstanding of what trolling is. If you've been online for as long as you say then you understand that the word comes from fishing. You would know that trolling is about obtaining a response from insincerity and that it very well may contain very high amounts of effort with the goal of keeping things going as long as possible. The Onion is a real world example of classic trolling. It's humor, but with the intent of conveying just enough believability to ensnare people into believing that it is sincere news. These people have been trolled...

http://thoughtcatalog.com/hudson-hongo/ ... -was-real/

Denying the definition of classic trolling, however, would certainly be in the playbook of "classic trolling." Classic trolling is often used to refer to the original definition of the word as opposed to the more recent attempt to redefine the word, as I thought that I made clear earlier. See the use of the phrase here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4519103

I did not, however, accuse "you" of trolling. So the only false accusation here is that I made an accusation in the first place. I simply said that this thread looks very much "like" trolling, and I very much think that it still does. I even made it clear that this sometimes happens. That is, sincere posters look like trolls.

I suggest that you simply ignore me, and other people who are not that interested in your topic and continue on with your conversation with others. You should know that whatever I think this thread is all about, protesting my perception will be the least effective way to change my mind about that.

[CTStump]

Also you may want to check out Renoise. It is a full featured Tracker and you can drop samples on the time line. It has a mixer on the same window and is vertical flowing, worth a look if you already used to one it may be easier to do what you want.

Here is a link:
https://www.renoise.com

[DJ Warmonger]

Back in the 90s I used to use Protracker and Octamed on the Amiga, as well as a few other trackers. Those programs just let you load up a big batch of samples directly into the program and they were all there ready to use - there was no need for each one to be running a VST.

So the "tracker" experience is precisely the kind of experience I am really looking for

It's 2017 and all of your past problems are non-existent. Back then trackers were tools for nerds, avantgarde artists and desperates. Now plugin market is incomparably more accessible to users.

But still, the whole VST way of working is not geared towards people using their own samples.

This is nonsense. VST is a name of a standard. The same as USB. Does a computer mouse have any disadvantages because its connected via USB over any other type of connection? It's impossible not to use USB today.

VSTs cover all the possible instrument types, including samplers, sampled instruments and romplers. Iris 2 is an example of sampler which allows you to load any kind of sampel and process it in creative ways.

Another concern is that I presume each VST uses CPU/memory

Samples use up the most of memory. Samplers, on the other hand, use little of CPU in general. In 2017 it's not a concern. If you could do something in 90s, today you will be able to do 100x more of that.

Then there's the inconsistency of each VST having a different interface. For many VSTs I'm sure that is necessary, for example soft synths. But if I simply want to play raw samples without changing anything, then it seems kind of disorganized having to use various different interfaces depending on whose samples I'm using.

It's up to you to choose your workflow. Nobody forces you to keep dozens of windows opened or closed at any time.

However, back in 90s you simply couldn't keep multiple windows open due to low resolution

It means you can't manage all your instruments as one big pool.

If your approach to data management also comes from 90s, then good luck. Are you going to store a terabyte of samples in a one big closet? There are better possibilities now.

One last advice for you:

[DJ Warmonger]

Maybe a positive example of how sampling and arrangement looks NOW:

[shidostrife]

It seems you totally misunderstood what VST is. DJ Warmonger explained it very well. VST is a format for plugins. If you want to use samples and your DAW does not have a built-in sampler that fits your needs, you need a sampler plugin, which happens to be in VST format. You DON'T need a single VST for every single instrument as there are sampler VSTs that is capable of this. These samplers works pretty much like how you described trackers. You load your (or other people's) samples in there and play them.

[EnGee]

@OP:
According to your points, I don't think you'll be happy with a DAW. I suggest a workstation that has sampling like Motif or Kronos. They have built in sequencer ... etc, but hurry because I suspect new generations would eliminate the built in sequencer (as Yamaha did with Montage). Everyone is going the computer route you see, especially for sequencing and most are happier with current technology than 4-tracks recorder of yesterday

[James Melody]

Thanks again to all for the replies.

ghettosynth > Re trolling, thanks for the explanation. I know yours wasn't a direct accusation, I was mostly objecting to Rappo's accusation. You obviously know far more about the subject of trolling than I do, it's not something that interests me at all. I haven't read a definition since the 90s, can't remember where, perhaps I was misinformed. But we know definitions of netspeak can vary (like, apparently, "surfing" now means browsing)!

Hopefully people still recognize that when someone starts a thread calling himself a "newbie" it is an appeal for people to be patient with their lack of knowledge.

Warmonger > Excellent reply, I really appreciate that, and I am encouraged about VSTs. Thanks.

Also you may want to check out Renoise.

Ooh, that is very interesting. Thanks for that!

Maybe a positive example of how sampling and arrangement looks NOW:

Thank you, that looks very cool for DJ types who are into stuff like drum loops and dance music, but that's totally not my thing. I'm more of a classical type of songwriter and I need to have my hands on a piano keyboard!

According to your points, I don't think you'll be happy with a DAW. I suggest a workstation that has sampling like Motif or Kronos. They have built in sequencer ...

I know why you're saying this, but I really was hoping to move to the computer. I really want to do everything on computer now. That's why I'm here.

Everyone is going the computer route you see, especially for sequencing and most are happier with current technology than 4-tracks recorder of yesterday

Yes, that is how I feel too. I've spent my life writing music, always knowing that my songs were not properly produced. I want to finally start making them sound professional. I've already started mixing my music with Audacity and it sounds vastly better, but I was hoping for an all-in-one professional solution for composing and mixing.

(For the record I am not a commercial artist, it's my passion, but not a career.)

[Rappo Clappo]

Yeah yeah yeah of course.

Is this a deliberate attempt at closing the thread or do you acknowledge the OP's explanation?... I won't wait for your answer...

Why don't you contribute to the conversation instead of one line taunts. I think your really bored and just poking fun(at least your own that is). The OP has really joined the thread in a very intellegent manner, just because he replied to your useless and demeaning dribble your back to give the guy more trouble.

To the OP google MIDI tracker there are some great ones still out there.

If the OP just had visited wiki, then you would not have to defend someone who -obviously- is looking for the wrong attention.
It's as simple as it is, I'm afraid. No need for speculations either IMHO
"Intellegent manner..." ghehe sure....

I'd like to point out that a sincere person would first pay attention to wiki (or another source) BEFORE harassing others by making all sorts of false assumptions in their first post.
You do the same in your post addressed to me.. go figure.

[Hink]

^^^^ doesn't help at all either way...I'm the second mod to comment now, please stay on topic.

[Rappo Clappo]

Are you threatening me?

[Rappo Clappo]

@Hink
Be sure I'll send screenshots to Ben, powerglove.

[EnGee]

According to your points, I don't think you'll be happy with a DAW. I suggest a workstation that has sampling like Motif or Kronos. They have built in sequencer ...

I know why you're saying this, but I really was hoping to move to the computer. I really want to do everything on computer now. That's why I'm here.

Everyone is going the computer route you see, especially for sequencing and most are happier with current technology than 4-tracks recorder of yesterday

Yes, that is how I feel too. I've spent my life writing music, always knowing that my songs were not properly produced. I want to finally start making them sound professional. I've already started mixing my music with Audacity and it sounds vastly better, but I was hoping for an all-in-one professional solution for composing and mixing.

(For the record I am not a commercial artist, it's my passion, but not a career.)

I'm also not a Pro. Music is my hobby since forever

My advice to you then, is jump in without so much thinking. Don't look at the 1/4 empty, but at the 3/4 full of fat!

Unfortunately there is no magic sticks! Composing need its own tools and mixing its own tools as well. Learning them together might need years of practicing and never ends of course. Anyway, the good news is you don't need a lot of money for all of this! The DAW you choose has about 75% to 90% of what you need. The other things are accessories (for a hobbyist).

If you don't need a score editor, then that make it easier and open more choices to you. But first, what hardware you have? Is your audio setup correct? Windows or Mac? Do you have audio interface and monitors (speakers)? Do you use ASIO driver?

If all are set well, then you need to demo several DAWs till you find the one that you feel comfortable with, which you might stick with it or change it later! If I were you, I would choose Studio One because it is the easiest to learn and the friendliest one. If you want the best value for money, then it is Reaper.

Ableton Live makes you record your ideas fast in the Session view, then arrange all in the Arrangement view (this is a special workflow for Ableton Live and Bitwig, but you could useignore the session view and start with arrangement view. Famous musicians who use Ableton Live, for example, is Jean-Michel Jarre. You can get Live Intro for cheap but it is 16 tracks limited. Check the comparison chart between Intro, Standard and Suite.

In short, you have a lot of work to do before choosing your DAW and being productive with it (and probably buying additional tools for both composing and mixing later).

I leave you with this video to give you some answers you might have in your mind: