Producing Without VSTs

[TechHaus]

One negative / positive from all hardware hardware (non-VST) production, especially in the past, is that if was very difficult to work on two projects at once. Recall was unreliable, at best - often, impossible.

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

But the total recall of VST's and DAWs is really liberating, when past recall systems included sheets of paper with markings for knobs and faders and Polaroid pictures. Now my entire studio can fit in a duffle bag, with full recall. Switching projects on a dime. Amazing.

[casiobioassay]

One negative / positive from all hardware hardware (non-VST) production, especially in the past, is that if was very difficult to work on two projects at once. Recall was unreliable, at best - often, impossible.

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

But the total recall of VST's and DAWs is really liberating, when past recall systems included sheets of paper with markings for knobs and faders and Polaroid pictures. Now my entire studio can fit in a duffle bag, with full recall. Switching projects on a dime. Amazing.

digital hardware synths presets could be switched from the DAW via MIDI

[TechHaus]

One negative / positive from all hardware hardware (non-VST) production, especially in the past, is that if was very difficult to work on two projects at once. Recall was unreliable, at best - often, impossible.

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

But the total recall of VST's and DAWs is really liberating, when past recall systems included sheets of paper with markings for knobs and faders and Polaroid pictures. Now my entire studio can fit in a duffle bag, with full recall. Switching projects on a dime. Amazing.

digital hardware synths presets could be switched from the DAW via MIDI

Yeah, but i ripped the VCA's out of my Neotek Elite, and also just because the preset was recalled, doesn't mean the knobs were in the right place and that all functions could be recalled. And doesn't mean my patchbay was still set up the same way. Not to mention the FX.

Wasn't just "synth presets", unfortunately.

[casiobioassay]

One negative / positive from all hardware hardware (non-VST) production, especially in the past, is that if was very difficult to work on two projects at once. Recall was unreliable, at best - often, impossible.

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

But the total recall of VST's and DAWs is really liberating, when past recall systems included sheets of paper with markings for knobs and faders and Polaroid pictures. Now my entire studio can fit in a duffle bag, with full recall. Switching projects on a dime. Amazing.

digital hardware synths presets could be switched from the DAW via MIDI

Yeah, but i ripped the VCA's out of my Neotek Elite, and also just because the preset was recalled, doesn't mean the knobs were in the right place and that all functions could be recalled. And doesn't mean my patchbay was still set up the same way. Not to mention the FX.

Wasn't just "synth presets", unfortunately.

I just record to audio. We (music industry) do/did this with bands traditionally. You records the drums, bass, guitar and vox. You get the sound with the instruments, room, mic placement, mics and pres as well as maybe some colour compression and EQ going in. So there is a commitment early.

Same with hardware synths. I wasted a lot of time with MIDI and preset recall etc because the feature was there and I felt obliged to use it. Big mistake on my part. Terrible workflow. Just record your 8 bar phrases. Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

[TechHaus]

One negative / positive from all hardware hardware (non-VST) production, especially in the past, is that if was very difficult to work on two projects at once. Recall was unreliable, at best - often, impossible.

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

But the total recall of VST's and DAWs is really liberating, when past recall systems included sheets of paper with markings for knobs and faders and Polaroid pictures. Now my entire studio can fit in a duffle bag, with full recall. Switching projects on a dime. Amazing.

digital hardware synths presets could be switched from the DAW via MIDI

Yeah, but i ripped the VCA's out of my Neotek Elite, and also just because the preset was recalled, doesn't mean the knobs were in the right place and that all functions could be recalled. And doesn't mean my patchbay was still set up the same way. Not to mention the FX.

Wasn't just "synth presets", unfortunately.

I just record to audio. We (music industry) do/did this with bands traditionally. You records the drums, bass, guitar and vox. You get the sound with the instruments, room, mic placement, mics and pres as well as maybe some colour compression and EQ going in. So there is a commitment early.

Same with hardware synths. I wasted a lot of time with MIDI and preset recall etc because the feature was there and I felt obliged to use it. Big mistake on my part. Terrible workflow. Just record your 8 bar phrases. Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Hence why I said, "The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something."

And traditionally bands would block out a studio for days, weeks, or months at a time. Now you can recall the session and bands can jump from studio to studio if they want, even, and continue right where they were.

Weird responses, tbh.

[zerocrossing]

I fully understand option paralysis but I agree, the options are liberating and rejecting them is silly.

Choose your limitations for creativity and work within that, that's the same hardware or software. VSTs are simply the democratizing factor that opens up options for more people. This is universally, unequivocally a good thing.

We have had music publishing open up with platforms like Spotify. Anyone can release anything now. From a music listener's perspective this has not made the experience better.

For better or worse, music publishing used to have a gate-keeper process that kept a lot, though not all, garbage out of the record stores and air waves. There was payola, but few were willing to pay for something that was really bad. I don't remember ever hearing voices that couldn't carry a tune or parts played without regard to rhythm or tempo, though that's a pretty common phenomenon if you visit KVR's Cafe section. It's surprising that I'm not aware of an influencer class that has arrived who spend the time hunting for talent and promoting it. I see a little of this on TikTok, but I don't think it's big. In a weird way, AI is this, as it generates its slop based on what it's trained on, which is generally published music that has gotten through some vetting process. Its problem though, is the music is generated without any emotional relationship with the training material and is bland and very derivative. A lot of human made music is bland and derivative, as well.

[casiobioassay]

I fully understand option paralysis but I agree, the options are liberating and rejecting them is silly.

Choose your limitations for creativity and work within that, that's the same hardware or software. VSTs are simply the democratizing factor that opens up options for more people. This is universally, unequivocally a good thing.

We have had music publishing open up with platforms like Spotify. Anyone can release anything now. From a music listener's perspective this has not made the experience better.

For better or worse, music publishing used to have a gate-keeper process that kept a lot, though not all, garbage out of the record stores and air waves. There was payola, but few were willing to pay for something that was really bad. I don't remember ever hearing voices that couldn't carry a tune or parts played without regard to rhythm or tempo, though that's a pretty common phenomenon if you visit KVR's Cafe section. It's surprising that I'm not aware of an influencer class that has arrived who spend the time hunting for talent and promoting it. I see a little of this on TikTok, but I don't think it's big. In a weird way, AI is this, as it generates its slop based on what it's trained on, which is generally published music that has gotten through some vetting process. Its problem though, is the music is generated without any emotional relationship with the training material and is bland and very derivative. A lot of human made music is bland and derivative, as well.

Technology has driven accessibility but the trade of has been flooding the market with lots of utter shite. Who wins under this model?

[cryophonik]

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

I just record to audio…

Same with hardware synths…Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Yup, that’s exactly how I work with hardware synths. I usually play it live and record the MIDI, tweak the timing, velocity, expression, etc. as needed, then add any additional MIDI automation, bounce it to audio and call it good. If, for whatever reason, I’m not able to print it to audio in a session, I just save the location of the synth’s preset in the track name (e.g., “P6-714), save the patch on the synth, and finish it in the next session. Once I’m done, I have the audio and MIDI saved on my computer, and I have the synth name and patch location documented in case I ever need to go back to it, which I almost never do.

The one caveat, though, is that most of my songs feature vocalists and it’s not too uncommon for them to want the key of the song changed to better fit their range when it comes time to record. In that case, I simply drop/raise the MIDI notes to the new key and re-bounce the hardware synth parts. Once the song is done, I move on and usually forget entirely which synth or patch I used.

[TechHaus]

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

I just record to audio…

Same with hardware synths…Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Yup, that’s exactly how I work with hardware synths. I usually play it live and record the MIDI, tweak the timing, velocity, expression, etc. as needed, then add any additional MIDI automation, bounce it to audio and call it good. If, for whatever reason, I’m not able to print it to audio in a session, I just save the location of the synth’s preset in the track name (e.g., “P6-714), save the patch on the synth, and finish it in the next session. Once I’m done, I have the audio and MIDI saved on my computer, and I have the synth name and patch location documented in case I ever need to go back to it, which I almost never do.

The one caveat, though, is that most of my songs feature vocalists and it’s not too uncommon for them to want the key of the song changed to better fit their range when it comes time to record. In that case, I simply drop/raise the MIDI notes to the new key and re-bounce the hardware synth parts. Once the song is done, I move on and usually forget entirely which synth or patch I used.

Right, but the op asked which is more liberating. Surely not that.

Cool story about workflows but that is more restrictive.

EDIT: misread what I was responding to, but leaving it anyway.

[cryophonik]

It’s actually VERY liberating. Maybe it would be restrictive to you or another person, but it’s not for me. We all have different ways of working and thinking. Penciling in notes in a piano roll and endlessly tweaking parts is a slow, tedious, and very restrictive way of working in my opinion, but other people are accustomed to that workflow or a totally different workflow and that’s perfectly fine, too.

[TechHaus]

It’s actually VERY liberating. Maybe it would be restrictive to you or another person, but it’s not for me. We all have different ways of working and thinking. Penciling in notes in a piano roll and endlessly tweaking parts is a slow, tedious, and very restrictive way of working in my opinion, but other people are accustomed to that workflow or a totally different workflow and that’s perfectly fine, too.

I actually misread your post while on my phone walking (i walk 2 miles a day to my studio). No criticism of what you wrote, i take it back!

EDIT: One caveat being if you are using a modular synth and the part is just not done yet and not ready to be recorded. That's a thing.

[casiobioassay]

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

I just record to audio…

Same with hardware synths…Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Yup, that’s exactly how I work with hardware synths. I usually play it live and record the MIDI, tweak the timing, velocity, expression, etc. as needed, then add any additional MIDI automation, bounce it to audio and call it good. If, for whatever reason, I’m not able to print it to audio in a session, I just save the location of the synth’s preset in the track name (e.g., “P6-714), save the patch on the synth, and finish it in the next session. Once I’m done, I have the audio and MIDI saved on my computer, and I have the synth name and patch location documented in case I ever need to go back to it, which I almost never do.

The one caveat, though, is that most of my songs feature vocalists and it’s not too uncommon for them to want the key of the song changed to better fit their range when it comes time to record. In that case, I simply drop/raise the MIDI notes to the new key and re-bounce the hardware synth parts. Once the song is done, I move on and usually forget entirely which synth or patch I used.

You can just change the key of the audio directly nowadays.

[casiobioassay]

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

I just record to audio…

Same with hardware synths…Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Yup, that’s exactly how I work with hardware synths. I usually play it live and record the MIDI, tweak the timing, velocity, expression, etc. as needed, then add any additional MIDI automation, bounce it to audio and call it good. If, for whatever reason, I’m not able to print it to audio in a session, I just save the location of the synth’s preset in the track name (e.g., “P6-714), save the patch on the synth, and finish it in the next session. Once I’m done, I have the audio and MIDI saved on my computer, and I have the synth name and patch location documented in case I ever need to go back to it, which I almost never do.

The one caveat, though, is that most of my songs feature vocalists and it’s not too uncommon for them to want the key of the song changed to better fit their range when it comes time to record. In that case, I simply drop/raise the MIDI notes to the new key and re-bounce the hardware synth parts. Once the song is done, I move on and usually forget entirely which synth or patch I used.

Right, but the op asked which is more liberating. Surely not that.

Cool story about workflows but that is more restrictive.

EDIT: misread what I was responding to, but leaving it anyway.

the restriction is good

[TechHaus]

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

I just record to audio…

Same with hardware synths…Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Yup, that’s exactly how I work with hardware synths. I usually play it live and record the MIDI, tweak the timing, velocity, expression, etc. as needed, then add any additional MIDI automation, bounce it to audio and call it good. If, for whatever reason, I’m not able to print it to audio in a session, I just save the location of the synth’s preset in the track name (e.g., “P6-714), save the patch on the synth, and finish it in the next session. Once I’m done, I have the audio and MIDI saved on my computer, and I have the synth name and patch location documented in case I ever need to go back to it, which I almost never do.

The one caveat, though, is that most of my songs feature vocalists and it’s not too uncommon for them to want the key of the song changed to better fit their range when it comes time to record. In that case, I simply drop/raise the MIDI notes to the new key and re-bounce the hardware synth parts. Once the song is done, I move on and usually forget entirely which synth or patch I used.

Right, but the op asked which is more liberating. Surely not that.

Cool story about workflows but that is more restrictive.

EDIT: misread what I was responding to, but leaving it anyway.

the restriction is good

Here is what I said early in this thread:

"VSTs are the liberators. But restrictions (hardware) can be good. Many great creations are made in restrictive frameworks. But you can create your own restrictions in the box with VSTs, if you choose."

You are just here to push buttons? I don't get it.

[TechHaus]

The positive of this is that it could force you to commit and finish something.

I just record to audio…

Same with hardware synths…Get to audio as soon as possible after all that is the end goal.

Yup, that’s exactly how I work with hardware synths. I usually play it live and record the MIDI, tweak the timing, velocity, expression, etc. as needed, then add any additional MIDI automation, bounce it to audio and call it good. If, for whatever reason, I’m not able to print it to audio in a session, I just save the location of the synth’s preset in the track name (e.g., “P6-714), save the patch on the synth, and finish it in the next session. Once I’m done, I have the audio and MIDI saved on my computer, and I have the synth name and patch location documented in case I ever need to go back to it, which I almost never do.

The one caveat, though, is that most of my songs feature vocalists and it’s not too uncommon for them to want the key of the song changed to better fit their range when it comes time to record. In that case, I simply drop/raise the MIDI notes to the new key and re-bounce the hardware synth parts. Once the song is done, I move on and usually forget entirely which synth or patch I used.

You can just change the key of the audio directly nowadays.

I'm sure he didn't know this. Appreciate you so much.