You also haven’t read the response above from @jamesstiff linking to a post from one of the people who worked on the Cycles development team, stating that the processor of the device is not capable of outputting more than a stereo stream.
People have also suggested multiple solutions for recording out individual channels one by one for processing.
The answers are here and no amount of plugin development will give you the multiple out solution you are looking for.
There is no problem to solve tho. This is how the cycles works. It’s as it is. It has been out for over 3 years and if there was a viable way to do what you want it to do then it would have been implemented already. As at least one person has already stated in this thread, the processor in the M:C is not capable of doing what you propose that it should do, so I think that really is the end of it. If you still assert that it can be done, ‘easily’ and for ‘free’, then im sure the M:C community would welcome you to develop this solution yourself and present it here.
And to be clear … the quoted statement came from @Ess who was part of the model:cycles development team, an elektron employee, of course.
EDIT: oops I duplicated what @Xpm said, sorry.
Yes, I read that post, but I didn’t find it useful because the approach I would like to use is completely different. And it doesn’t require a processor or hardware change. The problem is not in the cycles. The problem is in the daw.
Sampling individual sounds and then assembling them is one solution, but the lack of immediacy compromises artistic inspiration. It is important that the instrument plays live to be able to change the sounds during the creation of the song. The ergonomic and artistic aspect are important.
So going back to the solution that could be found, I think about when we use stand alone cycles. We touch pad 1 and only the kick plays. And if we touch pad 5 the bass will play. Okay. We need an app that does the same by sending the midi message. I don’t see any other solutions. Maybe I’m not taking other factors into consideration? I do not know. Have your say. If that could be my solution.
Your attitude is not as logical and constructive as you are willing to frame it. You make a lot of blanket statements about what should be, about the « true pro workflow », about « you never do that » or « always do this ». It looks a lot like you don’t realize other workflows than yours exist and you are not entitled to every feature you want just because you bought an instrument.
Unless you are part of the development team on Cycles, absolutely nothing lets you assess logically that Overbridge support would be « easy ». Software is not free to develop, and it needs to run on hardware, which maybe, can’t run said software. It is nobody’s job here to prove you otherwise. As you have been told several times, asking Elektron for the feature is the bet you can do (and you did apparently, so all is done).
Personally, I made a few tracks from the Model:Samples (same limitations) and made an EP with it. I muted all tracks but one, and recorded the whole song. And I did that 6 times, each time with a different track unmuted.
Is it supotimal? Yes. But it’s also a 20 minute process in what is going to be 3 days of mixing, composing, trial and error anyway. My time is not that precious. Work takes time, and other gear would require other sacrifices.
Overbridge is a bit of a rarity. Its existence in Elektron’s catalog does not make Elektron customers entitled to it. If you are mad about its absence on the models, wait until you hear about the Octatrack. Yet many people love that box, even more than the models! Because no gear is perfect, and musicians seek the gear that sounds and works how they like, and make compromises when necessary. The most inspiring instruments are not always the most practical for an audio engineer to record.
Besides, many great recordings were made using whatever means necessary. It is not always possible to do « the pro workflow as the books said ». In fact, many pro engineers know very well that what matters is whether it sounds good. No professional would actually cry about having to trade « the official workflow » for a better sound. If the Cycles sounds good to you, it’s your job to make it work. You are not entitled to any shortcuts.
Finally, I do read manuals before buying. I bought an interface that could not do an FX Loop to use outboard gear with Ableton Live. It had enough inputs and outputs. It had routing software, and yet it could not do it. I looked everywhere for answers, and it turns out it’s not a software bug. The interface is wired this way.
I whined about how « it has outputs but doesn’t let you route it freely? Ridiculous! ». But ultimately, I made the mistake of buying something that was not ready for my use case.
So I took responsibility, sold it, and found another interface that fits my needs. I suggest you do that too. Find a groovebox that sounds good to you and sends out multiple outs for multitracking. If that is essential to you, read manuals before buying now. Reach for the « connectivity » page and if it doesn’t clearly mention multiple outputs and multitracking, don’t buy it.
I hope you find the tools you need. But as others have clearly stated, please know that your attitude, claiming that « software should just be made duh » and asking people here to explain to you technical limitations that nobody (including you) has access too… it’s neither logical nor constructive.
I have been on this forum for a few years, and while drama happens once in a while, it is often due to a user acting like a lightning rod, showing all the red flags necessary to derail the conversation onto their behavior. I urge you to consider why your behavior could generate such reactions here. Elektron gear gets criticized all the time on this forum and it usually doesn’t pan out this way.
Having an opinion and a creative need all your own is one thing. Asserting things you have no idea about (feasibility of software implementation for one), and claiming that other forum users just « don’t know the professional way », trying to explain something as basic as multitracking to a community of musicians who (for many of them) have quite a few years of music making behind them… It’s just a bit rich for you to act surprised when some people find it untasteful.
I understand your point of view. But I’m looking for a solution with an alternative approach. Bypassing the hardware features of the cycles. Which are fine as they are. I do not give up. I’m sure it can be done.
I agree with you. But you misunderstood some points.
I know there are different approaches in the production world. And everyone is free to use the approach they prefer. But I was referring to the standard. That is the approach used by most users. Because if I don’t have control of the individual tracks, I can’t apply an EQ to the bass to fit it with the kick drum. So I, and many other users, need a multi-channel drum.
Regarding the claim to implement overbridge, even for a fee, I was not necessarily referring to overbridge with its technology that requires specific hardware to function. I was referring to any application that could solve the problem. Such as a max for live. As I mentioned it in response to another user. Or a VST and AU plugin that could improve the management of the MIDI that the DAW sends to the cycles.
In my opinion some users have misunderstood.
Hmm, I see.
When it comes to EQ, I recommend you compose to avoid having several sounds competing for frequencies. In other words, EQ should not be needed, it should just make something that already sounds good sound even better. Maybe you already know that, but I feel like mentioning it, as it explains in part why multitracking is not “an absolute need” for everybody.
As for the fee thing, it has not been “the Elektron way” to make users pay for software. Transformative features have been added, but in this case, as mentioned earlier, the Cycles team themselves confirmed that Overbridge was not possible.
When it comes to separate MIDI tracks, it should already work as intended: you should not use the External Instrument device on each track. Your should simply route each track’s MIDI to separate MIDI channels on the Cycles.
Since it can only output Stereo, there should be only one Audio track monitoring and recording its sound. But separate MIDI channels can sequence each track.
Note: none of these MIDI tracks are using the External Instrument device. In fact, the rack is empty on all tracks in this example.
Once you are happy with your composition, you should be able to mute all MIDI tracks except for one, and record that on an Audio track. Then you do it 5 more times, on different audio tracks, by unmuting a different MIDI track.
Let me know if that helps you a little bit. I’m trying to understand your problem better.
I wonder if this is because the models dont seem to have the AK4621 - 24-Bit 192kHz Stereo Audio CODEC that can be found in the digitakt and digitone…
Reason why I think this is that component is because the models seem to share most of their other components with the DT1. In any kind of way this is probably hardware limitation which cannot be solved with any firmware update.
I thank you. I need the DAW to control the cycles tracks individually but with external instrument. I also believed it should work without additional apps. But this is not the case because the DAW continues to send midi even from tracks that should not play. Did you see the video I posted at the beginning of the post? In that video the problem is clearly visible.
So I thought I’d create a max for live instrument to insert on each Ableton midi track. In order to send only the midi channel in question to cycles, without sending the other channels. It could be a solution?
Regarding mixing, I use EQs to improve the sound of the sum. Because if I don’t clean the tracks and they overlap too much, the mix sounds muddy and with less loudness. After the EQ treatment it sounds much more dynamic. However, I believe it is a technique that was born with the digital age to improve mixes in the box. Because when we worked only in analogue I don’t think these techniques were used.
… wait hold up.
Because when we worked only in analog I don’t think these techniques were used
arguably, having access to deeply editable multitracking is a very recent thing in the world of audio, as well as the way we mix in the digital world.
every classic drum machine, synthesizer, groovebox, sampler, etc in the world has relied on its physical outputs until very, very recently.
shit I mean we didn’t even have automated faders on analog mixers until the mid 70’s, and Overbridge itself hasn’t even been around a decade yet, not to mention it was definitely not perfect nor perfectly useable when it first came out.
it is a relevantly new and exciting priviledge to have something like Overbridge, but because of that, I can gaurantee there have been thousands of electronic records produced without access to advanced multitracking, which means a lot of this music was recorded in very limited and often clunky ways.
applying EQ to a full mix is a very old and very common practice that dates back to… well, since we’ve been doing audio professionally? the 2 buss was originally all that we had way way back.
also there is something to be said for mixing with a groovebox that only has a stereo output. it forces one to set the balance of everything internally first before ever even getting a recorded take, which is really good practice for setting a static mix! you should generally be doing this regardless of your mixing environment as no mix will sound “good” if the static, unprocessed mix isn’t balanced from the start.
you can also set up some basic chains in your daw, like a mix buss compressor, and set your static mix levels into that comp to get a better idea of how everything will balance post-processing later during mixing.
I don’t understand what you need External Instrument for. It is not required. And in this case, it will cause problems.
I have made a quick video demonstrating what I said: MIDI tracks only sending MIDI to the Model (Samples in this case) and one single audio track monitoring everything. You can mute and unmute MIDI tracks to stop them from sending MIDI to the model. Using this technique, you can then record each track, one after the other.
Here is the video
(sorry for the quiet audio. Again, it’s very quickly put together, just to demonstrate the workflow).
Also, another disclaimer: Track 5 is controlled using the Model’s sequencer. Track 6 plays the clap using the Elektron sequencer, and the kick using Ableton Live. This is to demonstrate that this technique allows you to use both sequencers at the same time without issues, if needed.
edit: More info on the External Instrument device. External Instrument is meant to allow control and monitoring of an instrument that responds to only one MIDI track, and only generates a stereo signal. Since this is not what you are trying to do right now, you should not be using External Instrument.
As for the EQ stuff, it is not really new. Sound is sound, analog or digital. Digital needs you to take care of aliasing when applicable and changes your relationship to clipping. Apart from that, the whole “mixing happens during writing” philosophy has been true throughout the history of recorded music.
In the video you did what I wanted to do but with the external tool. I need the external tool to process cycles tracks independently. In fact in my video you can see that I put a chandler compressor in the kick. In the hit hat an optical compressor. I couldn’t without the external instruments.
70’s?
I watched an interview some time ago with an artist that was talking about how he had no idea what sidechain is and was recording his clips while manually pumping the volume knob until like 10 years ago when someone taught him that DAWs can sidechain lol.
I think it was a STOOR hangouts session but can’t remember which…
also, mentioning STOOR, these guys produced 8 people playing techno orchestra from remote locations all over the world and had all of their instruments summed into a stereo out from SpeedyJ mixer…
You need to record your M:C tracks individually and then process them individually on different audio channels in your DAW, this is the same as recording pretty much any other instrument with multiple sources and only a stereo out. You can still have your midi on different channels but if you play them all at once then you will get all track audio through one audio channel.
You don’t need that. You need a separate MIDI track for control, and an Audio track for monitoring and audio processing (your compressors, EQ and everything else).
So, each one of your Cycles tracks should have 2 tracks in Live: one to send MIDI notes, and another one to record audio and add effects.
Because you cannot send 6 signals out of the Cycles, You will need to record each track separately, one after the other. Until you have done that, you will always hear all tracks at once.
Think of it like this: the Model Cycles is 6 stereo synths in one box and they share the same output, like they are going through a mixer.
So you will need to record them one after the other if you want to record and process each track separately.
Yes. I’m afraid that’s the case…
I’ll do some tests this afternoon. I didn’t quite understand what you told me now. Now I have to sleep. I did the night. We’ll talk about it again tonight. Thank you
oh my god that’s amazing, talk about commitment to the craft!
and yeah that’s also a good point on tech not reaching mainstream audiences until far later than its inception
HI.
This is the only solution. This one you’re suggesting. Create the project with midi and when I’m satisfied export the cycles sounds and work them in audio in the project.
It is not possible to use it with external instruments due to the stereo outputs only. I’ll do this while waiting for the new digitakt. But is it possible with digitakt? Even the digitakt only has two outputs… would the same problem arise? I didn’t understand how the overbridge works. It should be tried.
Thanks
Unfortunately (literally), I never had an Elektron machine with Overbridge (somehow). So, I can’t answer your question. I recommend you look for resources on how it works. There should be plenty of youtube videos, and lots of threads about it on here.
My understanding is that Overbridge should let you record each track separately over USB, without using the analogue Stereo Out.
However, please note that Overbridge is still in beta for Digitakt 2 apparently. You may join the beta or wait for the public firmware update if you absolutely need the stability and you don’t want to help file bug reports. But it will probably not have Overbridge out of the box if you buy one now. Digitakt 1 has had Overbridge for a while though, if you don’t need the new features and you want to save some money on a used unit.
Anyway, I hope you find a solution that fits you soon!
