I started looking at the Digitakt maybe if I should buy it… I was wondering, what happens to the send effects when you record the tracks? Are they integrated into the track signal in this case (theoretically possible, since it’s digital anyway), or there are separate delay/reverb tracks, or they are “lost”?
I suspect the latter… In that case, how do you find the otherwise awesome idea of recording into daw multiple tracks simultaneously useful? I mean, for postproduction (mixing) work, you’d need the
(I had the same dilemma with the A4, and ended up recording one-by-one, muting the other tracks. The send effects make an integral part of the sound. So simultaneous recording turned out not be very useful in that case)
There’s one stereo out. If you’re using the send FX, they are recorded with the summed signal. If you wanna record dry in order to use other FX when mixing in your DAW, just don’t use the internal FX.
If you’re talking about the possibilities of Overbridge, I’ll guess that it will (when OB for DT is released) work like the other machines. There’ll be a “main out” equal to the physical stereo out (all tracks + FX) and the option of streaming the individual tracks (then without the send FX, since these are on the master only).
I see, that’s what I suspected.
As per my question on how is this useful, “just don’t use the internal FX” is a solution, yes But is there any other workaround which is less drastic?
I am referring to Overbridge recording. Just trying to figure out why people seem to think that Overbridge’s capability to record multiple tracks simultaneously is practical and awesome.
We don’t know yet how that’ll be implemented. But it is possible that you’ll be able to send track audio only to separate USB streams (like individual outs) while sending FX (only) to main. Time will tell.
not sure if you have ever mixed a record in a DAW, but it’s quite nice to have individual control over every sound…different EQ, compression, more FX etc
also, 8 tracks at a time? saves a lot of time. 8x less time.
Hmm well yes, basically the thing is that I use effects for 2 purposes. One purpose is mixing, modifying the sound so that they gel together better. These uses are often subtle. The other is something drastic, like a big reverb that makes the sound completely different.
And for these latter uses the for the A4 effects are instantly gorgeous, while I am always struggling with DAW/VST effects, they sound meh to my ears. More is not always more.
Of course I do want to EQ the tracks.
But I just realized that maybe I could just feed the EQd tracks back to A4 with via Overbridge while mixing and that’s the solution. Gee, thanks
i can’t speak to A4 effects, or whatever plugins you own. I use Universal Audio emulations of classic reverbs like Lexicon, EMT, AMS Neve etc. they sound amazing and pretty much everyone agrees. More is more there… And yea, you would need everything on a different track to apply separate EQ…
What I’m reading into here is a difference in approach to recording post production in a DAW, and live performance needs. If you’re trying to record a performance off the Digitakt, that’s one thing… if you’re trying to get stems out of it, it’s another. Different contexts, in my opinion. Now… if you have an affinity for the character of the DT’s reverb and delay… that’s a different animal. I see these two send effects as performance tools, not mix tools in a DAW context. My 2¢.
But is there any other workaround which is less drastic?