Hardware fun vs. DAW productivity


#62

I’ll take incoherent sketch/jam over finished track most of the time.
I find music created outside of standard DAW arrangament window, more alive and full of happy accidents.
Personally i cant see how one can have ‘fun’ as an option while making music, it just has to be there.


#63

that’s why i bought a mixer with built-in multitrack recorder.
importing a multitrack session to Mixbus (or any other DAW) is one movement.
live mix and mix for release are two absolutely different mixes anyway.


#64

This thread might win for most ridiculous comments in any thread on Elektronauts. What does it matter how anyone else makes music? As if there’s a right or wrong way or any absolutes. Sad. Do what works for you and makes you feel satisfaction. I look forward to hearing it.


#65

if there is no right or wrong… how can any of the comments be ridiculous ? :wink:


#66
  1. it’s fun to discuss.

  2. DAWless is trendy, so why should we not discuss it?

  3. it may be useful for noobs. a noob can read the discussion, choose the point of view that he/she likes, and (the most important part) get an idea about planning his/her money spending.

so, i would not say this kind of topic is a total waste of letters.


#67

Another thought on the hardware/software/hyrbid concept is that I’ve found that my DAW only approaches have been influenced by things I have learned in the hardware world. Previously my Live projects never had anything bounced to audio except if it was a question of CPU usage (in which case I would freeze rather than render). Now though, I will record things from softsynths to audio and then cut up and re-arrange as needed. The act of committing to an idea rather than maintaining an ability to tweak on a microscopic level has helped my productivity and creativity hugely.

If something isn’t working within a song then it’s no bad thing just to ditch the idea and do something else rather than tinkering searching for a mythical blend of parameters. I think that’s applicable for hardware or software.


#68

That was my point. At some stage the OP has to come to a decision. Does he remain an Amateur and tinker around just for the FUN. Or does he get serious about things and look to produce something on a regular basis. A lot of people think creating music without FUN is a waste of time. But some think the opposite. Creating music without an end product is a waste of time. The book is mentioned is really helpful in converting your attitude. As at some stage you have that feeling things arent quite right and its not going to go away either.

Btw. Im an Amateur. I do it ONLY for FUN


#69

Really? I’m sure I’ve seen many threads that topped this one here by a mile…
I just was interested in finding opinions of other people experiencing the same conflict.


#70

…i make my living since 30 years with sonic results…i have always come to a point…end of the day…
…no matter what… it’s my job…

and hell yeah, i can create way more intresting results in hardware while i just play along…
and hell yeah, i need total recall and the options of daw editing to finish track arrangements…and final mixes.
so best of both worlds…record all ur hardware madly beauty and intresting mess arounds to harddrives and then get it done straight in ur daw…


#71

I think ultimately it is easier to complete songs in a DAW, basically because that is what they are designed to do. Even back in the day when software could only sequence MIDI, it did it better (i.e. more conveniently) than hardware sequencers unless you were composing something fairly simple.

I also find it strange that people call hardware musical instruments but not DAWs. If I use my keyboard to play its own internal sounds or the sounds of my A4 via Din MIDI or a VST instrument via USB MIDI it is all the same to me. When I am playing the VST it still feels and sounds like I am playing a musical instrument.

Personally I can have as much fun whether jamming with solely hardware or just ITB or a hybrid setup. However, when it comes to completing songs I am more productive ITB.


#72

Yes I think this would be the most convenient solution. But I want to avoid a mixer because of space and cable mess. That’s why I think Audio via USB is pretty cool in theory, cause you only need a good USB hub then. But does it really work well so far? For elektron you would have to stick to OB enabled devices (assumed that it will finally drop and work one day)… And other devices? I heard there are many problems with audio over usb with the Roland ACB stuff e.g.


#73

Here’s a jam with nothing but the Analog 4 ran through the Analog Heats Enhancement setting

Here’s a track with a combination of hardware jamming and sequencing but all arranged and processed in Live

But check out my whole SoundCloud. Everything prior to the last month was a jam. As soon as I gave up the midi clock (and got a UAD system) I figured out how to integrate both hardware and software pretty seamlessly. Now it’s the best of all worlds.

Now, if I could just get better at actual music production and make something actually good :thinking:


#74

My thread here makes me consider push again. But there must be a reason why I sold it three times


#75

i actually made the complete opposite movement … i went back to basics recording straight to 2-track , i use ableton only for mastering purposes and some minor edits (mainly start / end point edits) . it was such a relief giving up on finetunening and banging out stuff on the boxes on the fly .


#76

A lot of music is created in a DAW and after that they figure out how to perform that piece for a live audience.

I don’t want to create that way. Just play live (overdub ok, depends on what you want to do) and record. I prefer to get a finished product in the traditional way. If not also fine :wink:


#77

Have you tried maschine? Resolved the daw/saved across multiple boxes issue for me entirely


#78

Rather than a Push, which unfortunately I didn’t connect with very well as a singular, all-in-one instrument interface, I’m getting more mileage from using more than one type of USB controller at a time.


#79

in DAW land I tend to be less likely to finish things since there are sooooo many options and so easy to copy projects and produce endless variations. . . even if I run out of CPU it’s really easy to bounce down and keep going. . . with my hardware setups I find it much easier to stay grounded - it’s much more difficult and time-consuming to swap modules around in my modular and its impossible to add features to the Elektrons so I’m more inclined to just use it as it is and actually get something done

‘too much gear’ or ‘too many options’ is often a damper on both productivity and fun, whether we’re talking plugins or pedals, samples or synths - 3 Elektrons and a DFAM is a pretty hefty setup in the grand scheme of things - having a couple Elektrons talking to each other isn’t that different from trying to make music using two DAWs simultaneously, which people do of course, but I wouldn’t recommend it


#80

Hi, just curious what UAD had to do with it specifically, would you have the same feeling with another high end interface?


#81

sure it‘s hefty. Each of these machines on their own are hefty :slight_smile:
the biggest problem for me really is the project management across multiple elektrons. so as many have mentioned here I have to record each single track into the daw to finish it.

recording jams to a single stereo track is also sometimes fine for me but only with one or maximum two elektrons. I can‘t handle more of them properly