Overbridge survey : what is you overbridge workflow?

Elektron Software Overbridge
#1

Hi guys,

I was wondering, what is you overbridge workflow ?

Here is 3 différents exemples

Worflow exemple 1 aka "print the performance’ :

  • jam with one elektron device to create pattern
  • connect it to daw (or even standalone overbridge app) and record a live performance in daw with OB.
  • add a few samples etc

Workflow exemple 2 aka " jam and collect ideas "

  • jam with elektron device and ableton live sessions view (to add samples etc), or any other hardware synth.
  • record audio of each pattern, just to export them
  • arrange and mix

Workflow exemple 3 aka “daw program it all” :

  • start with opening daw, and linearly arrange a song
  • when needed, use overbridge to start a beat/part by triggering a pattern triggered by a midi item on the daw timeline
  • go on building song by sequencing device with midi clips/items on the daw timeline

So what is yours and why ? Workflow 1, 2 or 3 or other ???

In my case, I am somewhere in beetween of 1 and 2 : I jam both with my digitakt and my daw (where I record guitars, strings and midi playing virtual synths, sometimes hardware synths). Then I am recording the basic digitakt patterns (not doing perfomance/dj like stuff) and build most of the songs. When I am happy with it, I record some “transitions” by live performing and record just the few stuff I still miss.

3 Likes
#2

I have tried using all 3 methods you describe and each seems to have pro’s and cons.

1:
pro: you can quickly create on the hardware and capture its specific workflow, and later use a DAW to arrange and remix your creations into tracks. Great if using electron Machines as sketching devices for creating music in the daw
con: I feel a bit restricted by the “limitations” of the hardware itself, i.e. only two LFO’s, steppy p-locks, limited overview of automation, notes played, and no way to use sequence data outside of the boxes.

2: Pro: I can use elektron boxes to access DAW functionalities like VST’s etc. and expand their sonic potential
con: I have to work with audio coming from the boxes and have to stick with the (amazing) elektron functionalities, which give you limited control over features in the DAW.

  1. Pro: I can use powerful midi features of a DAW to get extensive control over elektron gear, and easily exceed the 64 step pattern length. Its very portable as well and does not take a lot of computing power, since only midi is involved and audio recording is the very last step in the process. Using midi clips also enables me to easily rearrange, transpose, and re-use sequences across my setup, which would be quite tedious using only the elektron’s, or song-mode for that matter.
    Con: requires a bit of template creation and you loose the great performance workflow of the electron boxes.

I am undecided which one I like best. I use Cubase 12, so I created some templates that enable me to do each. I think it ultimately depends on the specific integration between DAW and Hardware setup and its ergonomics, plus your musical background.