I usually multitrack a performance. Repeat the performance until I think it’s ok. Then I might do some minimal editing and adding a few things here and there but mostly I just use the Daw to mix the track.
So I guess it’s more like how you record and produce a band playing live just that it’s electronic instruments instead
I usually record takes/stems into my OTs by sending groups/auxes from the mixer to which I have all hardware connected. Then the arrangement and editing is done in the OTs and I create the full arrangement flow in the Arranger. After that, I multitrack to Studio One (sometimes with a bit of performance of the fader done during the recording) with full sync using external clock (Midronome since lately). I don’t feel that this is much of an issue - I usually route track by track to the CUE outs and those get recorded on separate tracks. All in all, that recording process is almost always less than an hour (even using 2 OTs) and after that I can just disconnect entirely to the OTs.
Once in Studio One, I usually add linear stuff that I want to feel more dynamic over the course of the track such as extra pads, small fills, etc - these I either play by hand or sequence in any of the machines and sync to the DAW using that midi clock.
After that, sometimes vocals are added and then comes the mixing (hybrid in my case).
In some cases, I go directly from direct outs of the mixer instead of “printing” parts to the OTs - my mixer allows for 30 separate outs and can capture 26 of them at the same time through my Presonus Studio 192. I feel that both of these approaches work well for me.
Just to throw a personal anecdote into the discussion, none of my tracks released by record labels were made using a DAW, not that I’m presenting myself as some big shot at all because I definitely ain’t, but it is just a point to say it is entirely possible to not use a DAW even if the intent is to release music.
Yeah there’s a lot that don’t but in modern electronic music I’d say a majority do pass through a daw at some point. Especially as most releases are probably house, techno, edm, trance etc.
I’d also say some genres may vary in the ratio of daw to non daw
In Ableton I try to move from session view to arrangement view as soon as possible.
If starting with hardware boxes I record takes while tweaking via separate ins/outs into Ableton. After that I’ll treat my tracks as samples that I can chop, mangle, mute or process further.
Doing live takes to stereo, and doing it really well, is of course a skill. Can’t say I’ve mastered it yet.
If your goal is to finish and release music, then whatever workflow actually makes you finish music, must be the right one. I’ve certainly wasted a lot of time trying to make things complex, daydreaming of the ultimate setup/ultimate workflow. But then, I’m no octopus when it comes to tweaking lots of knobs simultaneously.
Making decisions, committing to audio, is what works best for me.
Frankly, I’m surprised more people have not come around to Bitwig. With a Driven by Moss controller, it really has a hardware DAWless vibe. I use BW with an Akai Fire and Launchpad ProMk3. Especially with the Fire, which even has a screen, you can do nearly everything from the controller including mix.
Lies. Damned lies. There was no music before FL Studio was invented.
Conservation of boredom: someone has to suffer through the tedious sounds/processing, if not the audience, then the artist.
“Jamming” or improvising can certainly be interesting music too… but that’s usually because the artist has practiced enough, ie. suffered through a lot of less successful or more tedious sessions…
This resonates, yet I’m also interested in synergizing the disparate approaches… So far, ultimately I fall on the songwriting side; I haven’t transcended the divide–and maybe this is partly because the tech hasn’t either
Key points, well made.
Although I’d transpose the first to “if not the artist, then the audience”
I’ve never finished a track on hardware but I guess it depends on the genre you’re working with. Techno or Ambient stuff could be finished purely on hardware I guess but stuff with a more complex arrangement is impossible for me to “finish” dawless. Most of the time I’m jamming on my Push recording some phrases on software instruments and when I’m happy with the outcome, I record some stems to my OT and fuck it all up hands on in there just to resample it into the daw.
This is a actually helpful point of view!
To solve this problem I decide to skip the painstaking stage of arranging and finishing a track. I choose to stay in the creative, in-the-zone stage because thats obviously the most rewarding.
For who should i finish my niche’s genre tracks anyway? The 6 persons on the planet that take notice of my bandcamp page and take the effort to actually listen longer then the first 8 patterns.
And if that’s what works for them then great.
But that doesn’t change the fact that most (not all) DAWs are based on this idea that all the elements (bass, drums, rythm, lead, harmony whatever) should be recorded onto their own tracks and arranged into songs. Lots of electronic artists work that way, but lots don’t and it’s this latter group that currently aren’t being catered for by DAWs.
There’s a lot of stuff that is a pain in the arse in a DAW that is integral to certain types of electronic music (stuff like sample accurate clocking, interpolation, cross modulation and matrix control/mixing). Things are still too reliant on tracks on a grid.
Like I said, a lot of people use them and love them, but there’s a lot of areas where they just aren’t a good option for recording or arranging electronic music.
been there but then encountered Drambo.
now my default approach to finished tracks is iPad with Drambo as a sequencer, and MC-707 as sound module.
my main reason to love Drambo is lack of conventional DAW linearity, so it’s NOT a tape recorder on steroids.
Recording, arranging and mixing to fully recorded song is the most difficult aspect of music to me. It’s not fun and feels like real work!
I’m always narrowing down my options, and practicing commitment to my self imposed limitations.
That’s increased my ability to finish tracks, and further develop a style that feels like my own thing.
One of the hard limitations I stick to is, not multitracking and editing tracks.
All things done in hardware and recorded stereo out.
Many other things like limiting how many tracks, and how many sounds etc.
I’m not constantly searching or over editing.
When I realized my tracks sound better and are easier to finish if I don’t multitrack, it felt like a breakthorugh, and a huge weight lifted.
Guys, i think o know the solution to all your trials and tribulations with music making: i love mixing and arranging. I can finish all your tracks if you pay me, I’ll do the boring daw stuff, you focus on your hardware sketches 
This is pretty much my workflow too. In fact, unless it’s something that is a specialty hardware effect, I try to keep in mind the effects I’ll be adding in the DAW later and record a bit on the drier side.
One of the reasons I upgraded from Digitone to Digitone Keys is the 4 separate stereo outputs. Which I’m sure you can recreate in Overbridge, but I haven’t yet explored too much.
My process usually consists: Octatrack MKII (clock/effects/samples), Digitone Keys, Machinedrum, FaderFox MX12. I’ll generally get multiple patterns on each of the machines. Octatrack makes all pattern changes for the other other boxes. Play it live and control with MX12 and OT crossfader. Audio runs all out to separate channels through a Tascam Model 24 into Logic with each track recorded live to its own channel. From there, it can be composed a little better, add effects, compression. Give it a little digital life.
These threads always blow up so fast - glad to see this community is going strong.
Anyways yeah - create a “loop” with lots going on, almost too much, then write a second loop in a brand new pattern where things are slightly different (either the melody, sounds, effects whatever). Multitrack record that in to your DAW with the main structure in mind, say X amount of bars of the first loop and X amount of bars of the second loop. After that it’s just a matter of going in to the DAW and deleting parts of the wave forms so the song slowly builds up in each section. Maybe you live record an overdub or some effects after that.
Some people prefer to not bother with all that and will just record direct to Ableton as is. Personally I find my arrangements are a little too tricky to nail in one take even with song mode, and I like the option of being able to tinker with the arrangement or mix after the fact (usually after walking away for a week I’ll come back and realize I must have been experiencing some kind of psychosis to have the kick that loud).
all the elements (bass, drums, rythm, lead, harmony whatever) should be recorded onto their own tracks
With the DAW you get a multitrack recording environment but then it’s up to you to decide how to record your parts. You could separate all the elements for maximum control during the mixing stage… or do exactly the opposite, by recording big stems/submixes.
and arranged into songs.
Again, the choice is yours. Actually I think it’s way easier to go “freeform” with a DAW, using it as a simple tape recorder, compared to a hardware (groove)box designed to work with chains of fixed length patterns.
It just matters how you use it. I think that is why no one can come to a unified answer. For me, I write dance tracks so I think in terms of when it feels right to change things up in an arrangement.
Playing in bands for years we wrote the same way - jam ideas, get the part tight then figure out what it is - a chorus, verse…bridge…etc. Then you think of another part to connect it to. And that is how I like to write because I want to guide the listener through something.
If its a style of noise/ambient…etc then that is completely different. I am not sure I would really need a DAW for that, althought it could take things to another level if you subtley build a movement across the timeline.
The DAW also functions as an idea recorder for me. So mess with plugins or gear, create cool sounds and then record those for further maipluation. That is a really great way to use a DAW for electronic music. You can do all of this in hardware as well if needed.
But I think a DAW works great for electronic music making, it’s just more about what kind of electronic music is being made.