Given that often DAW discussion these days revolve around audio & VST strengths, issues etc. I could not help wonder whether users are exploiting the midi-to-hardware functions & features, and to what extent?

I spent some time recently trying to find the optimum configuration for composing using only my Roland Fantom X and
Ableton Live
Studio One
Cubase
- the interesting bit is that some sequencers are surprisingly weak on setting up sufficient multi-channel midi control , not necessarily GS or XG, but just allowing the user to
1) use an existing patch from the synth, including retrieving the actual patch name
2) recall that arrangement later on, with minimal fuss
3) have control of the FX engines of the hardware

My basic scheme using Cubase and its Midi Device Manager
Channel 16 --> Performance mode
Channel 10 --> Rhythm patch (allows patch change of drum banks only)
Channel 1~15 --> Patch mode (allows access to any patch incl. ext card & SRX cards)
This way I am able to select a "hardware configuration template" including FX arrangement, just by changing the Performance patch from the inspector.
Unfortunately I cannot change FX patches from Cubase, but I am able to automate CC parameter control assigned on the hardware.

Curious to hear from others what they doing with their setups? And would love to hear about better ways of exploiting my existing configuration.

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

10-20 years ago, *the* way of using software sequencers was at the centre of a MIDI instrument setup.

These days, this is more the exception than the rule - I think you'll find most Logic/Cubase/Protools/etc users these days, in terms of numbers, probably have one keyboard (likely a USB one), and maybe the odd other piece of MIDI hardware.

So this kind of MIDI functionality and features of DAWs hasn't really developed beyond what was developed back then.

In addition, the few remaining MIDI instruments got so complicated that it was far easier to use other ways to manage and access data, than basic MIDI, so we have customer editor software, flash card readers, large amounts of sample memory and so on.

Using plugins is just so more convenient in many ways. Certainly for me, bit by unit over time I've replaced my hardware with plugin equivalents, which means multiple instances, dedicated mixer channels, recall ability without having to mess around with sysex etc. no separate committing to audio after the MIDI part is finalised.

Now, I still do have some MIDI hardware, so when I'm using it I will do all the usual things - access named patches, tweak the MIDI performance, commit to audio, save patches when necessary but I do all that less and less. My days of having to extensively program MIDI instruments to get the maximum realtime resource out of them are over - it's just too much effort when there are far simpler and quicker methods.

And as far as FX engines of hardware go, there's very few effects in hardware that I can't do better as a plugin. If a synth patch has embedded FX that are a necessary inherent part of the patch, I'll either retain them, or switch out some of the wet FX (refers/delays) for replacement in the mix.

And while I could switch, say, my XV-5080 to multitimbral mode and use 32 parts sequenced at once, compromises in FX use mean that it doesn't sound it's best that way - I'd rather do one part at a time and commit to audio, rather than try and do everything in realtime over MIDI from one module. I had years of doing that, I don't want to go back!

For any other MIDI tasks, Logic's environment can handle pretty much anything you'd need to do, which was a big draw of Logic for me back in the day - though again, these days, that stuff is used less and less as the hardware requirements of making music decrease...

But - we each choose our own workflows and methods for what works for us...

Desmond,

I still would like to hear from those workstation users that have spent serious money on a Triton, Motif, Fantom, Kronos, etc.

For me it's more about, I've invested in this piece of kit - let me get the best out of it. And whilst younger people probably don't buy hardware, what about the older crowd who already have a room full of synths? - paperweights?

If you have no use for that 5080, by all means send it down mate

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote C.LYDE:

---

I still would like to hear from those workstation users that have spent serious money on a Triton, Motif, Fantom, Kronos, etc.

---

Most of the people I know who have these thought tend to be "players" using them to gig and perform with, rather than as the centre piece of a studio, but of course there will be people that do.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

For me it's more about, I've invested in this piece of kit - let me get the best out of it.

---

Sure.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

And whilst younger people probably don't buy hardware, what about the older crowd who already have a room full of synths? - paperweights?

---

Nah, they will probably be using them the same as ever. But it's far easier to record and process them than it used to be...

Quote C.LYDE:

---

If you have no use for that 5080, by all means send it down mate

---

It makes a nice SD card holder...

Quote desmond:

---

Most of the people I know who have these thought tend to be "players" using them to gig and perform with, rather than as the centre piece of a studio, but of course there will be people that do.

---

Sure - that's me too - after composing something, it needs to be performed - one of the niceties of the workstations are that they allow one to take the 'production' to the people...

Quote desmond:

---

Nah, they will probably be using them the same as ever. But it's far easier to record and process them than it used to be...

---

Well, lets look at this in some detail - how exactly are people using their WS with their software - I've briefly mentioned my approach and quite frankly, I cannot approach Ableton to Roland in the same way as I would Cubase to Roland ...

How does Logic to XV5080 make it easier for you? Do you enter the patch names manually or can you retrieve them from the XV?

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote C.LYDE:

---

How does Logic to XV5080 make it easier for you? Do you enter the patch names manually or can you retrieve them from the XV?

---

Yes, I have all the patch names for my synths in my daw (Logic) with custom bank changes for all banks to make patches easily selectable. For custom sounds, it's easy enough to get the sounds in - I typically use Soundiver* to request the user banks, copy the names to the clipboard, and I can then just paste the names into Logic.

I have the XV5080 coming up on a digital input to my audio interface, and typically I leave it in Patch mode, rather than the full 32-part multitimbral performance mode, as I want to full sound quality of each sound without getting bogged down by FX juggling and sharing resources.

What I will typically do is sequence the part, and when I'm happy, record it to audio (while saving the MIDI part should I want to re-record or edit it later). Printing to audio means you can still use the track without the hardware or sounds present, and is good practice to archiving - not to mention mixing with plugins and so on becomes easier.

In the old days, say I was using an Atari/Creator combo and had no onboard audio in the computer, then of course it changes the workflow, and I would be running as much as I could live via MIDI, and juggling resources to give me the parts that I wanted which could all be mixed down live. I'm guessing that your workflow is similar to this - to basically use Cubase as a sequencer, and run much of your arrangement live via MIDI.

In that case, you'd leave your keyboard in multitimbral mode, and probably have a quick set up in your software to allocate all the available MIDI parts to their own tracks all ready to go, so you can pick a part, choose a sound by name, and start sequencing. Depending on your hardware, you may have to make FX compromises on certain sounds.

Or you may wish to start sequencing on the keyboard itself, if the onboard sequencer is good and well-integrated, and transfer the MIDI to the computer later on.

Lastly - often I may multisample some of my favourite patches from modules into the computer so I can still "use the module" without having it connected - this depends on the nature and complexity of the sound and so on.

* Although now my forced upgrade to Lion means I've lost Rosetta and can no longer run Soundiver PPC anymore. Might need to pick up a PC version and run it in Parallels or something as a workaround... although it's not much of a big deal as my hardware requirements are minimal these days.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

Given that often DAW discussion these days revolve around audio & VST strengths, issues etc. I could not help wonder whether users are exploiting the midi-to-hardware functions & features, and to what extent?

I spent some time recently trying to find the optimum configuration for composing using only my Roland Fantom X and
Ableton Live
Studio One
Cubase

---

I have a Fantom G8, and a Korg Kronos, both workstations that are capable of multi-track recording: I don't use either for that purpose. In short, it's far too cumbersome to work on a workstation, when compared with a laptop/PC, and if you're all about recording an idea as quickly as you can then you'd have to go some way to beat a small 4-track SSD recorder.

If you're looking for something to record and progress ideas, over and above a quick recording on a 4-track, then I cannot see why you wouldn't use Cubase/Ableton etc, and use the Fantom as your sound generator. I wouldn't even bother with the internal FX on your Fantom either, and not because it's not very good, but because Cubase comes packaged with VST's that are for more useful/controllable for that very purpose.

Quote desmond:

---

I typically use Soundiver* to request the user banks, copy the names to the clipboard, and I can then just paste the names into Logic.

---

I wondered about the integration of Sounddiver - seeing that both were Emagic. Is it integrated into Logic like the Cubase device manager? or are you generating patch names/scripts and then import these?

Quote desmond:

---

I have the XV5080 coming up on a digital input to my audio interface, and typically I leave it in Patch mode, rather than the full 32-part multitimbral performance mode, as I want to full sound quality of each sound without getting bogged down by FX juggling and sharing resources.

---

Interesting - the Roland performance mode allows one to connect the FX in series (& some juicy combos as well) which can create some really powerful sounds e.g overdriven lead sound with separate delay + separate phaser - a patch contains only 1 FX unit.
I fully understand that one can add these afterwards in the mix, but then again some composite patches simply need to be played live to get the 'right' feel...


The rest of your workflow sounds similar to mine, when using rack synths, except I would generally transmit in multi-midi mode and record all sounds simultaneously (I can record all stereo audio channels simultaneously - 16 to 24 inputs)

Quote desmond:

---

* Although now my forced upgrade to Lion means I've lost Rosetta and can no longer run Soundiver PPC anymore. Might need to pick up a PC version and run it in Parallels or something as a workaround... although it's not much of a big deal as my hardware requirements are minimal these days.

---

Good luck with that.. the only real external app. option is SoundQuest, and its not cheap... which comes back to my point about the ext. midi capability of modern sequencers.

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote TheChorltonWheelie:

---

I have a Fantom G8, and a Korg Kronos, both workstations that are capable of multi-track recording: I don't use either for that purpose. In short, it's far too cumbersome to work on a workstation, when compared with a laptop/PC, and if you're all about recording an idea as quickly as you can then you'd have to go some way to beat a small 4-track SSD recorder.

---

Interesting, and you paid mega bucks for what ... the band required several patch changes during the set?

Nah - seriously, I learnt to sequence on a Roland W30 ! so yeah PC's make our lives easier...

Tell me, how do you config. your arrangement from your software to hardware? For instance do you select a patch only via the midi channel, play whatever and then record that audio to PC? or
Create a template within your sequencer from which you are able to call up all the patches from the G8 & the Kronos, so that when you save the song, everything including your patch fx is recallable (sic) ?

What about your Karma settings ?

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote C.LYDE:

---

I wondered about the integration of Sounddiver - seeing that both were Emagic. Is it integrated into Logic like the Cubase device manager? or are you generating patch names/scripts and then import these?

---

SoundDiver has always been a separate application. In the old days, "Autolink" let Logic communicate directly with SoundDiver, so as you updated the patches in SD, the names would dynamically in real time be correctly displayed in Logic.

However, OSX removed the mechanism that Autolink needed to work, so the link between the two apps was lost. Now you simply request the patches from your synth in SD (or load them from disk etc), copy the names to the clipboard, and then paste them into a multi-instrument object when you want to update them. Those names get saved in your project. For presents banks etc you only need to do it once and save those names in your default templates and you're good to go.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

Interesting - the Roland performance mode allows one to connect the FX in series (& some juicy combos as well) which can create some really powerful sounds e.g overdriven lead sound with separate delay + separate phaser - a patch contains only 1 FX unit.

---

Sure. But any given patch requires a random combination of FX units (there are essentially three complete FX units in the 5080, for example), meaning that if you create a multitimbral performance of 16 of the patches you want to use, you have exhausted your ability for the FX, and have to start making compromises. As the 5080 is actually 32-part multitimbral, to be guaranteed of having the patches sound as they were intended, you'd need to have 96 FX units onboard.

So the simple and quick act of choosing patches in your arrangement forces you to start analysing the FC requirements and reprogramming compromises almost straight away, which is a crap workflow - and one of the main reasons that *sane* people moved away from that workflow when DAWs became capable enough for complete audio arrangements. I've done enough of it in my time, I'm glad to not need to do it anymore...

Quote C.LYDE:

---

Quote TheChorltonWheelie:

---

I have a Fantom G8, and a Korg Kronos, both workstations that are capable of multi-track recording: I don't use either for that purpose. In short, it's far too cumbersome to work on a workstation, when compared with a laptop/PC, and if you're all about recording an idea as quickly as you can then you'd have to go some way to beat a small 4-track SSD recorder.

---

Interesting, and you paid mega bucks for what ... the band required several patch changes during the set?

Nah - seriously, I learnt to sequence on a Roland W30 ! so yeah PC's make our lives easier...

Tell me, how do you config. your arrangement from your software to hardware? For instance do you select a patch only via the midi channel, play whatever and then record that audio to PC? or
Create a template within your sequencer from which you are able to call up all the patches from the G8 & the Kronos, so that when you save the song, everything including your patch fx is recallable (sic) ?

What about your Karma settings ?

---

I'd always setup my keyboards with manual patch changes, or rather soundsets that I flick between each song, as I'd never rely on the click track to do that simply because if push comes to shove I can still play keyboards even if the click track goes down. I think it'd be a little foolhardy to rely on the click track for that, it's a case of belt and braces.

I use an RD700NX as my main controller, with the Kronos on top, and they're both controlled by the same laptop that does the backing tracks via their USB connections. The tracks are generally created within ProTools, V10 at the moment, and then I render to WAV and import into Ableton Live. I don't change the Karma settings live, or indeed any setings for that matter, as I'd create the specific sound I wanted, for any given track, and then create a default/preset. I use Ableton to play each track, and I also create a MIDI track for each song too as I use that for the DMX controller.

I have a default project with PT and Ableton, to make the import process easier, and I'm very, very retentive on each project setup down to having the same colour legends on each corresponding track, always using track 1/2 for original audio and track 3 for click etc, etc. It sounds very OCD, but, it pays off in the long run as I always know where everything is.

By the way, I work within the law.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

Unfortunately I cannot change FX patches from Cubase, but I am able to automate CC parameter control assigned on the hardware.

---

To answer the original the question, you have to create a performance default for each sound, as, and I'm sure you know why, the FX has to be copied manually from each sound into that default. To control all of the parameters, real-time, would be impossible. It has been a while since I use the X-Fantom, but I'm fairly sure that's the answer.

Quote desmond:

---

Now you simply request the patches from your synth in SD (or load them from disk etc), copy the names to the clipboard, and then paste them into a multi-instrument object when you want to update them. Those names get saved in your project. For presents banks etc you only need to do it once and save those names in your default templates and you're good to go.

---

However what one really wants to do is request the patches (or browse patches) within the sequencer environment and once the ideal patch is found, save that (with proper name)with the song/performance. This is possible with Cubase, but not with Live or Studio One, and apparently Logic either, unless I misunderstand the 'multi-instrument object'? Is the 'default template' an arrangement template or dedicated device template?

Quote desmond:

---

Sure. But any given patch requires a random combination of FX units (there are essentially three complete FX units in the 5080, for example), meaning that if you create a multitimbral performance of 16 of the patches you want to use, you have exhausted your ability for the FX, and have to start making compromises. As the 5080 is actually 32-part multitimbral, to be guaranteed of having the patches sound as they were intended, you'd need to have 96 FX units onboard.

---

However a patch is usually only a single insert FX with global send to chorus and reverb. So one is able to create 3 parts with inserts & 1 part without (often drums in my case). Personally I don't find the need for multiple sounds doing the same function e.g. pads. If a change in patch is required this can be programmed within the same track (& channel).

This way I am also able to render to audio, at least 4 parts simultaneously as compared to the one patch at a time situation. (provided I'm not looking to use the unique quality of a combo patch)

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote TheChorltonWheelie:

---

Quote C.LYDE:

---

Unfortunately I cannot change FX patches from Cubase, but I am able to automate CC parameter control assigned on the hardware.

---

To answer the original the question, you have to create a performance default for each sound, as, and I'm sure you know why, the FX has to be copied manually from each sound into that default. To control all of the parameters, real-time, would be impossible. It has been a while since I use the X-Fantom, but I'm fairly sure that's the answer.

---

Thanks for that - I know; it was more of a 'observation of the present situation' than a question. I can assign parameters to CC and these controller I can link to midi automation; however the available parameters are pre-determined e.g. overdrive, chorus rate, delay time etc.

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

TCW,

So this refers to the live set-up, and by click track, I understand you do not mean pre-sequenced midi changes .i.e. at bar 45 piano changes from acoustic to electric?
I can understand spontaneity in the live situation, however seeing that you bought 2 workstations with built-in decent reliable sequencers, it seems a shame to waste all that engineering... aah well.

I'm curious why you would "create within ProTools" and not Live, as it appears you're simply bouncing your synth parts to audio? Or is this ALL audio including voice/guitar etc?
Also it appears you have to export both midi and audio each time going from PT to Live ?

"Retentive" - not sure what this entails for you, but for me this would a single arrangement I can save with a mouse click and open with a click? This is what I'm working towards - so to that end...

1) Whatever patches I select in the software sequencer, when I re-record the midi arrangement to my Fantom, this is with minimal fuss; push record on Fantom and that's it.
2) Whatever audio I require, I import that to the fantom as well - no need for laptops.
3) Parts can be muted at will and seeing that the patches are already primed, I can jam along should it be required.

By the way, I challenge, bend and break laws... especially musical ones...


--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote C.LYDE:

---

So this refers to the live set-up, and by click track, I understand you do not mean pre-sequenced midi changes .i.e. at bar 45 piano changes from acoustic to electric?
I can understand spontaneity in the live situation, however seeing that you bought 2 workstations with built-in decent reliable sequencers, it seems a shame to waste all that engineering... aah well.

---

The only MIDI changes on the click track are for the DMX light controllers, I always changes patches manually myself: that way, if the click track goes down I can still continue/play.

The best sounding synths, or rather the synths with the best usable sounds for live work that I do happen to have workstation facilities built-in, but that's not why I bought them. If either Roland or Korg went back to a sound module type affair then I probably buy that rather than the full-blown workstation. I always find a PC/laptop and DAW far easier to work with than an onboard workstation sequencer.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

I'm curious why you would "create within ProTools" and not Live, as it appears you're simply bouncing your synth parts to audio? Or is this ALL audio including voice/guitar etc?
Also it appears you have to export both midi and audio each time going from PT to Live ?

---

I find PT far easier to work within, and most other people that I work with also use it, so I didn't really see a need to change to Ableton. All of the tracks within PT are rendered before the export to Ableton, the only reason I've used Ableton is because it has some great song/sequence/set-list options, but I'm about to go to the new version of Digital Performer as that's due on PC. I might end up using DP as my DAW and live sequencer, as that's what it was designed for, but the PC version hasn't quite landed yet so I won't know for a month or two yet.

Quote C.LYDE:

---

By the way, I challenge, bend and break laws... especially musical ones...

---

I used to do that too, however, when you're doing 3-4 gigs a week, from the local pub through to the NIA/NEC, there simply isn't the opportunity to be anything other than tight as a nun's chuff, mega-slick, well-rehearsed etc. There were simply too many gigs, with too much riding on them, to be anything other than 100% prepared in advance. I do an acoustic band too, which is more for fun than anything else, and I do that without any synths at all, that's just piano/electric piano, and that's what I find most challenging. The full band is challenging in the respect of delivering a great overall band performance.