All,
becuase I have a dinosaur for a computer and plagued speed issues (I'm using ableton)
would it be better for me to record the audio that a midi sequence produces, or is less demanding on the computer to let the midi play until I'm ready to finalize the entire song?
Basically, if I have a # of midi clips play some soft synth that are repetitive, shouldn't I just record the audio and have that loop over n over as much as I need it?
[basics/nooB] midi vs audio (recording it)
-
Shepherd_of_Anu
- mnml maxi
- Posts: 624
- Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:14 am
- Location: The space between space
Some people do that. I saw an interview with A Guy Called Gerald... I got the impression that is kind of how he works. He has amassed a library of clips he has produced and then turned into rex files. He then plays his clips from multiple laptops and mixes stuff out with a mixer.
I don't think too many people work that way specific way though. There is nothing wrong with the sampling method. Its really what works for you.
If you have a lot of effects on that channel's output and its really slowing down the program then recording the output of that instrument and playing it as a sample is probably your best solution. The result will be the pretty much the same.
For another alternative... couldn't you drop the playback quality when you work on CPU intensive tracks? It might be troublesome when it gets to the time when you want to fine tune your mix but until then maybe its a solution to get you by.
Can you hook abelton up to any external programs like cakewalk or whatever so record your output and have them work in tandem? I don't know enough about the program, sorry. I almost bought it last month but decided not to at the last moment. Just stuck in my ways I guess.
I don't think too many people work that way specific way though. There is nothing wrong with the sampling method. Its really what works for you.
If you have a lot of effects on that channel's output and its really slowing down the program then recording the output of that instrument and playing it as a sample is probably your best solution. The result will be the pretty much the same.
For another alternative... couldn't you drop the playback quality when you work on CPU intensive tracks? It might be troublesome when it gets to the time when you want to fine tune your mix but until then maybe its a solution to get you by.
Can you hook abelton up to any external programs like cakewalk or whatever so record your output and have them work in tandem? I don't know enough about the program, sorry. I almost bought it last month but decided not to at the last moment. Just stuck in my ways I guess.
hello noob.
don't stress. do both.
Anothing you could do is just use reason. its much less cpu usage than ableton.
don't stress. do both.
Anothing you could do is just use reason. its much less cpu usage than ableton.
------------------------------------------------------
http://soundcloud.com/kirkwoodwest
http://soundcloud.com/kirkwoodwest
yes, I have a few DAT's laying around myself. I come from that skool, so the Ableton way is different for me,Android wrote:the old school method::
use your Computer to Send (play) / Record Midi (and edit midi)
midi out -> hardware synths and beat machines and samplers
hardware audio out -> mixer / summing device
mixer stereo out -> DAT
most of your favorite classic tunes before 95/96 were made like this