DIY audio production

[KeyboardEric]

To any audio heads or "keyboard producers" out there -

 

Lately I've been monkeying around with the sequencer in my Korg workstation, just trying to produce some simple songs for fun. I always seem to have ideas and it's satisfying to get them together. I am wondering if anyone has any tips or maybe a simple process to get it sounding listenable and perhaps even decent in the end.

 

I've just been mixing everything inside the sequencer and recording as one track into Reaper DAW, and that's about it. It sounds okay but pretty unfinished - the levels are a bit unpredictable at times. I thought about using some mastering techniques I saw in a Youtube video to kind of balance things out. Maybe that's all it needs to get it to where I want it. I also thought about exporting each individual track to the DAW and mixing it that way but that seems super time consuming, although it could be worth it.

 

I'm much more a musician and not much of an audio engineer, but feels like I am learning more and more all the time regarding the audio side. It's occasionally confusing/frustrating but overall a pretty rewarding endeavor.

 

If anyone else has any tips or home projects kind of like this I'd be interested in hearing it.

[Biggles]

Which Korg are you using?

[KeyboardEric]

Kross 2

[timwat]

The biggest problems I've run into using workstation sequencers is dynamics in overall presentation. It all ends up sounding like it's coming from one machine. I'm no expert, but I'm presuming it's because of my temptation to use FX, which eventually goes from per-track FX to bus or master FX. And of course the fact that despite using different internal sounds, yes, one machine is going to sound like, well, the same machine.

 

You're reporting some track levels that need to be tamed. There are a lot of techniques to do that including introducing MIDI volume control commands, etc. This is harder to do in a workstation than a DAW based sequencer, certainly...not sure if that can be done in your Kross 2...I'm not sure it can be done in my Kronos either (never tried it).

 

All to say whenever I've wanted to do an "everything / all parts" sequence, I've always gotten better results doing the thing in a computer based DAW, tweaking, editing and polishing there, and then transferring it back to the machine (if I have to have the machine play it standalone). But if you're just trying to produce some "all on your own" tunes for fun (not have to be able to push the "play" button live), I have always had a more enjoyable and more musical experience using the computer.

 

Others who have spent more workstation sequencing time than I have may report better results. But that's been my experience, whether it's DP or Garage Band, or now, Logic.

 

Tim

[Nathanael_I]

All to say whenever I've wanted to do an "everything / all parts" sequence, I've always gotten better results doing the thing in a computer based DAW, tweaking, editing and polishing there,

Tim

 

This is my experience. This way, you can sequence or play each part, however you like to do it into the DAW. You don't have to use any effects in your keyboard. You can add them all in the DAW. This lets you treat each "instrument" as it's own component of your mix. If you try to get each part sounding as good as possible, and then do the same at the mix stage, then the whole level of the production rises. I find it very useful to separate the stages in my mind and in practice. 1) get the music written/transcribed/whatever. 2) get really good at playing it (or enter it). 3) tweak the sounds so that they sound as absolutely good/right as possible without FX. 4) Record the parts as audio. 5) Make a new session that is audio only. 6) Mix (yes, I know this is a whole other thing) 7) Separate mastering step, best done after a month or so to remove auditory memory.

 

I find that if you are going to "do it all", it helps greatly to only "wear one hat at a time" and give yourself full freedom to only do that thing.

[Dr Mike Metlay]

There's a certain mindset that goes with doing everything entirely in the synth. Some folks find it more focused and have an easier time getting the results they want or need.

 

In the era before computer DAWs, this was often the only way to do this kind of music; we all remember the era of multiple synths MIDIed together and recorded to tape (remember tape?) as a stereo mix or multitracks... the problem was, as mentioned above, these devices were rarely if ever designed for actual mixing. Once you sequenced your parts, setting and riding levels, adding effects where needed, and pulling things together into a well-glued final mix was theoretically possible, but almost never easy. You'd occasionally find a synth with eight faders for mixing part levels, but these were often not available for actual mixing, only for setting basic levels within a sequence.

 

Exporting to a DAW as individual tracks gives you a lot more flexibility and will almost always produce more professional-sounding results after a bit of practice, but you shouldn't let yourself be discouraged if you really find using the computer to put a damper on your creativity. I know of at least one excellent album that was entirely composed and created in a much more primitive machine than your Kross 2, and spun out to digital stereo and pressed to CD directly from the synthesizer, one song/sequence at a time. But yeah, it was a LOT of work.

 

[Reezekeys]

Yea, why use a workstation's sequencer if you have a DAW (I don't use Reaper but just checked to make sure it does midi as well as audio). Just for the editing environment I would imagine a decent DAW is miles beyond a workstation screen.

 

Also as has been pointed out, a DAW lets you use other plugins to add variety to the sound. And probably better (at least more versatile) automation controls for mixing. I get it if you don't have a computer, you use the tools you have and make the best of it. But just in terms of sound quality, a song entirely sequenced and mixed with effects in a single workstation is IMO not going to compare too well with what most of us can do with a decent DAW and a variety of VI and effects plugins.

 

If you're comfortable & fast on the Korg sequencer, I can see using it as a scratchpad to quickly get ideas down. Use what works best for that, and what works best for getting the final sound right.

[KuruPrionz]

I agree with above posts regarding recording each output to a seperate track.

 

But wait, it gets worse!!!! :- D

 

Not sure what plugins come with Reaper but seperating the tracks will give you much more control. For instance, maybe only one or two tracks need a bit of compression or limiting to even out the volume.

Plus you can pan things in the stereo field.

 

As you get more familiar with your DAW you can copy and paste multiple instances of your tracks and apply various effects filters to those different tracks. Using track animation you can then blend and weave the various sounds of each track and create something that sounds infinitely more complex and huge than your basic "run everything into stereo" mix will allow.

 

Modulation, pitch shifting and ambience effects open up an entire Universe of possibilities. Have fun! Kuru

[KeyboardEric]

I like the Reaper DAW so far. Lots of online resources and comes with effects. Seems to have everything one would need in a DAW.

 

But I kind of like the idea of doing it all in the sequencer for the minimalism aspect. The sequencer isn't great though, it has it's drawbacks.

 

Maybe I'll try a couple tunes doing it each way (one DAWed out, one all in the sequencer) as an experiment and see what I like more. For me it's all about learning anyways, I don't fancy myself a "bedroom producer".

 

It's interesting to hear others' approach to this type of thing. Thanks for sharing.

[KeyboardEric]

. I know of at least one excellent album that was entirely composed and created in a much more primitive machine than your Kross 2, and spun out to digital stereo and pressed to CD directly from the synthesizer, one song/sequence at a time. But yeah, it was a LOT of work.

 

what was it?

[Anderton]

I kind of like the idea of doing it all in the sequencer for the minimalism aspect. The sequencer isn't great though, it has it's drawbacks.

 

Maybe I'll try a couple tunes doing it each way (one DAWed out, one all in the sequencer) as an experiment and see what I like more. For me it's all about learning anyways, I don't fancy myself a "bedroom producer".

 

IMHO there are three elements to creating a production: Tracking, mixing/editing, and mastering. There's no reason why you can't track in the sequencer, and transfer the tracks to Reaper or your eventual DAW of choice for mixing.

 

Tracking to me is about inspiration, capturing the moment, getting ideas down fast, and enjoying the process of watching a creative endeavor take shape. Mixing is more about paring that burst of creativity down to the essentials that are needed to get the point across.

 

Many people would disagree with me and say these days, you can master while you're mixing, and indeed you can. You can also check your email while making love, but I'm not sure combining those activities is optimum To me - and this may be old school - mastering and mixing require two different mindsets.

 

[KeyboardEric]

 

IMHO there are three elements to creating a production: Tracking, mixing/editing, and mastering. There's no reason why you can't track in the sequencer, and transfer the tracks to Reaper or your eventual DAW of choice for mixing.

 

 

I was thinking of trying it this way at some point. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

I'm a long time rock musician and tracking/mixing/mastering in their separate phases is how I've always approached music production in every band I've recorded with. I tend to think that way also.

[EricBarker]

Mixing should always be done with some distance away from the instrument. Kind of impossible for most keyboardists because typically their instrument (or some version of it) is plugged right into the DAW, but from a philosophical standpoint, it's helpful to have that separation. Also, I would feel that if everything was done on a keyboard, it's all going to come from a keyboard mentality. Yes, I do a lot of parts on keys (when I'm not tracking with full bands), but for drums and other instruments, I use combinations of programming, hitting pads, Seaboard, etc. to get myself away from ivories.