maybe I can contribute a Little in this thread. I am maybe not Aware of every aspect of the Topic, but I would like to let both concepts exist in Cubase.To me there is a minor inconsistency in the way cubase works, namely the missing “record” button on the vsti-Audio tracks. To Keep things consistent that would be a perfect way to go. Consistent with the other Audio channels that receive their Input from external sources. And it would elimate the “freeze” concept. You either “Play life” or print the Audio to disc. like on any other Audio channel.
Well, all this has to do with the way I prefer to work: Miditracks are to me like the Player of an Instrument. And after having recorded, he or she may leave the Studio. From this Point on I only work with “real Audio”-tracks. Currently to accomplish this I have to do the extra step to record the vsti-sounds back into cubase or do an Export.
Sorry,rtorstrick,then this is a different method of doing the SAME thing…
An instrument track with many midi outs and audio outs.That’s what i did with the rack instruments as well!
I’m on 7.0.6, and I mostly run large orchestral templates (around 40 gigs of ram fully loaded) with many instances of kontakt, play, and omnisphere, all as instrument tracks. I’ve noticed that cubase runs these templates much better with instrument tracks than as vst rack/ midi tracks. I don’t know exactly why, but it seems that cubase processes these tracks differently. I personally get many more dropouts and even crashes when using rack instruments routed to midi tracks than with instrument tracks, using the same exact template. Each instrument (violins, horns, etc) get their own kontakt instance on their own instrument track. Just seems to run much more smoothly this way. Just my experience.
Mark, if you use MIDI tracks routed to a multi-timbral VSTi (like Kontakt) with multi outputs enabled, each output has its own fader, right? when you’ve done with perfecting the MIDI to each part, you can freeze the whole instrument (the freeze button on the instrument rack) but of course you can still move and automate the audio outputs of the instrument. What you can’t do is change the MIDI INPUT to the instrument, that’s frozen.
Personally I’m in the camp of ‘what’s the point of Instrument Tracks?’ because they seem to me to be just like MIDI tracks, but less flexible. But then I rarely if ever do anything with the MIDI channels in the mixer, I only mix with the audio outputs of the instrument. I keep the MIDI channels hidden so they don’t clutter the place up. If I want to change anything on the MIDI side, I unfreeze the instrument.
7.5 has developed Instrument tracks to the point where they are NEARLY as useful as MIDI/VSTi combinations. I hope the next step isn’t to do away with MIDI tacks altogether, but I fear I may be disappointed. Still, there are worse things in the world to worry about.
Edit to say…
I agree with Ernst, a couple of posts up. In fact, although I sometimes freeze tracks, quite often I render the track to audio - I prefer being able to manipulate the audio file directly, which you can’t do with a frozen MIDI or Intsrument track.
And godspeedyouq, that’s interesting, I will have to look into whether Instrument tracks are more CPU efficient than MIDI/rack VSTi. That’s a beast of a template you have there! 40GB! Might it be better to use 2 machines with VE Pro?
There is still plenty of MIDI devices out there, and will be for a while I am sure. If nothing else, there are so many older AWESOME MIDI devices still in use. I have tons, and even some in various storage. Try removing MIDI tracks and I’ll have no choice but to change software, and THAT would be tough, after so many (near 30) years with Steinberg.
Try removing MIDI tracks and I’ll have no choice but to change software, and THAT would be tough, after so many (near 30) years with Steinberg.