Which would give me better results when mixing… using Cubase or the features in VycroMX?
ie: Is there any technical reasons to use the keyboad’s hardware rather than Cubase software.

I’m going to try it but I want to know if somebody already has.

Since the MX only has a stereo output, to mix in Cubase you have to record each part as audio one by one before you can mix.  Why do this? To take advantage of the Cubase plugins, or to overcome the limited number of insert FX in the MX.

If you are not recording any other audio (i.e vocals or other instruments) mixing inside the MX and record this mix to a single audio track in Cubase is definitely a viable option.

Which would give me better results when mixing… using Cubase or the features in VycroMX?
ie: Is there any technical reasons to use the keyboad’s hardware rather than Cubase software.

As with anything musical there are going to be several ways to proceed. You will need to determine which one works best for you.

When you talk about “mixing” - as a former full time audio engineer, the word to me is a verb, means it is an action that takes place. Some folks feel that mixing is simply setting each part to a specific volume with a specific EQ setting and effects, and then letting the computer render a wave.

Okay, I’m old school and really hate that. Some are very impressed at how fast the computer can build/render that .wav (I remain unimpressed). Old school “mixing” meant in real time, a one time, “live” performance of the entire set of recorded tracks that would be documented by the two track (stereo) mixdown deck.

I’m old school enough to remember the first of the mixing console automation functions found in recording studios in the 1970’s, and this was a major step forward. Automation is simply using technology to manipulate levels and settings for you - because it documented when and how much you change something - automation was a big step forward.

Old school folks will remember sessions where the whole band gathered around the mixing console to help the engineer manipulate the board… you would ‘rehearse’ a mixdown - everyone had several jobs… at the second verse, someone would mute track 12, and turn on track 13, someone else would change the level of track 8 from this grease pencil mark to that grease pencil mark, someone else would pan track 9 left and bring in the info on track 15, etc.  That was real OLD SCHOOL automation :-) and it could be very complex, trust me. (It was always funny)

When the electronic version of automating the mixdown came out, you could relax and perform all of the different tasks once for the automation’s benefit, and it would handle those commands from that point on… It literally was like having hundreds of hands. And because it was able to faithfully repeat the gestures every time, it was an instant benefit, and the art of mixing moved forward a major step.  (this was all pre-MIDI folks)… MIDI automation is one of the most powerful tools in the arsenal of todays musician/producer…

You can use Cubase’s mixer with its awesome automation capabilities to help you with your mixing duties - while the data is still MIDI data… you can Mute tracks, change volumes, move pan positions, etc., etc., etc.

Your end result will be a stereo audio file that represents your MIDI data being played back by the MX tone engine. You will document that playback to a two channel (stereo) file --- this takes the place of the old 2-track mixdown deck). But the mixdown is still a mix performance of the musical composition - performed for the 2-track (stereo) result.

With the VycroMX Editor you can set the initial instrumentation, the initial volume, the initial pan position, the effects and their settings etc. But it is not an interface for manipulating the data for “live” documentation. If you simply want to set the parameters and let it render the results. You could certainly set it up with the VycroMX PERFORMANCE Editor.

But if you want to fade things in or out, pan things while the composition is playing, you might want to investigate the extensive amount of MIDI automation available via Cubase. (See the Cubase documentation on AUTOMATION)

Meatballfulton suggests another very viable method… you can, track by track, record each MX PART to your DAW (Cubase) creating multiple audio files… and this is a viable way to work as well. You can apply Cubase automation to Audio tracks as well. Again you will wind up with multiple tracks - if they all can be simply set to a specific volume and play -great. If not, use the Cubase automation functions to manipulate your mix. But the mixdown will still be documenting a single rundown of the entire song to a stereo result.

In any method you choose, the end result will be a stereo AUDIO file (typically a .WAV which you can then convert to whatever you wish). How you get there is really up to you.

Hope that helps.

Cool, thanks for your help. I seem to have tried all that is suggested so I think I just need to learn to perfect a technique that works for me - I think I just wanted to make sure I was on the right track (pardon the pun!). The automation I’ve used on a specific track is very limited at the moment but I have found there are loads to play with.

If anyone has time this is where I’m at the moment, be kind as I’ve not been doing this long but any constructive criticism would be fab.

https://soundcloud.com/michaeljohnwilcox/doctor-who-remix

I’m sure to the trained ear I have made loads of errors, but unless people tell you - how can I learn.