I currently don’t use a DAW or interface with a computer ever. I program and record and play back everything on my MOXF.

I’d like to get all my MIDI sequenced songs into audio format, keeping the multi-channels (to archive) and arriving at a WAV file that duplicates the Song (minus the part I play) that can be played back digitally from a computer if need be.

It’s a lot of Songs and I’m really only wanting to do this one thing. So I’m needing a DAW program that interfaces well with MOXF, but is also super easy to learn. 

Cubase is the obvious first choice, but I have a feeling there might be even better ways to go for my limited purposes (and low DAW literacy). I’ve had different recommendations for “easy to run” DAW programs, Reaper to Audacity to Ableton, but I don’t know enough to make a selection. And again, the simpler the better.

Any recommendations?

If you secretly do have any experience of DAWs, the answer ought to be the DAW that you’ve already put time and money into.

Failing that…

None of them are especially ‘easy’ to run and you’ll find that in order to capture audio and bounce it down to WAV, the process is very similar on all DAWs.

No matter what DAW you choose, you’re still going to have to deal with the following things:

- Routing audio to the DAW (outputs from your source to inputs of the DAW).
- Synchronising and keeping your audio in time with the DAWs grid.
- Sample and bit rates.
- What kind of tracks to set up and how to operate them.
- How to edit and process your audio.
- How to export your audio as a WAV file.

They’re all much of a muchness with weightings towards specific areas.

For example:

Ableton is an all round DAW but suits DJs and people who like to use loops.

Cubase and Logic have the history and pedigree as great MIDI sequencing packages that expanded into audio recording and processing in the 90s.  Cubase came from Pro 24, and Logic came from Emagic Notator.  Logic is Mac only.

Audacity isn’t really an all round DAW with little to no MIDI functionality (can support midi files), but it is a great Wave Editor. Ideal for capturing audio to WAV, not to mention FREE.

Pro Tools is the music industry standard recording and mixing DAW which had MIDI support bolted onto it in about 1999.  They have a free version called Pro Tools First.

Then there are DAWs like Reaper and PreSonus Studio One with their really cost effective packages and generous support (free updates). These were born out of frustration at the cost of DAWs and updates.  Reaper is very much along the lines of Cubase.

These should all run happily with your MOXF as an interface.

Thanks for that overview.

It would seem logical to just stick with Cubase, a version of which came with my latest MOXF. Will that version fit my minimal requirements?

Meanwhile, I’ve downloaded Reaper in anticipation of moving forward with SOME DAW or other. 

Will I need any other equipment or will I be able to work directly from the MOXF to the program running on my HP laptop?

I see no reason why you can’t use your MOXF as an interface for Reaper or Cubase.

You’ll need the correct Yamaha Steinberg USB Driver and something to listen on, but you shouldn’t need any additional equipment beyond that.

I’m not very well versed in too many different DAWs but I’ve worked with a few of them and I’ll try to help.

In my opinion the most important thing is finding a DAW with an interface that you’re comfortable with. DAWs can pretty much do the same things, it’s how well they can do them that matters. And the last thing you want to do is having to fight the UI or the DAW itself.

I’m primarily an Ableton Live user since 2016 (having switched from Cubase 5 from all the way back when I was messing around with it throughout elementary school) and despite liking the UI and workflow I’m slowly switching to Logic Pro due to some stability issues and lack of support for MIDI parameters such as program and bank changes. With that said, Live’s UI is very intuitive while also being very compact, at least in the “traditional” arrangement view. There isn’t really a mixer you open in a separate window like many other DAWs, each track has its own set of devices you can put on it, be it instrument VSTs, effect VSTs, MIDI effects (chord, pitch, arpeggiators, etc) or live’s built in audio effects. The piano roll however is abysmal and editing MIDI is a chore. Recording audio (especially multiple takes) is still one of Live’s weakest points. It’s also one of the most expensive DAWs on the market and the lower tiers aren’t really worth it, especially not Live Intro.

FL Studio is nowhere near as bad as people say even though it tends to be seen as the “middle/high schooler with a laptop” DAW (it’s kind of earned it though). MIDI capabilities are actually quite good, especially if you like doing things by hand. Controller integration isn’t as plug and play as Live so I have no idea whether it’s ideal for your MOXF but I’ve never had any issues with my Launchkey MK2. Audio recording isn’t stellar either, especially for multiple takes but it’s easier to organize them than Live. I personally don’t really like how things are laid out in the UI but it’s one of the least clunky DAWs out there despite the myriad of buttons.

Logic’s UI feels a bit more claustrophobic on a small screen (at least on my 15” MBP) and it’s less immediate than Live but the piano roll is top notch and so is editing MIDI data. Logic is also an amazing bargain, it comes with tons and tons of stuff at probably the most competitive price on the market. Not to mention that on OSX audio and MIDI latency is a nonexistent problem unless you abuse Universal Audio’s plugins. (so probably not an issue for you)

I went back to Cubase out of curiosity and sadly it’s extremely unstable for me. It’s a shame since MIDI editing on it is unrivaled and the UI is mostly immediate. Apparently Cubase 10, 10.5 and now 11 are some of the worst releases yet so I don’t recommend it. Maybe try Cubase 9 if you can acquire an old license. Also, Steinberg products require a physical authentication key in the form of an USB drive. It’s a pain in the ass and the licensing process is horribly clunky and sometimes doesn’t work at all.

Pro Tools, just like Avid’s Media Composer and Sibelius is a power-hungry and horribly clunky monster of a program. It’s considered the “industry standard” in a circlejerk-y way and like just about every other “industry standard” in the music production world it’s mainly due to people refusing to switch or refusing to accept the fact that times moved on since 1999 and/or what they paid for might not be that great after all. Abysmal MIDI capabilities, good for recording multiple takes at once. Sorry for the vitriol but I loathe this thing and the people who keep pushing it down everyone’s throat.

Reaper is very barebones and highly customizable but it’s also pretty clunky and the customizability often works against it. It’s also pretty clunky when it comes to MIDI editing and the interface is kind of a mess. It’s cheap for a reason.

In terms of free DAWs you have a couple of mostly bad choices.

There’s Cakewalk which is completely free but also sadly riddled with bugs and crashes just like Sonar used to be.

LMMS is extremely clunky and unstable, especially when using VSTs. Avoid it if you can.

Pro Tools First is like Pro Tools but extremely limited. Please don’t do this to yourself.

Garageband (if you’re on OSX) is excellent as a free DAW and I suggest spending some time with it if you can.

PreSonus Studio Prime is the free version of Studio One and it’s honestly not that bad overall. Much like the full version it excels at nothing and MIDI editing is mostly an afterthought but it’s pretty stable and easy to learn.

TL;DR Garageband or Logic if you’re on OSX, Cubase 9, FL Studio or Studio One (as a last resort) if you’re on Windows.

There’s also Reason. I personally love Reason but due to its nature I can’t really recommend it unless you want to spend a lot of time learning it. It emulates how real hardware works, including the mess of cables. It’s an excellent learning tool if you want to learn the ins and outs of how the hardware works (or at least close and polished emulations of real hardware) and you can pretty much lose yourself in it. It’s extremely fun but if all you want to do is record a few tracks and be done with it then it’s hard to recommend.

Xeraser - 24 February 2021 09:52 PM

Pro Tools, just like Avid’s Media Composer and Sibelius is a power-hungry and horribly clunky monster of a program. It’s considered the “industry standard” in a circlejerk-y way and like just about every other “industry standard” in the music production world it’s mainly due to people refusing to switch or refusing to accept the fact that times moved on since 1999 and/or what they paid for might not be that great after all. Abysmal MIDI capabilities, good for recording multiple takes at once. Sorry for the vitriol but I loathe this thing and the people who keep pushing it down everyone’s throat.

This is mostly incorrect.  I agree with you on the MIDI aspects of Pro Tools, though.

It is actually the industry standard DAW, for recording and mixing, by quite a long way.  Other DAWs are involved in all manner of production beforehand, but it all ends up in Pro Tools. 

You cannot send any of the handful of top mixers in the world, of which I’m very familiar, anything but Pro Tools sessions or consolidated audio files.  Consolidated audio files are put into Pro Tools anyway.  In some cases, Pro Tools is routed out into a hardware mixer, but that’s still making use of Pro Tools.  If you want to be on the same page as 99% of pro studios around the world, then Pro Tools is your choice.

In fact, the perpetuation of the myth that it isn’t the industry standard is born out of jealousy, a total lack of experience and the horror at the cost of renting it, mostly by folks who frequent piracy sites and have pretend clients, those that bang on about running a music business on a Hackintosh, or the kind that drove people like Bob Katz off of Gearslutz with their ‘experience’ when he was very happy to share his.

On a personal note, I’ve worked on over 150 high profile projects in the last few years and haven’t been sent a session in any other format than Pro Tools, not even by accident.  I’m sure you’re not calling about 99 percent of the best facilities on Earth including those in Nashville, with massive budgets and brilliant people ‘circlejerks’ are you?

As for continually changing your tools, nobody worth their salt does that (not even dedicated hobbyists) or in any line of work.  People stick to what they know and get the job done. 

I like to make music in Logic, I have done for over 20 years, but I could only do a fraction of my job with Logic or any other DAW that isn’t Pro Tools.  I’ve never been fussed about what is the best, I’m fussed about what I am used to, what I like and what I can do my job with.  Motif is a great example of that, too. It’s not perfect either.

I’m not a snob, a realist maybe.  I offered no speculation either.

I’m sorry if it upsets you, and it isn’t meant to be elitist.  It is a fact of life and I’m not disagreeing that it’s an ugly one:

Pro Tools is what I would call a big boy’s toy, and you need money to use it, you need money to buy the equipment for it and if you’ve got that kind of money, you won’t be using a slow computer, so it won’t seem like a system hog.  Those very facts alone seem to upset quite a few people, and there will always be a dominant product in anything.  Without a dominant product, we’ll all be spending days at a time going through laborious session conversion processes between every flavour of DAW in the universe.  It’s earned its place to be there and you pay a premium to have it I’m afraid.

It’s also kinda sad though, you’re making it sound like music production is nothing more than a mere job to you now. Or maybe I’m just speculating. Funny how that works.

All software and production equipment is just a job to me.  The better the performer and performance, the less of it I need to use.  I am all about the music, and that’s where I focus all my love and attention.  I would rather record a great performance on duct tape than a bad one on the latest and greatest, or most fashionable technology. 

I thought you did an excellent job of helping the OP, actually.

I nearly expected Mixcraft isn’t mentioned here at all - in my opinion it is the most underrated DAW. It’s easy to use, has a big community and loads of tutorials from Acoustica in the ‘Mixcraft Academy’. The price even for the pro version, which I recommend, is low-end.

Moving past the controversial part of this thread, I want to emphasize that I am not only pretty much a novice, but I’m MOSTLY looking into DAW for the purpose of getting my MOXF-created SONGS into audio form and mixed down to a decent stereo version that I could use INSTEAD of playing along with my MOXF.

If I were to desire anything other then easy set-up, a reasonable learning curve and reliability—I would lean toward software that might give me some MIDI editing tools for “humanizing” (randomizing of Velocity and Clock ticks) which is NOT supported in any way on MOXF and is something I expend a lot of time and energy trying to achieve.

I am NOT interested in live recording, just MIDI editing and sequencing tools. 

I am also completely ignorant about what interface equipment I’m going to need if I’m staying in digital mode. I’m not even sure my computer is able to handle this, so I may be needing recommendations for that, too!

If you got a lite version of Cubase free with your MOXF, maybe try that.  I can’t imagine that it won’t be suitable for the tasks you intend to perform.

As far as I’m aware, it should allow you to capture audio from your MOXF and it will certainly allow you to edit and sequence MIDI data.

You don’t need any kind of additional audio interface for this to work, because your MOXF has one built in that you can connect via its USB ‘To Host’ with a USB cable.

Hi

Blimey, I was just about to post a reply pointing out that the lower end version of Cubase doesn’t support MIDI insert F/X. When double checking to make sure this hasn’t changed (I have 9.5.50 since 10.5 is too buggy for my liking) and I can confirm that it still doesn’t support insert F/X, but it does have modifiers to randomly add your humanization for both timing and velocity!

No Need to use anything apart from Cubase for us hobbyists, menothinks! :-)

@muscarella

My Motif XF8 and MOX are the center of my recording studio.  I do all the midi, arranging, effects , panning, everything on those.  I’ve also used my MM8 and QY100 to extend the sequencer memory for really big projects.  For my Audio Mixdown and Mastering I use the Tascam Portastudio 24 Track

https://tascam.com/us/product/dp-24sd/top

It is the simplest, easiest, less hassle free, most cost effective way of doing digital audio recording.  No dongles, no driver incompatibility issues.  No Audio Interface., No computer, no Daw!  It has Eight Channels in and supports 24/32 track overdub and recording.  IMO it has excellent audio, mixing, and mastering options.  It has Usb and SD card for integration with the computer if you find that necessary.  Its also does not get in the way of the music.  Its the closest thing you have to portable recording studio.  Hence the name PortaStudio.

I do the lionshare of all the music production on my Motif/Mox.  In the end Everything is moved to my Motif. Sometimes I mixdown to 2 track stereo audio on my Motif , and just bring the stereo tracks in to my Portastudio and do the mastering there.  The portastudio has some Awesome Mastering templates that represent standard mastering settings for all the music genres (or at least most of them)

Other times I bring the entire sixteen tracks from my Motif to the Tascam Portastudio.

I Use the Firewire in the Motif to transfer the sixteen tracks to Audacity.  This method is sooooo much easier than trying to get the 16 tracks of audio to Cubase and then getting the 16 tracks of audio out of Cubase.  In Audacity all you do is hit the big red record button and hit play on your sequencer and the 16 tracks are transferred.  Then you do a multiple track export in Audacity (1 menu click) and you have you 16 tracks of audio that you can take anywhere you like.  In my case I import them into my Tascam DP 24 SD Portastudio.  And there I can integrate those tracks with stems from our Sax player, guitar , and bass player, flute player and vocalists.  The portastudio supports all of the cut, paste, move, tracks, cross fade, punch-in, punch out, etc.

The Portastudio has compressors, dessers, limiters, equalizers, exciters, noise suppressors, chorus, delays, and reverbs.  It has a built in routable Digital Mixer.  It supports Aux Sends and Returns.

And for $399/$499 No computer needed.  No DAW bull$hit.  No Cubase version 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14.....1000101 needed.  Just plug in 1/4 balanced or unbalanced cables and go.

I’ve been basically DAWLESS , with little to no computer for a few years now.  I’ve never been more productive.  And nothing gets in the way of my music any more.  I use the computer now only to convert .wav files to .mp3, do the Firewire transfer between the Motif and Tascam, and to put my .wav and .mp3 files on google drive, e-mail, or youtube.

Using my Motif/Mox MM8 and QY100 together I’m able to manage huge midi projects, concerts, performance just fine.  I’ve learned how to manage the pattern sequencers and song sequencers and connected USB drive to Motif/Mox to manage midi projects that are much much larger than Motif’s internal midi memory. 

So the Motif/Mox function as my Midi Recording Studio and the Tascam DP 24 SD functions as my Digital Audio recording studio.  No Protools!  No Cubase!  No FLstudio !  No Ableton!  No Logic!  No Garageband!  None of that stuff!

I’m thinking about one more piece of gear to coordinate all of my Midi, because I may add a Montage(they added some new features i really like) to my rig soon.  The last piece of gear I’m thinking about is the :

https://www.akaipro.com/mpc-one

It really is a powerhouse midi sequencer and sampler.  And can act a Midi Control hub.  It also can function in standalone.  No DAW needed.

I’ll never go back to the DAW, under any circumstances.

Here is a list of good choices (NO DAW or Computer needed) for getting your audio from your MOXF

https://tascam.com/us/product/dp-24sd/top
https://tascam.com/us/product/model_12/top
https://zoomcorp.com/en/us/digital-mixer-multi-track-recorders/multi-track-recorders/r24/
https://www.akaipro.com/mpc-one
https://1010music.com/product/bluebox
https://tascam.com/us/product/model_16/top
https://tascam.com/us/product/dp-32sd/top
https://tascam.com/us/product/model_24/top
https://www.akaipro.com/mpc-x
https://zoomcorp.com/en/us/digital-mixer-multi-track-recorders/digital-mixer-recorder/livetrak-l-20/
https://tascam.com/us/product/dp-03/feature
https://www.behringer.com/product.html?modelCode=P0ASF

Any one of these or their variations will get you there without Cubase, Protools, or any of the rest of that DAW !@#$

The Motif/MOXF series are full blown music production environments that can let you take any midi recording studio scenarios completely from concept to high quality stereo audio.  The Motif’s ISS (Integrated Sampling Sequencer) let’s you mix audio track with midi tracks and gives you ability to mix the entire thing down to a very high quality stereo wav file.  They are very high quality music production instruments in their own right.  But if you want to mix and sum other Audio or do other extensive Audio processing, mixing, mastering, etc, then the recording solutions above will get you there.  Export your Audio from your MOXF how ever you choose, and import into any one of these digital recording/mixing devices and go from there.  In 2021 There is no need to use a DAW if you don’t want to.  Especially if you are fortunate enough to have a MOXF, or MOX or Motif.  And if you just have to for some reason process Audio on a computer I would recommend Audacity!

https://www.audacityteam.org/

Wow. I’ve got lots to chew on. I’m anticipating (but perhaps I’m wrong) that it will be best to bring my 16 MOXF tracks without system effects, but WITH Insertion FX. And then “master” things and re-do a full 16 track version AND, of course, to get the MAIN task accomplished—have MP3 or WAV files of all my Songs/Patterns.

I’m trying hard to keep my MOXF’s (I now have 4!) running cause I really enjoy how I can create all day, recording and rehearsing on nothing but the MOXF, AND then it goes with me to the gig. But it may be impossible to do it that way for much longer for so many reasons.

Now that I think about it, if I’m getting the drift, it’s possible that a 16 or 24 track Tascam could do more then just mix down my Songs. I presume I could use the mixer for the gig and play my Songs straight off the Tascam. (Computer avoided!)

That said, if recording/transferring ALL 16 tracks onto Audacity in one fell swoop is truly that easy. I’d have the main elements captured and ready to go for whatever editing process I decide to go with.

As for Cubase, I’ve got a few of the Lite version discs floating around but just never used them. As I said, the feature I miss most when working on MOXF is some kind of “humanizing” filter. I start most of my Songs from commercial MIDI files and then edit and re-record extensively to get them sounding ALMOST real. I’ve gotten pretty good at it—the exception being, of course, guitars!

Anyway, thanks for all the tips. And I welcome all feedback from fellow MIDI producers!

@muscarella

I’m definitely all about the Midi Recording Studio and Dawless Music Production.

I have several different workflows when it comes to integrating my Motif/Mox MM8 and QY100 with Audio and my Tascam DP 24 SD.

1.  If All the instruments are digital, meaning I’m not working with my acoustic band members (Sax, Flute, Bass, Guitar, and Vocals) then I mix everything on the Motif/MOX , all my panning and stereo spectrum placement, all reverb, delays, chorus, isolators, EQ’ing, compression (VCM compressors) , virtual sound staging, everything is done on my Motif until I’m completely happy with the Mix.  I Mix with Sennheiser HD280s, HD300s, and HD650s.  And I give it a final listen with Yamaha HS8s.  Then depending on my mood, I will either record the stereo out to the Tascam, or mix down to a stereo audio on the Motif and import the stereo pair to the Tascam.  Once there I listen to the to the stereo pair again from a mastering point of view and then if (and only if) more processing is needed I’ll use some of the mastering templates, and mastering effects on the Tascam to produce the final stereo wav. Which I then export over USB to my Mac and convert to .mp3 in Audacity.  And to Youtube, Facebook, and Google Drive we go!

2.  If my music has mostly digital instruments, and some samples taken from vocals, or other acoustic instruments I use Motif’s Integrated Sequencer Sampler, to assign Audio to sequencer tracks, and then I follow the process in step 1 above.

3.  If I have Audio stems (wav files or mp3s) from other musicians, vocals, samples or if I’m recording acoustic instruments or vocals in realtime, and mixing all of that with my Motif/Mox , then I track all of the audio stuff directly to Tascam Portastudio, I use Firewire on my Motif to transfer how ever many tracks (with insert effects) I’ve recorded on the Motif [1..16 tracks] to Audacity and then drag-n-drop those tracks on the Tascam Portastudio using the USB connection on the Portastudio, and I do all of the mixing, Eq’ing, Virtual Staging, apply all of the effect Reverb, Chorus, Delay, etc,, the Compression, Limiting, Noise Suppression, etc on the Portastudio.  Any Audio editing, track duplication, cross fading etc that I need is all done on the Portastudio and I do the Mixdown and the Mastering on the Portastudio.

There is very little to be gained if all of the instruments are digital to extracting sixteen tracks that have already been mixed on the MOXF just to go through the same thing on a Portastudio.  Motif/MOXF have extremely high quality effects, virtual staging, EQ’uing, isolating, compression.  You would be duplicating work at best transferring the tracks, and taking a step down in some instances, because the Effects are not as flexible as what are found on the Motif/MOXF.  But there is value to taking your stereo audio pair, and going through the mastering process on the Portastudio.

The other approach, is to record all of your raw MOXF tracks directly on the Portastudio and do all of the mixing and mastering there(The advantage is you have more raw tracks on the Portastudio).  Or you can import raw MOXF tracks to audacity.  Motif has FW and can transfer 16 audio tracks at a time.  I think the MOXF can only transfer 4 audio tracks at a time over USB .  ( I think through USB 1/2, 3/4) So you would transfer 4 tracks at a time to Audacity and then drag-n-drop them on the Portastudio through the USB connection.

I guess the point I’m making is you really should only do the mixing once.  You can record or export your raw audio to the Tascam Portastudio and mix it there, or you could bring your polished mix from the MOXF to the Portastudio and master it on the Portastudio.  The Portastudio has very good audio editing, so from a work flow point of view you can mix and match between the pattern/song jobs on the MOXF and the audio editing capabilities of the Portastudio.

And if you’re using sequences in your live performances now, there’s no reason (except for space possibly) to transfer them to the Tascam and use your Tascam for live performances.  But that being said you absolutely could transfer your songs to the Tascam and could use it in a backing track scenario or whatever.  The Tascam does have a programmable foot pedal that would let you totally be able to use it in that way.

It is also possible that you could use the digital mixer to combine 24 or 32 recorded tracks with 8 live channels of music in real time.  So you could have 24 tracks prerecorded on your Tascam, 16 tracks recorded in your sequencer, and then 8 additional channels for live mixing during a show. 

There are times I do live sets where each set is about a hour and 15 minutes, and I have used the full sequencer memory on my Motif for the first set, and I load the 2nd, and 3rd set from the USB between breaks using the All Songs, and All Patterns format.  I use 32GB USB drive and have never ran out of space or had a technical snafu.

The Pattern/Song modes & jobs on the Motif/MOXF are excellent and extremely flexible for Composing and Arranging.  But raw tracks can be transferred to the Portastudio, and its audio editing does allow for very flexible Composing and Arranging as well (Not as Flexible as Motif/MOXF) but pretty good.  Midi in general offers more arranging/composing options than working with audio.

I’ve been away from my music for 10 years. Back then I stayed away from computer programs because of all the issues I read about. I used my motif ES with an AW16. Very simple set up with real knobs and faders. None of the issues associated with computer programs.

Since then I aquired an XS and an Aw1600 with 24 bit recording. You can pick these Yamaha recorders up for next to nothing. Roland made some really good pieces of hardware as well back then.

I was considering going to computer thinking 10 years have passed and the improvements must have reached a point of minimal issues and ease of use. After reading this thread, I will certainly continue to stay away from the computer world. I find the motif sequencers are powerful enough to do what I need. In fact I just finished a demo for a documentary. Going from the ES to the XS is a great improvement especially with the larger screen so switching pages has been minimized plus additional effects already plugged in. :)

While with computers, you can see much visually and the plug ins are endless, I’ve concluded that the more tools you have at your disposal, the more there is to bog you down searching and experimenting with the newest tools in your arsenal. Also while the visual aspects of your signal is a great tool with the computer program, ultimately your ears are the ultimate and most valuable tool available to you.

In essence with a piece of hardware like the AW1600, Roland or Tascam combined with your keyboard, you have a setup more powerful than many professional studios had back in the day. Remember when the Beatles did an album on a 4 track recorder? Oops, showing my age.

Amen, Exactly!

That AW1600 is very nice!!!! 

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/yamaha-aw1600

I wish Yamaha would do a reissue.

But discontinuing their hardware recorders might be related to their purchase of
Steinberg and Cubase at the time

https://usa.yamaha.com/news_events/2004/20041223_yamaha-announces-acquisition-of-steinberg_us.html

http://www.motifator.com/index.php/archive/viewthread/406729/