Hey everyone,
I’m new to this world, and to Digitakt in particular. I’m happily making tracks on it, but I’m wondering what people use to mix and record their tracks other than a DAW?
I ask because I want to stay hardware-only (I’m a software engineer; I do enough staring at screens). I did see, for example, the 1010 Music Blue Box, which looks like a viable device for this sort of thing.
Any suggestions appreciated!
Are you just looking to record the DT or do you plan to add other gear to the setup? Do you want multitracking or just want to record a single stereo source?
I’ve had good results with the Zooms H6 and H1n (when recording a few or only a single input) and the TX-6 for more inputs.
I do a little clean up afterwards in Live, but not much, and I don’t keep a computer set up in the studio area (usually I do stuff in batches after a decent chunk of tracks are recorded onto the flash card in question).
This has been discussed in many, many other threads on here. I’d suggest searching and finding one of those because a lot of answers have been given already for people in very similar use cases. Hope that helps!
I’m looking to add a synth, too. So I guess I’d run the synth and the 'takt through a mixer like the Bluebox. It’s the part after that I’m trying to suss out. I’m new to this and don’t even know anything about mixing/mastering yet, merely that it’s a thing. (I’m assuming stuff that you make on the 'takt isn’t production-ready, i.e. there always is some sort of post-'takt mixing process? I may be wrong…)
Thanks, I’ll do that!
Ah so when you say a little clean-up, there’s not necessarily some massive, complex mixing scenario I’m envisaging? Can tracks come straight off the Digitakt and be production-ready? I’m new to music production and just automatically assumed there was a mixing/mastering process I’d yet to get my head around. Thanks!
Zoom H6.
Like others have said, there are a million opinions on this! But I would say no, there does not have to be a complex mixing process involved if you don’t want there to be.
What I typically do is, record a jam from a single box (like a Digitakt) or a handful of them connected together. Usually I don’t record separate tracks for each instrument, I just record the “2-track” (stereo) mix of the tune. (This requires doing a little bit of careful listening up from, but it’s not a big deal for most styles of instrumental electronic music imo.)
Then, I take that file into Live (it could be any software DAW, but I use Live) and do a tiny amount of EQ (mostly removing any subsonic rumble that can mess with the mix), then add compression and limiting just to get the volume up to the level most listeners would expect.
I also trim the front and back of the file and do any fades needed. Because I have EQ and compressor settings I like saved, it only takes slightly longer than the length of the jam itself to do this step.
There are definitely pros and cons to this type of approach, but imo you can take things really far without having to worry about fancy computer mixing at all.
I use tascam DR40x
Thanks for this! Really helpful. Just to clarify, when you say you add compression in Live, is that separate from the compressor feature in Digitakt? And, if I understand you rightly, you’re not exporting each separate DT track (or tracks from other hardware) into Live, you’re just taking the whole, merged file in (i.e. all tracks) and then EQ/compressing that master file - is that right? (My terminology may be off). Thanks again.
Thanks for this. So that seems to be a recorder; so no mixing/masterig/post-production malarky? Thank you.
Thanks for this. So that seems to be a recorder; so no mixing/masterig/post-production malarky? Thank you.
Yes, that’s right. I do use the Digitakt compressor, but imo it’s a bit too aggressive to be used as the only compressor on a track (unless that’s what you are going for).
In Live I use the “Glue Compressor”, which has a more transparent sound than the DT compressor, but does have some “character” to it (nice subtle distortion, basically), followed by the Live Limiter (to apply a last layer of precise limiting to the sound).
There are a million options for compression, but I think the most important thing is to not overdo it. It’s pretty easy to overdo it with the DT compressor, imo. Working on a complete take in Live, layering on a couple different compression options, it’s easier to get where you want to be without overdoing it. 
Nah, straight into the device, just how we use to do it in the backcountry over in Mali.
I like to go on walks with the dog and have this thing out recording, and my headphones on. Gives you super hearing. Feels sort of badass.
What’s that Miss Fletcherson, you don’t like the color of my house. Well guess what, I can hear you and I hate the color of your moomoo…
“Oh hi Miss Fletherson, yep it’s a beautiful day. Yep just out for a walk listening to some music.”
…fuck your moomoo.
Most of the time (but not always) I jam through an old Phonic BKX8800 mixer into OTO Bim Bam Boum onto a single stereo track in Cubase and then eq it later. If it sounds ok when it goes in that’s half the battle sorted and aren’t too many things to worry about later. Less is more, get the base right and the rest is sprinkles on the top.
Thank you, everyone - good to know it’s not quite as scary a process as I thought, though I do need to learn what limiting is!
I use a Sound Devices MixPre field recorder as a mixer/recorder/audio interface in my setup. It has configurable analogue limiters for the channels which is very handy as the final stage in a live mix.
compression with a really high ratio setting basically.
If you already have your head round the Digitakt compressor/compression in general.
As for the other question - I think the answer is really dependant on what you want to do with the final track. The mixing process is definitely really blurry for electronic musicians because it tends to be part of composition to some extent - you choose sounds that fit together and EQ as you go.
If you’re using the Digitakt and one synth, maybe there are only very small things you need to do to “finish” the mix.
Equally, if someone heard your track and decided they were going to get Rihanna to sing on it and release it worldwide, they’d probably get another two engineers to mix and then master it to a shiny shiny LOUD state.
So basically… I reckon everyone’s right and you can call tracks “finished” if you’re happy with how they sound. You will probably just gradually identify more things you want to do to the mix as you make more things. Or you won’t and will be happy with what comes out of the Digitakt. It’s kinda up to you in the end.
Thanks, both. Really appreciate the info. Guess the proof is in pudding i.e. how it sounds. I’ll read up more on this whole area but it’s heartening to know it needn’t necessarily be a world of hurt/complexity.