Native Instruments Crash Course

There are well-documented discussions online about the new Native Access registration tool by Native Instruments. Many of them concern the fact that Native Access without exception crashes on systems with multiple monitors. I have experienced this myself, and so far the only workaround has been to disconnect all external screens when Native Access is in use. This is of course highly impractical and leaves users with problems solely created by Native Instruments.

But this is not all.

Recently Native Instruments has released two new plugin packs: Mod and Crush. The reasonably-priced packs include effects often used in modern EDM productions, when they are going for a more edgy analog feel. This idea is applied also in the plugin GUI as one can see. It is no accident that they have been given a look resembling guitar pedals:

The problem is however that what I see instead of GUI is a blue screen: both plugin packs crash my Win 7 64-bit multiple-monitor systems instantly when launched. 

On one monitor – laptop only – the plugins work as soon as I don’t try to mess with the controls. They are almost unresponsive from the start, but any attempt trying to move the knobs results in BSOD, as it is called.

In comparison I loaded eight random plugins by other vendors with heavy GUI load on top of each other and activated them all: no problemo.

Considering the earlier Native Access example, it looks like Native Instruments design department is in serious crash course with many people’s setup. It doesn’t matter if a registration tool or a plugin looks cool if it is unusable. These are audio tools, not 3D animation demos.

What I look for in audio setup primarily is stability. As long as Native Instruments follows a different path, I will access other alternatives.

The Modular Way

Yesterday the Apple Developers’ meeting gave participants first taste of iOS 9, and there in the fine print was also a mention of a new audio feature. It seems that iOS will in the near future include plugin technology, which would mean apps like Cubasis could have similar addons as in their workstation form: instruments, effects etc.

This would of course mean the end of the road for Audiobus, so far the best option for linking apps. Also the new multitasking feature will affect this, but it remains to be seen when and how. I’m sure Audiobus will in practise hang around for quite a while until the app vendors omit the new approach, if it actually is a practical one. If only Apple did something to the physical audio connections also, then the iPad would really start to challenge the workstation environment.

Meanwhile I have searched for ways to combine these two. A year ago or so I browsed through the iConnectivity catalog and found their hardware somewhat pricey. However now there is a model, the iConnectivity 2+, with the price tag of 80 euros or so, and I have actually ordered myself one. I am not in possession of it yet so I will get back to it once I have done some practical testing.

The second task, using the iPad as MIDI controller in Cubase 5 on Windows 7, has been one problem I haven’t been able to solve – until now. I found Mr Vitaliy Tarasyuk’s apps called DAW Control and Midi Studio, two reasonably priced pieces of software, which both work with Cubase 5. The only thing you need on your workstation is Tobias Erichsen’s rtpMIDI connection driver, something I have actually had installed for years. It is only now however that I found suitable apps I can use it with.

As one might suspect, DAW Control enables one to use the Cubase recording and mixing options along with the channel sliders on iPad, and I can confirm the app supports the Cubase 5 version. The real finding was the Midi Studio app, since it – although set in mixing view – gives free Midi learn option for users. Just set the sliders and knobs for Massive via Midi learn, and you can control basically every aspect of the sound like you had a hardware synth in front of you. Again, everything is fully compatible with Cubase 5.

Afterwards it basically made me angry when I thought how long it all took to be realized, and this was the main reason I wanted to share the details. I also watched Beardyman give a lecture at the TED gathering, and during the presentation he used his stage setup consisting of three iPads and synths. The outcome was a paradox, since the keynote show raised more questions than it gave answers to.

Somehow there is this veil of secrecy – even Beardyman did not give a guided tour of his setup but settled for being a sound wizard – surrounding new, easy ways of controlling sound. By this I mean the inexpensive ways, not Kontrol sellers (i.e. Native Instruments and other big players).

It’s like people are deliberately guided into buying integrated and often expensive software-hardware combinations, when in fact – as presented –  an app worth couple of euros can totally transform the way a soft synth is used in production, erasing the need for expensive new gear.

Is it really so that the controllers of the controllers  – the big makers of hardware – want to keep the easy solutions out of the market and replace this potential flexibility with their view of what is Komplete? 

I would rather take the modular way, where I am in charge of the particular pieces constructing the whole package. The only thing I need is some sort of compatibility, rather the kind that does not take two years to sort out. It seems that all sorts of things can be done with little or no extra cost, but very few people talk about this in public and I have no idea why.        

Plugin within plugin: case Softube

The current trend of software vendors turning into hardware makers is an interesting phenomenon. So are some of the new products they come up with.

It was not long ago when Plugin Baby was the name of the love child for most of the music producers around. It’s when they turned from instruments to programming, as one LA producer once described his local working scenario in the beginning of the century.

After that a lot has happened. Hipsters brought back the banjo and other acoustic instruments along with vinyl records and even c-cassettes. Thus it may not be that surprising that also VST vendors seek new markets outside the ‘greatest plugin synth ever’ scheme.

Following the latest trend, Console 1 adds both hardware and software to your home studio.

This setting could be best described as plugins within plugins. For example, the Swedish mixing software vendor Softube recently announced their launch of Console 1, an integrated hardware/software solution, which basically replaces the mouse-mixing with knobs. A number of questions concerning Console 1 are answered here, so I’ll just insert the image I respectfully downloaded from their site for presentation purposes.

This mix of hardware and software is of course a good example of a larger trend I described earlier: those knobs do remind me of an analog mixing console. Then again, Console 1 is a controller compatible with major DAWs (Digital Audio Workstation), enabling people to use digital plugins, although renditions and models would be based on so-called vintage consoles. Hence the reference to plugins within plugin.

Then again, the Korg analog synth renditions on iPad have proven that these two worlds are today interconnected and work well together if things are done right: people like vintage even more if it comes with the processor power of the twenty-first century.

One thing I noticed concerning Console 1 was the incompatibility of the controller with third-party plugins. This is a limitation for example NI Maschine does not have, and since people choose their favorite software plugins regardless of hardware vendors, it seems risky to me to have these sort of limiting factors. After all the transformation from hardware to software in mixing was originally caused by increased mobility as well as flexibility.

The ground rule here should be the same as in keyboard controllers: they all play the sound no matter who made it. There is an obvious need for DirectLink/Audiobus sort of general standard for mixing plugins and the respected hardware, and this need will only emphasize itself if and when new hardware mixing consoles keep popping up.

One other important factor is the tablet compatibility. DAWs like Cubasis are rapidly turning iPads into portable mixing consoles so it remains to be seen if one day there will be Console 1 (or maybe 2) with (even wireless) iPad connection.

So are the knobs back for good? In most cases they were never there in the first place: products like Console 1 are aimed at mouse-mixers with wrist pains (I know what I’m talking about here). The idea of bringing in more plugin hardware along with software ultimately faces the question of necessary empty space on my table. And the more universal the controller, the less space is eventually needed.

A vendor-specific controller sounds major trouble to me. Personally I like for example using the Izotope Ozone in mastering, and it is true that Waves is a major player in mixing plugin markets. Would Waves or Izotope – or the good old Softube business pal Native Instruments – at some point release mixing console hardware with Softube plugin compatibility, I believe my choice would be an easy one.

This does not mean that Console 1 would be of faulty design. I just hope the plugin integration will eventually span outside the borders of their own products. It helps when people think about including Console 1 as a part of their gear arsenal. Also the Console 1 price should from my perspective be closer to NI Maschine Mikro or IK iRig Keys than any of the Softube software plugins: for me as a hobbyist 200 euros would the maximum for this concept. There’s one thing vendors often miss regarding to this. Pros already own or have access to quality mixing hardware so they are not the Console 1 target group, but the hobbyists have limited financial resources.

And after all the less people you exclude, the more you will in the end include.

Plugins: overpriced commodities?

Let’s cut right to the chase: the price of most VST plugins is in no relation to VST instruments. So are the instruments too cheap or the plugins too expensive?

When it comes to buying VST instruments, I often apply the same rule I use in shopping for example apples: I check the origin, the quality, and the price. However the weight of the bag must be in some relation to the price tag suggested. If a nine-gigabyte library of grand piano sounds from one vendor cost as much a fifteen gigabytes from another company, the instrument itself must have something special in it.

Anyone who has worked with VST plugins know that their price is often very expensive compared to their weight: an average plugin download is some 40-50 megabytes only, but the price tag is equal to ten gigabytes of instrument samples. Yes, they are two separate product categories, but the code and algorithms included in them have distinctive similarities. After all many of today’s VST instruments include in themselves lots of features from separate plug-ins: EQ, compression, reverb etc.

This is why I think the plugins cost so much: it is only a decade or so ago when they were by and large applied by professionals only, and even today the pros are still the most important clients for many of the vendors. Hence the habit of putting a ‘pro price’ tag on them (whether or not also the pros have paid too much for them I leave to general discussion).

Of course also plug-in manufacturers have realized the potential of home mixing: a whole new target group is making music in their respective home studios now. And to be fair, the plug-in prices have in general come down from their most outrageous peak.

But let’s do some research here. Waves Audio has come up with a new product concept by putting out ‘signature plugins’: software allegedly used by a famous music producer. This is of course merely a marketing strategy: I am willing to bet anything that for example J.J. Puig or Eddie Kramer didn’t once have the actual software tailor-made for them that is now sold by taking advantage of their reputation. Or do you really think Brett Favre wears his signature Wranglers only?

It is also ironic that famous music producers would publicly admit that all their skills can be encapsulated in or reduced to a bunch of ones and zeroes. But this is not the main issue here: we were supposed to talk about plug-in prices. A J.J. Puig signature plugin costs 100-150 dollars each, and according to Waves online store there are six different Puig plugins available. So if a home mixer would like to purchase all of them, he or she should put in a hefty 700 dollars: enough for purchasing some of the lushest VST symphony orchestra libraries around – most of them equipped with tailor-made mixing options of their own.

But when it comes to price, neither a seven-hundred-dollar VST library nor a plugin pack of similar cost are sensible choices for hobbyists. Using freeware plugins then again is: there are tons of different mixing freeware – some of them of excellent quality – around.

If you take a look around at any professional studio, you understand why a hundred-dollar plug-in does not sound peculiar: everything else there is even more expensive. But when it comes to bedroom studios, this is usually not the case. The most valuable thing for hobbyists is using common sense, and at least mine says no when someone tries to sell me fifty megabytes of code for 100 dollars.