|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 22, 2023 12:29:28 GMT -6
This approach is actually not that far off from what I do with a couple key differences. The first is that I do it in multiple projects (I like your approach better, just handle that with different sets of mutes/hidden tracks... keep everything wired up if you need to recall it thus removing the need to juggle endless files) and the second is that you print FX on each track. Works in this setup. Appealing. However... I'm not sure I understand the section I quoted above. The rest makes total sense to me, but are you saying you're doing 'verbs on each individual track instead of on a send? Is that so that you can print the track with spatial effects? This seems difficult to me from a mixing perspective not to mention resource intensive. Also, I have a couple HW verbs I like to use that I bus. Can you elaborate? Yeah, verbs on every single mix track - no longer as "sends". It's weird at first but I'm getting used to it. You have to or you don't have 100% instant and perfect recall. It's different than I've mixed my entire life, but necessary for the recall aspect. Otherwise, if you print aux verb tracks and have to remove something from a track, the removed instrument will still be heard in the reverb print tracks. The hardware verb tracks become problematic in this approach. Unless you have dozens of hardware verbs.  Man, I think I see why you're doing it but that's a total paradigm shift putting verbs on each track. I guess I could set up an automation lane to adjust "mix" level on the verb and that would function like a send knob, so maybe it could work for my brain. Or wait a minute, are you printing a 100% wet 'verb for each track? Instead of doing the verb as an insert, why not just do "one instrument per aux" and print the auxes. Then you could adjust the mix level for the verb as part of your recall. "Hey, can I get less reverb on that snare, it sounds like we recorded it in 1985." "Ouch. Ok. No problem, I'll just pull the snare verb fader down." |
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Feb 22, 2023 12:29:42 GMT -6
drbill - this is really similar to my setup as well. It terrifies my students and interns because it is a LOT of tracks 🤣 I use routing folders so I can hide stuff a bit easier, while also gaining their 'aux track'-like facilities. But I struggle with the fx/reverbs thing and haven't yet found a solution to suit my workflow. I guess I need to consider simply changing my workflow. This approach has worked great, especially when receiving decent sounding roughs from outside studios/engineers for me to mix. I can load their PT session right into my template and use their rough as a starting point. Works like a charm. But it definitely tears through busses and CPU cycles in general, esp cuz I'm at 96k most of the time. Happy for HDX Hybrid mode! Probably wouldn't be possible without it.
|
|
|
|
Post by copperx on Feb 22, 2023 13:37:32 GMT -6
This is also how I do it. Print the track with hardware inserts and leave the original track in the session but keep it muted (and usually hidden) so I can go back if needed. For hardware processing on the mix bus I take notes. If you're using Reaper, you can print into the same track, creating a new take. In that way you can switch instantly between takes and reprint if necessary, no extra tracks or muting needed. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 22, 2023 13:40:36 GMT -6
This is also how I do it. Print the track with hardware inserts and leave the original track in the session but keep it muted (and usually hidden) so I can go back if needed. For hardware processing on the mix bus I take notes. If you're using Reaper, you can print into the same track, creating a new take. In that way you can switch instantly between takes and reprint if necessary, no extra tracks or muting needed. I saw that on some video but I didn't quite understand how it worked. I was gonna look through the manual. Do you mind explaining if it's easy to explain? |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 22, 2023 13:49:58 GMT -6
Yeah, verbs on every single mix track - no longer as "sends". It's weird at first but I'm getting used to it. You have to or you don't have 100% instant and perfect recall. It's different than I've mixed my entire life, but necessary for the recall aspect. Otherwise, if you print aux verb tracks and have to remove something from a track, the removed instrument will still be heard in the reverb print tracks. The hardware verb tracks become problematic in this approach. Unless you have dozens of hardware verbs. Man, I think I see why you're doing it but that's a total paradigm shift putting verbs on each track. I guess I could set up an automation lane to adjust "mix" level on the verb and that would function like a send knob, so maybe it could work for my brain. Or wait a minute, are you printing a 100% wet 'verb for each track? Instead of doing the verb as an insert, why not just do "one instrument per aux" and print the auxes. Then you could adjust the mix level for the verb as part of your recall. "Hey, can I get less reverb on that snare, it sounds like we recorded it in 1985." "Ouch. Ok. No problem, I'll just pull the snare verb fader down." Yes it is a paradigm shift. It's worth it to me to be able to have the instant recall with HARDWARE. There are compromises in any type of workflow. Certainly with ITB workflow for me. You can absolutely have automation on the wet/dry levels in PTHDX with this type of setup. No, not printing a wet verb track. Printing it with the program material. You COULD do that, but it would take an already semi-insane setup, and make it almost an impossible setup. It would seriously with 2-3-4-5 different verbs per track. BTW, one thing I forgot to mention. When I'm done automating my mix - I print the print tracks, the stems, and the 2 bus mix all in one fell swoop. Love that!! |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 22, 2023 13:55:50 GMT -6
drbill - this is really similar to my setup as well. It terrifies my students and interns because it is a LOT of tracks 🤣 I use routing folders so I can hide stuff a bit easier, while also gaining their 'aux track'-like facilities. But I struggle with the fx/reverbs thing and haven't yet found a solution to suit my workflow. I guess I need to consider simply changing my workflow. This approach has worked great, especially when receiving decent sounding roughs from outside studios/engineers for me to mix. I can load their PT session right into my template and use their rough as a starting point. Works like a charm. But it definitely tears through busses and CPU cycles in general, esp cuz I'm at 96k most of the time. Happy for HDX Hybrid mode! Probably wouldn't be possible without it. Benny - bgrotto Yup! For guys like us who grew up on consoles with aux sends, it's a definite mind bender. But there are young guys who never even use aux sends. They instantiate all their reverbs on track inserts, have dozens and dozens of verbs instantiated, and use the wet/dry control of the plugin to control their "verb levels". Weird, but workable. And essentially, that's the direction I am turning to for this hardware recall paradigm. and yeah, cpu cycles and busses!!! LOL. Last mix I did I was in the 400's of busses. LOL One thing I am struggling with - my Bricasti. Having only one does not embrace this workflow. Still thinking thru that. I may have some ideas, but still too early for me to comment.... Glad to hear about your workflow! Thx for sharing. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 22, 2023 13:57:15 GMT -6
Man, I think I see why you're doing it but that's a total paradigm shift putting verbs on each track. I guess I could set up an automation lane to adjust "mix" level on the verb and that would function like a send knob, so maybe it could work for my brain. Or wait a minute, are you printing a 100% wet 'verb for each track? Instead of doing the verb as an insert, why not just do "one instrument per aux" and print the auxes. Then you could adjust the mix level for the verb as part of your recall. "Hey, can I get less reverb on that snare, it sounds like we recorded it in 1985." "Ouch. Ok. No problem, I'll just pull the snare verb fader down." Yes it is a paradigm shift. It's worth it to me to be able to have the instant recall with HARDWARE. There are compromises in any type of workflow. Certainly with ITB workflow for me. You can absolutely have automation on the wet/dry levels in PTHDX with this type of setup. No, not printing a wet verb track. Printing it with the program material. You COULD do that, but it would take an already semi-insane setup, and make it almost an impossible setup. It would seriously with 2-3-4-5 different verbs per track. BTW, one thing I forgot to mention. When I'm done automating my mix - I print the print tracks, the stems, and the 2 bus mix all in one fell swoop. Love that!! Got it. So let's stick with snare example. You've got a snare and on the inserts you have a delay, a room, and a reverb. So you print that and put it with the Stage 3 tracks. Do I have that right? But if the client comes back and says they think the snare is reverberant, you go back to Stage 2 and recall all your settings for all your inserts (including dynamics and EQ) and then reprint it? I'm struggling with this part. |
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Feb 22, 2023 14:02:18 GMT -6
Interesting setup drbill. I do something a little simpler but similar in approach. All my production tracks are dragged into a Cubase track folder label "Old tracks", then hidden. I print my hardware on individual tracks, keep the hardware live on my busses (with notes in the session as to their settings). And my routing looks like this: Track ->instrument bus -> Stem Bus ->Instrumental bus/vocal bus -> Master Bus with AUX -> Stem Bus ->Instrumental bus/vocal bus -> Master Bus So for example: all drum tracks -> drum buss -> Drum Stem Buss - Instrumental Mix Bus (all instruments minus vocals) - Master Bus with Aux sends feeding reverbs etc from my drums -> Drum Stem Buss etc So with this setup each group gets their own verbs/delays etc. Even if I'm using the same exact reverb for everything they each get their own instance of the verb, Drums to drum verb, Guitars to gtr verb, Vocals to vocal verb etc etc, and the verb/delays etc feed the "Stem Busses". This way when I bounce down I get my Master, plus each stem each with their own printed effects baked in, with no bleed from other instruments, and all in one go. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 22, 2023 14:03:34 GMT -6
Yes it is a paradigm shift. It's worth it to me to be able to have the instant recall with HARDWARE. There are compromises in any type of workflow. Certainly with ITB workflow for me. You can absolutely have automation on the wet/dry levels in PTHDX with this type of setup. No, not printing a wet verb track. Printing it with the program material. You COULD do that, but it would take an already semi-insane setup, and make it almost an impossible setup. It would seriously with 2-3-4-5 different verbs per track. BTW, one thing I forgot to mention. When I'm done automating my mix - I print the print tracks, the stems, and the 2 bus mix all in one fell swoop. Love that!! Got it. So let's stick with snare example. You've got a snare and on the inserts you have a delay, a room, and a reverb. So you print that and put it with the Stage 3 tracks. Do I have that right? But if the client comes back and says they think the snare is reverberant, you go back to Stage 2 and recall all your settings for all your inserts (including dynamics and EQ) and then reprint it? I'm struggling with this part. Yes. For a verb change, you would have to go back to stage 2. But I'm rarely ever finding myself doing that. Actually, I have minimal recalls/remixes, but you gotta be prepared. For my normal setup, for your example, it would be pretty easy - I'd put stage 3 snare on input, the associated stem on input and the mix bus on input, have a wet/dry change on the snare track on the offensive reverb / delay, reprint that one track to stage 3, the stems, and the 2 buss mix track in one fell swoop. Pretty simple once you do it a few times. |
|
|
|
Post by copperx on Feb 22, 2023 14:21:56 GMT -6
If you're using Reaper, you can print into the same track, creating a new take. In that way you can switch instantly between takes and reprint if necessary, no extra tracks or muting needed. I saw that on some video but I didn't quite understand how it worked. I was gonna look through the manual. Do you mind explaining if it's easy to explain? Sure. I keep forgeting to make a video about this, because I think it might help many people. There are two steps. 1. You add ReaInsert to the channel you want to print (Ping it, make sure delay compensation is correct). 2. Record enable the track, and set source to be OUTPUT (mono or stereo, depending on your setup). No latency compensation needed. That's it. Record the track and remove ReaInsert when done. A new take will be automatically created on top of the original one. Need to reprint a track? Just click on the original take and reprint. Unsure about your outboard settings? Print multiple versions and switch between them while mixing. Cool stuff. I've created a script to automate this so I can quickly print multiple tracks unattended. |
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Feb 22, 2023 14:57:12 GMT -6
drbill - this is really similar to my setup as well. It terrifies my students and interns because it is a LOT of tracks 🤣 I use routing folders so I can hide stuff a bit easier, while also gaining their 'aux track'-like facilities. But I struggle with the fx/reverbs thing and haven't yet found a solution to suit my workflow. I guess I need to consider simply changing my workflow. This approach has worked great, especially when receiving decent sounding roughs from outside studios/engineers for me to mix. I can load their PT session right into my template and use their rough as a starting point. Works like a charm. But it definitely tears through busses and CPU cycles in general, esp cuz I'm at 96k most of the time. Happy for HDX Hybrid mode! Probably wouldn't be possible without it. Benny - bgrotto  Yup!  For guys like us who grew up on consoles with aux sends, it's a definite mind bender.  But there are young guys who never even use aux sends.  They instantiate all their reverbs on track inserts, have dozens and dozens of verbs instantiated, and use the wet/dry control of the plugin to control their "verb levels".  Weird, but workable.  And essentially, that's the direction I am turning to for this hardware recall paradigm. and yeah, cpu cycles and busses!!!  LOL. Last mix I did I was in the 400's of busses.  LOL One thing I am struggling with - my Bricasti.  Having only one does not embrace this workflow.  Still thinking thru that.  I may have some ideas, but still too early for me to comment.... Glad to hear about your workflow!  Thx for sharing. The reverb send thing was giving me pause too. 400 busses. Man, that even puts Michael Brauer to shame. Sounds like a really interesting idea. |
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Feb 22, 2023 15:26:29 GMT -6
drbill - this is really similar to my setup as well. It terrifies my students and interns because it is a LOT of tracks 🤣 I use routing folders so I can hide stuff a bit easier, while also gaining their 'aux track'-like facilities. But I struggle with the fx/reverbs thing and haven't yet found a solution to suit my workflow. I guess I need to consider simply changing my workflow. This approach has worked great, especially when receiving decent sounding roughs from outside studios/engineers for me to mix. I can load their PT session right into my template and use their rough as a starting point. Works like a charm. But it definitely tears through busses and CPU cycles in general, esp cuz I'm at 96k most of the time. Happy for HDX Hybrid mode! Probably wouldn't be possible without it. Benny - bgrotto Yup! For guys like us who grew up on consoles with aux sends, it's a definite mind bender. But there are young guys who never even use aux sends. They instantiate all their reverbs on track inserts, have dozens and dozens of verbs instantiated, and use the wet/dry control of the plugin to control their "verb levels". Weird, but workable. And essentially, that's the direction I am turning to for this hardware recall paradigm. and yeah, cpu cycles and busses!!! LOL. Last mix I did I was in the 400's of busses. LOL One thing I am struggling with - my Bricasti. Having only one does not embrace this workflow. Still thinking thru that. I may have some ideas, but still too early for me to comment.... Glad to hear about your workflow! Thx for sharing. If you haven't tried it before, the Seventh Heaven plugin does a pretty good Bricasti impersonation. Might still wanna print the real deal for a big fancy snare or vocal reverb, but for most cases, the plug will probably get the job done very nicely. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 22, 2023 15:35:14 GMT -6
Benny - bgrotto Yup! For guys like us who grew up on consoles with aux sends, it's a definite mind bender. But there are young guys who never even use aux sends. They instantiate all their reverbs on track inserts, have dozens and dozens of verbs instantiated, and use the wet/dry control of the plugin to control their "verb levels". Weird, but workable. And essentially, that's the direction I am turning to for this hardware recall paradigm. and yeah, cpu cycles and busses!!! LOL. Last mix I did I was in the 400's of busses. LOL One thing I am struggling with - my Bricasti. Having only one does not embrace this workflow. Still thinking thru that. I may have some ideas, but still too early for me to comment.... Glad to hear about your workflow! Thx for sharing. If you haven't tried it before, the Seventh Heaven plugin does a pretty good Bricasti impersonation. Might still wanna print the real deal for a big fancy snare or vocal reverb, but for most cases, the plug will probably get the job done very nicely. Yeah, I need to explore that a bit more! Great idea... |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 22, 2023 16:51:02 GMT -6
I saw that on some video but I didn't quite understand how it worked. I was gonna look through the manual. Do you mind explaining if it's easy to explain? Sure. I keep forgeting to make a video about this, because I think it might help many people. There are two steps. 1. You add ReaInsert to the channel you want to print (Ping it, make sure delay compensation is correct). 2. Record enable the track, and set source to be OUTPUT (mono or stereo, depending on your setup). No latency compensation needed. That's it. Record the track and remove ReaInsert when done. A new take will be automatically created on top of the original one. Need to reprint a track? Just click on the original take and reprint. Unsure about your outboard settings? Print multiple versions and switch between them while mixing. Cool stuff. I've created a script to automate this so I can quickly print multiple tracks unattended. Got it. And the old version would be the previous take. Pretty easy toggle. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 22, 2023 16:52:22 GMT -6
Benny - bgrotto Yup! For guys like us who grew up on consoles with aux sends, it's a definite mind bender. But there are young guys who never even use aux sends. They instantiate all their reverbs on track inserts, have dozens and dozens of verbs instantiated, and use the wet/dry control of the plugin to control their "verb levels". Weird, but workable. And essentially, that's the direction I am turning to for this hardware recall paradigm. and yeah, cpu cycles and busses!!! LOL. Last mix I did I was in the 400's of busses. LOL One thing I am struggling with - my Bricasti. Having only one does not embrace this workflow. Still thinking thru that. I may have some ideas, but still too early for me to comment.... Glad to hear about your workflow! Thx for sharing. If you haven't tried it before, the Seventh Heaven plugin does a pretty good Bricasti impersonation. Might still wanna print the real deal for a big fancy snare or vocal reverb, but for most cases, the plug will probably get the job done very nicely. I've never used a Bricasti (or a Briscotti as some call it) but I got the 7th Heaven plug recently and I love it. I'm pretty picky on verbs. |
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Feb 22, 2023 17:28:05 GMT -6
I'm wondering about the folks that have, say, a compressor on the bass or an EQ on the snare drum. Many of them print that effect before mix down either for recall purposes or so they can reuse that hardware piece somewhere else. I've never done that because it's always seemed like a hassle with not enough reward for the effort. But I feel like I'm in am minority on that, maybe not. Same here. If that's the reality of my surroundings I'd rather stay completely ITB. Honestly skimming this has given me a crackin headache... there seem to be some massively over complicated solutions here and I dunno. Maybe I'm a caveman but I'm routinely running 2 dozen + channels of outboard and its all 100% live and not very labor intensive. Not enough time to get into detail on how & what I do... but generally very little gets "printed back" into the session. And probably 90% of what does get printed back are "science project" effect things... running an EHX memory man on drums or vocals? Something twitchy like that where you'll never get the sound back? Print. Otherwise general EQ & compression... even outboard reverbs & FX with those few exceptions all run live. That outboard lives between the D/A box and console, an SSL XLogic desk. And or it also hangs off the desk which has its own aux sends & inserts. Full recall isn't typically an issue. Comes back 97.5% which is close enough for gov't work considering we're making changes anyway. Takes an average of 15-20 minutes to reset the patchbay & reset all buttons & knobs. Everything else is happening ITB. I'll just leave this here. Nice piece w/ a great overview & some real depth on Sylvia's workflow & overall process, which I have to say is remarkably similar to my own. Worth the half hour of your time. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 23, 2023 2:55:07 GMT -6
I saw that on some video but I didn't quite understand how it worked. I was gonna look through the manual. Do you mind explaining if it's easy to explain? Sure. I keep forgeting to make a video about this, because I think it might help many people. There are two steps. 1. You add ReaInsert to the channel you want to print (Ping it, make sure delay compensation is correct). 2. Record enable the track, and set source to be OUTPUT (mono or stereo, depending on your setup). No latency compensation needed. That's it. Record the track and remove ReaInsert when done. A new take will be automatically created on top of the original one. Need to reprint a track? Just click on the original take and reprint. Unsure about your outboard settings? Print multiple versions and switch between them while mixing. Cool stuff. I've created a script to automate this so I can quickly print multiple tracks unattended. I ended up changing a couple of settings to do the method linked below as demonstrated by everyone's favorite anti-Snake Oil crusader. Maybe this is the same thing you're doing? But it allowed me to do kind of a version of Dr Bill without a whole lot of effort. I've got all my tracks bounced into "lanes" that I can toggle on or off as well as stems mixed down and a final aux mix. Literally just armed the tracks, set to record output, and waited 3.5 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Feb 23, 2023 10:07:27 GMT -6
it gives me the best of both worlds with instant recall. Every time I pull up a session, The tracks I’m mixing are printed into the session. If a client wants a hardware change on something that I’ve used hardware on, I can always go back to the original file and re-process it. But honestly, I can’t remember the last time I’ve had to do that. But I have had cases where a record label or client comes back to me years later, and I am able to recall perfectly because it is printed into the session. I assume that you're tweaking everything in a "live" mix first, and then, once you've got the full mix like you want it, that's the point where you go back and print all of those individual channels through their respective hardware chains that you were already monitoring though for your "live" mix? basically yes. Making sure it’s where it sits right in the mix before I print. Once printed, if a client wants a small EQ tweak, I may bring up a fab filter EQ plugin to tweak further, but I print once it’s where I like it. |
|
