Solo Tracks while Recording a mix

[Glazik]

Originally Posted by BScout

It's called routing.

And it's not a big deal or a "workaround."
It's how mixing desks work.

Different DAWs have different names or ways (as do mix consoles.) And some have "functions" which are just auto-routing of the same thing. But in the end, they are the same thing.

Yes yes, but a modern DAW isn't a desk. And you should look at what Nuendo can do. Avid claim that that Pro Tools is the industry standard, OK, that's history, not future.

How long will users accept to pay so much more for less ?

But in the end, they are the same thing.

No. Absolutely not.

I like working with Pro Tools because it is simple and often efficient. But some functions haven't been improved since the last century, (solo is a good example).
Look at idea scale, some functions have been called for years (why not a phase reverse switch ? Oh yes, a different way to do this : Insert a plug you don't need, a use its phase reverse button !).

[Dalton_Sound]

Glazik,

I don’t see this as a short coming or “work-around” in PT. It is just something that PT doesn’t have an auto function for; and I needed to learn how to route this. Yes there are some features that other DAWs have that could be in PT; I still see PT as the main daw in use at most studios, and especially post production and film facilities. I would classify that as pretty close to “Industry Standard, and I haven’t found a DAW/Interface combo that is as stable and low latency as HDX. Even with networking involved like RedNet, the latency is wicked low.

john1192,

Wouldn’t resetting the send faders while recording a) stop the recording, or b) kill my automation on the tracks?

[BScout]

Originally Posted by Glazik

Yes yes, but a modern DA... <snip> ...button !).

Lot of ranting that has nothing to do with OP's question. If you want to get off the PT bus, do so. I know Cubase/Nuendo as long as I've known Pro Tools and use both. I also know what Cubase/Nuendo doesn't do well so as I know Pro Tools' shortcomings.

OP asked how to do something, I gave options (especially since I know what he was talking about from Cubase/Nuendo).

To @Dalton_Sound, I didn't recommend mixing on sends for the second point you mention. It's not a natural workflow vs mixing on the main faders and with your 2TR on the sends for record down. You could flip sends to faders (if you have a control surface) but then your main fader mix and send fader mix would differ whereas mixing on the main faders, the default is the send fader mix being the same (but the solo independent) and the option of making them different (PRE). Also, Pro Tools has had issues (in the past -- don't know if it is still true) delay compensating certain routing setups (one of them was if you send an audio/aux input channel to a "dummy" output vs a physical output in its output chain on the main output path.)

The other thing is if you have to go back to re-mix (or import session data into another session) after the live session, everything is laid out the best way possible to do so (with all automation on the main channels).

[Dalton_Sound]

Thank you again BScout

Very Helpful!

As far as I know, PT is still finicky about dummy paths. I was trying to work on a 192kHz session on an analog desk with 32 tracks, and 1 HDX card. The card ran out of resources even though PT supports 64 tracks at 192kHz on 1 card. Took it to a system with 2 HDX cards but no analog desk, and it ran fine. When I checked the system usage it was not even using a full card. Fun fact, having a pre fader send to route each channel to the analog desk ended up using more than double the resources than if I was not using the sends.

[BScout]

Sends are treated (from the DSP mixer) the same as if they were individual separate channels if they are going to outputs -- so doubling resources isn't unexpected. Voices are allocated for the send which, in effect, requires its own DSP mixer the same as the main channels.

Running at 192k will definitely tax those resources.

[john1192]

Originally Posted by Dalton_Sound

Thank you again BScout

Very Helpful!

As far as I know, PT is still finicky about dummy paths. I was trying to work on a 192kHz session on an analog desk with 32 tracks, and 1 HDX card. The card ran out of resources even though PT supports 64 tracks at 192kHz on 1 card. Took it to a system with 2 HDX cards but no analog desk, and it ran fine. When I checked the system usage it was not even using a full card. Fun fact, having a pre fader send to route each channel to the analog desk ended up using more than double the resources than if I was not using the sends.

hi, sorry, i did not say during recording ... this would be done ahead of time .. and i see as i re-read that you need this to happen while recording .. if i had an HD system here i would have tested this to see what it does to that channel's automation or if it would STOP PT altogether ..

just need a quick test to find out ..

[Dalton_Sound]

Thanks, I currently don’t have access to an HDX system, but I’ll try and check next time I do (in 3 weeks probably)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk