Protools for Composing/delivering files for scoring projects

[buckman]

As a newbie to using PT after a hiatus on Protools, I am just hoping this question makes sense and still as to why PT is the industry standard.

As a composer who has done a few Ads etc, on other software, and wanting to get into TV drama, which are longer stories/projects, is PT still the standard in delivering files as a 'session' alongside the full video?

I saw a recent*composer mention how they work with Logic X and PT, synced together, with all the composing/MIDI done in Logic and then bounced as audio and transferred to PT, compiled, as the finished project.
Is PT still favoured over Logic, Reaper etc, because everyone at the different sound stages uses PT, and you can send the Protools Session with the files embedded at the right frame lock for the whole project, so its easier to open and have the score 'mixed' further down the line as the whole TV project comes to a finish?

If so, then this would make sense as to why everyone still uses PT over say, Reaper, which although it is amazing, its not compatible with anything 'down the*track', so even a ''Reaper finished score'', would be best rendered as PT stems to be delivered?

Also does anyone ever use various DAW's to compose in, like Ableton for sound design/loops at the tempo of the cue ie: 102bpm, then bounce this audio into PT as a 'tape recorder', then switch off Ableton to move onto Logic to render MIDI as audio (at 102bpm) into PT, then just*compile it and shuffle around in PT, as well as fx, and pitch-shifting, so that PT is doing ''some'' of the composition work (with audio) instead of everything lined up perfectly and synced from Logic>PT?

Almost like a jigsaw, of different DAW created 'audio' that is all combined, edited in PT against picture, then the session is saved and sent so that the raw audio and stems all go to the next stage in the dub to complete the TV drama.

I hope these questions make sense, as I just wanted to find out genuinely, and maybe get PT 2019 (or 2020) as a deliverable format, and compile everything as cues in PT so it can go out the door and be compatible down the line.

Also I guess a PT session would allow several stems to be locked together in place, whereas using another DAW you'd have to just render the stereo master and tell them where to drop it on a frame?Or does this not matter as much anymore, and you can deliver stereo files (cues) but with a sync plop to frame?

Thank you for any help.

[RecRoom]

I'm sure others will chime in, but I personally don't think PT is necessary for composing music. Most music I receive comes in the form of 5.1 (or stereo) audio stems. I've had composers send me PT sessions, but it's always just a session with the stems laid out to the timecode. So as long as you can send your mixer stems that can laid out to timecode, I don't think it matters what DAW you use.

[Southsidemusic]

Originally Posted by RecRoom

I'm sure others will chime in, but I personally don't think PT is necessary for composing music. Most music I receive comes in the form of 5.1 (or stereo) audio stems. I've had composers send me PT sessions, but it's always just a session with the stems laid out to the timecode. So as long as you can send your mixer stems that can laid out to timecode, I don't think it matters what DAW you use.

Agreed 100%

For composing music it is the DAW you like that is gonna do the job as all daws today will be able to use for composing and bounce down stems to send off.

If you want a score mixer to do work you might wanna converse with him/her what DAW they prefer and send a session but for mixkng and mastering stems of audio is the MO for most.

We do a lot in PT HD but nowadays also a lot in Live10Suite (ableton) and as we send audio stems and always have to master engineers it doesn’t matter what DAW you use. I dont know many masterinng or mix engineers these days that wants a whole session sent and have to bounce and bounce and bounce all the stems down before starting to mix.

[buckman]

Thank you for your replies.

I should clarify that I probably didn't word this very well, and that my composing DAW's would be a mixture of Ableton and Logic/Reaper to design sounds, and loops.

My question more, was do I need a PT session to 'deliver' the finished cues, as either 2-track stereo master files (in the correct place to the exact frame) or as a few stem files (in the correct place to the exact frame) ?

This way, if others used PT in the dub, and mix, (as its industry standard) they could mix/eq sounds within PT if needed further down the line as it would all stay inside PT.

Is this how it works?

If not, and I deliver single stereo master file cues, using another DAW, whats the best way to make sure they are 'spotted' correctly? Do composers, simply put the frame start of the cue in the title of the piece ie : 01:00:04:26 etc?


So i guess, within that industry, do directors, sound mixers etc, only accept PT sessions so that the cues are spotted correctly when delivering the final music and can be tweaked and mixed if needed further down the line? or is it still a case of sending on just the 2 track stereo files when finished ?

[reichman]

As a mixer, I like getting the music as a Pro Tools session. It's not required, but it's convenient. Often I'll request checkerboard stems, so the first cue is spread out over 5-10 stems, and the second cue is on another set of 5-10 stems, A/B checkerboard. Makes mixing easy, makes it easy to address client notes ("can the horns come down and the percussion come up?"). These are mixed stems, so usually there are no plug-ins and very little volume/pan automation.

But you can achieve the same thing with flat WAV files across the whole program. I often work with composers who use Logic, and you'll find that the WAV files coming from Logic have the right timecode start in the header, so you can use Spot in Pro Tools to have them fall into the right place.

Some composers use Pro Tools as a dubber, so they might have dozens of Logic songs, but as they work, they record into Pro Tools, automatically assembling all their cues into one session.

Many different ways...

[buckman]

Originally Posted by reichman

As a mixer, I like getting the music as a Pro Tools session. It's not required, but it's convenient. Often I'll request checkerboard stems, so the first cue is spread out over 5-10 stems, and the second cue is on another set of 5-10 stems, A/B checkerboard. Makes mixing easy, makes it easy to address client notes ("can the horns come down and the percussion come up?"). These are mixed stems, so usually there are no plug-ins and very little volume/pan automation.

But you can achieve the same thing with flat WAV files across the whole program. I often work with composers who use Logic, and you'll find that the WAV files coming from Logic have the right timecode start in the header, so you can use Spot in Pro Tools to have them fall into the right place.

Some composers use Pro Tools as a dubber, so they might have dozens of Logic songs, but as they work, they record into Pro Tools, automatically assembling all their cues into one session.

Many different ways...

Thank you reichman, I think this is what I was thinking, and even though there are many competent DAW's out there (of which I use most) at the end to deliver, they are usually spotted into place (frames) and compiled in Pro Tools so its all done. Plus theres the flexibility of giving stems, so that things can be turned up or down, but the majority of the automation is already rendered and flattened.

Good to know though, that stereo files can still be sent and spotted in, with the timecode within the Music name/title if you use, say Reaper to do everything in?
I guess its just down to who you are working with at the time, and what they are using

I guess what you mean by 'Some composers use Pro Tools as a dubber,' is that you can make sounds, melodies, chords, in all sorts of DAW's but compile it at the end for sending, in PT as a giant tape recorder against video? :)

[reichman]

Originally Posted by buckman

I guess what you mean by 'Some composers use Pro Tools as a dubber,' is that you can make sounds, melodies, chords, in all sorts of DAW's but compile it at the end for sending, in PT as a giant tape recorder against video? :)

Exactly. Some composers have trouble seeing the forest from the trees (and you can't blame them, writing music 14 hours a day is hard). Making a master PT session can keep them sane.

Two examples:

1. For advertising, I would be really surprised to get a PT session unless there were (8) versions of a campaign. WAV mix and stems are totally fine.

2. I'm producing the music for a TV show now, and I deliver a PT session with checkerboard stereo stems for the mixer. But in addition to that, I send the entire music edit on 50-60 tracks below the mixed stems. This allows the mixer to work fast with the stereo stems on top, but if they run into trouble, they can dive into the multitrack for really detailed work.

[buckman]

Right, thank you for your clarification!

I am just weighing up whether to buy PT in order to whether I will need it or not.

Can you just clarify what you mean exactly by ''checkerboard stereo stems''?

Thank you!

[reichman]

Originally Posted by buckman

Right, thank you for your clarification!

I am just weighing up whether to buy PT in order to whether I will need it or not.

Can you just clarify what you mean exactly by ''checkerboard stereo stems''?

Thank you!

Wait until you need it. Try a demo. Your usage of Pro Tools wouldn't require more than an hour or two of learning, so save your money until a project demands that you have it.

Checkerboard mix delivery is where cue 1 is on track A, cue 2 is on track B, cue 3 is on track A, 4 on B, etc. This is really handy when the outgoing cue needs to ring-out, and the incoming cue needs to come in at a radically different level. When you look at the two tracks, they are "checkerboarded" black clip, white space, black clip, white space, and the inverse below.

Checkerboard stems are where you do the same thing but cue 1 is on 10 tracks, and cue 2 is on another 10 tracks. Advantage here is that the mixer could use 2 music VCAs to control the A and the B of the checkerboard. And then if you needed more detail, the mixer would spill the A tracks.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by reichman

Wait until you need it. Try a demo. Your usage of Pro Tools wouldn't require more than an hour or two of learning, so save your money until a project demands that you have it.

Excellent help, thank you!

Yes i have used PT in the past, so you're right i could probably get up to speed in a hour or two playing with it again.

Since then though, the versions have changed, and its subscription based, so not sure which level version I can 'get away with' now that is compatible, for simple session delivery when the time comes?