Bounce to disk vs. printing to track

[mr.armadillo]

I'm using delay compensation in PT 7, and when I print the final mix to a track, everything is perfectly in place - except for the last sample, which is always zeroed. When I bounce to disk though, the first 2 samples are truncated, leaving 2 samples of zero at the end. While 2 samples are not that much and you certainly won't hear that in theatre, it's still irritating. I've also noticed that printing to track results in more accurate automation processing than bounce to disk. Are there any other differences? What do you guys use, bounce or print?

[Wellnitz]

Hi mr. armadillo,

in most cases i prefer record to a track for 2 reasons.

First, your mix stays in the same session. From there you can export it in any format you like.

Second , if you need to make a change and that will happen constantly, you can make this very easy with destructive record on and you only allocate the area you need to change instead of bounce the hole mix.

my 2 cents

Jochen

[ChannelZero]

I've also noticed that printing to track results in more accurate automation processing than bounce to disk.

how do you know this?

[TVPostSound]

Quote:

I've also noticed that printing to track results in more accurate automation processing than bounce to disk.



how do you know this?

We have compared bounces to track mixes!!!!

[JKD99]

FWIW, I don't know why ANYONE bounces anymore, especially when you're doing post (meaning long reels, not 3-4 minute songs). Just being able to punch in on the mix makes it so much more flexible and ultimately timesaving than bouncing. The only time I use bounce is when I have to generate a stereo interleaved file for someone, and even then it's bouncing an already-created split-stereo file, not a running mix.

My 2¢