Heat on Aux Tracks? Bus output to Audio Track?

[Rule62]

I hope one of you DUCers can help me. I am using HEAT on a mix. I am new to it. I understand that HEAT won't apply to AUX busses (which I use lots of). I have read that the work around is to Bus the output of your Aux Bus to a new Audio Track. Does that mean that I have essentially "print" all of my AUX busses to that audio track?! If I just route them to an audio track, I cannot bounce to disk since Pro Tools won't allow you to Bounce when a track is record enabled or input monitored.

Can any of you help?

[KMcK]

Bounce To Disk is not your friend, you should try printing your mixes in your PT sessions. In addition to allowing you to use Audio Tracks in input mode as Aux's w/HEAT, there other benefits to printing your mixes this way; i.e. you are also able to export your mixes to multiple formats more quickly, and perform quick mastering or edits w/o having to create a new session. I believe it's generally the preferred method these days, or at least everyone I know prints their mixes this way, although everybody is usually printing stems that I deal with so that may be why. Basically you just need to set up a Print Bus and send all tracks to that bus with a stereo audio track with that bus as its input and record your mix on that track.

[Rule62]

Ok, got it. The only way to use HEAT on AUX is to bus to Audio tracks. I WILL start printing my mixes in a PT session. That will eliminate lots of headaches. Thanks!!!

[WernerF]

+1 to what KMcK said. I always buss auxs to audio tracks. I also have a separate audio track that, of course, I keep in input and buss all VI's to.

[Micks_Mix]

Can someone explain me, what the main problems with BTD are? What is the advantage of printing the mix within the session? I always use BTD with "convert after bounce" checked and had no problems so far... except the noise tail with PT 5.1. But that one seems to be fixed.

[Eric Lambert]

Originally Posted by Micks_Mix

Can someone explain me, what the main problems with BTD are?

There are no problems with it, it's just an issue of workflow. Some people prefer to print mixes within their session and others prefer to BTD. I've been bouncing for years -- it's reliable and sounds as it should.

[jeremyroberts]

Originally Posted by Micks_Mix

Can someone explain me, what the main problems with BTD are? What is the advantage of printing the mix within the session?

bus/record to session "RTS" has a few workflow advantages, including:

1. all bounces are time aligned. very useful for no-vocal, no-bgv, and printing stems

2. if you hear something during the bounce, you don't have to abort. You can complete the pass (or simply stop), then go figure out what you heard (fix it), and then go back in with destructive record.

3. There is no reason NOT to work this way -- BTD's origins go back to ancient time, when the computer could not even process 4 tracks of audio while the UI was active.

BTD does have a few workflow advantages as well -- so having it your tool belt is a good thing. Use the most appropriate tool for the job, right?

[formfunction]

Originally Posted by Micks_Mix

Can someone explain me, what the main problems with BTD are? What is the advantage of printing the mix within the session? I always use BTD with "convert after bounce" checked and had no problems so far... except the noise tail with PT 5.1. But that one seems to be fixed.

Here we go again. Use the search function and you will come up with TONS of good info on this subject. ff

[Eric Lambert]

Originally Posted by jeremyroberts

bus/record to session "RTS" has a few workflow advantages, including:

1. all bounces are time aligned. very useful for no-vocal, no-bgv, and printing stems

2. if you hear something during the bounce, you don't have to abort. You can complete the pass (or simply stop), then go figure out what you heard (fix it), and then go back in with destructive record.

3. There is no reason NOT to work this way -- BTD's origins go back to ancient time, when the computer could not even process 4 tracks of audio while the UI was active.

1. Either method is time-aligned.

2. I've very rarely needed to abort a Bounce and I assume that goes for most people. However, if the track is long (film... ouch!) it would be a nightmare to abort mid-bounce.

3. The fact that BTD has been around forever makes it no less relevant today.

#2 is a good reason to print to a track.

[jeremyroberts]

Originally Posted by Eric Lambert

1. Either method is time-aligned.

2. I've very rarely needed to abort a Bounce and I assume that goes for most people. However, if the track is long (film... ouch!) it would be a nightmare to abort mid-bounce.

3. The fact that BTD has been around forever makes it no less relevant today.

#2 is a good reason to print to a track.

-- the benefit of RTS is PLAYLISTS... print a dozen mixes to the same playlist and then edit (time aligned). BTD requires an additional step to bring your bounces into the session.

-- my point about BTD being ancient was that in the old days, there were no playlists, and the machines simply didn't have the juice to pull off RTS -- and there were no playlists - not that it wasn't accurate or sonically transparent.

I use BTD when I DON'T want to record into a playlist (and then export).

My point is that there are workflow benefits from both methods -- use the most appropriate tool for your job.