pt9 bouncing techniques

[randomtech]

i dont mean to start the whole age old discussion of bouncing in pro tools, just looking for a couple of pointers here and there from people who are experienced in bouncing final projects.

after a bit of research, my first inclination is to do the following:

1. take a finished project and route all tracks plus master fader (with appropriate eq, compression, etc.) thru an aux

2. record that aux's output to an new audio track, then export the recorded audio

3. import the audio file into a new project to make final adjustments before bouncing to desired format within pt.

Would this be the correct way to proceed in getting the most accurate final product? Moreover, is it possible to get a carbon copy bounce using the stock plugins in pt9?

[Talisker]

I could never really grasp the advantage of the export instead of bouncing method. Recording the song to a track takes just as long as bouncing. And then people say : " yes, but once, you've done that you can quickly make little changes and export it again". A lot of my little changes are changes in volume....so record the entire song again.
Plus, you have to reroute that Aux-send depending, whether you wanna listen to your session or record it. Or you have to leave your exporting channel on record all the time...but then try to listen to a soloed channel....
I just bounce my sessions.
Oh and yes, the stuff, I do not give away for mastering, runs through a special mastering session (in fact, I use logic for that, since it provides more useful onboard plugs for mastering AND that program can bounce offline)

thats just my opinion

[CME]

I'll agree that I've never found the bounce to be problematic. I can see the advantages to recording the master buss as you go and once done just export. But to me there is something about stepping back and listening to the entire track one more time. However I'm talking short songs. If you're doing any kind of long piece I totally get recording while you go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Craig F]

native or HD w/ Destructive Punch?

[randomtech]

Well, I figured that in general it made more sense to make use of PT's recording capabilities. But if directly bouncing is the way to go, then it certainly makes things easier by a few steps.
Also i have heard that in some circumstances the direct bounce to disk from a finished project can result in some unpredictability within PT. For example, a track with heavy amounts of automation becoming corrupted. Not sure if how valid of a concern that is.

Now im interested in the use of logic for mastering purposes as well. I have never used it for anything other than composition, as I assumed PT was the ultimate platform for finalizing. Would it be safe to assume that logic might have better set of stock tools for such?

[Stig Eliassen]

I do this:

• all tracks are routed to a stereo aux "called "2MIX")
• "2MIX" is routed to digital outs 1-2, and to stereo bus 51-52 (called "*RTD*" - Record To Disk)
• a muted stereo audio track (called "Song Name") with inputs *RTD* ready to print

When I'm done with the mix, I record-enable "Song Name", and print the mix. It's convenient, and the upside is that I can interact with PT during the print. With Bounce to disk, you'd have to discard the entire bounce if you hear something weird, which you don't have to with RTD.

[CalebB]

FWIW I record to a stereo track through a master aux channel for the benefits posted above and I just want to say that I often wish I could have a mix faster than real time. I'll usually be taking the song on a thumb drive to my car where I can listen to the mix on the way to wherever (and I may not have the 5 minutes right then). So it's not that I don't respect listening in real time because I will be listening to the mix 150 times before it's done anyway (as I work on it) so there's no good reason why PT should force me to listen to the mix in real time (that I know of).

[Styles Bitchly]

I used to bounce to disk all the time, but since upgrading to the latest version of PT9 (for Mac 10.6.8) my bounce has become intermittent - sometimes it works, sometimes it does nothing. So, I've started printing to a separate track, and I actually like this better. I can see the waveform as it's being recorded, and I can spot check portions of the finished track without having to import a bounced file. I really don't know why I haven't done it this way all along.

[O.G. Killa]

I print stems and mixes all at the same time within protools. The thing about any software is it isn't always backward compatible even though they say it is.

Five years from now the plugins you used maybe have been upgraded and outdated or the plugin company went out of business and you had to stop using their plugins because they were no longer compatible with new OS releases, etc... and so 5 years from now when opening a session you did today, none of the plugins will open correctly. I have had this happen to me personally on many occasions. Soft Synths, plugins, daws, etc... the only thing that has actually remained constant since the late 80's/early 90's are WAV and AIF files. WAV and AIF files I made in 1991 still open today in any daw. But a session I did in StudioVision or Cakewalk Pro Audio or Digital Performer in 1993 won't open today with 100% reliability. But WAV files printed from those sessions will.

So I record my multitrack mix to instrument stems, so that the mix of each group of instruments is recorded in addition to the full mix. I normally do stereo tracks for everything...

I'll have Drumset, Drum loops, Perc, Bass, GTR A-C, Keys A-C, Strings A&B, Brass A&B, Woodwinds A&B, Lead Vocal, Dbl Vocals, BG Vocals, Adlib vocals, and FXs stems depending on the piece of music.

All of those stems then feed Full Mix, Instrumental Mix (No Vocals), and Alt Mix tracks (I use the "mult" feature of PT outputs but you could also do sends). With 256 busses now in PT9 and 10, it's easy to do this and not run out of busses.

The great thing about protools and delay compensation is that you can setup all of this simultaneously and set all these stem and mix tracks to "input Monitor" mode (little green "I" on each track) and solo safe. Then you start mixing your tracks as you normally would. Once the mix is ready, you record enable all of your stems and mix tracks and print them all simultaneously.

Then 5 years down the road, if you need to open up that song for whatever reason (maybe a famous artist wants to buy the song from you or the song might be used in a film) you have all the stereo WAV files of each instrument group. You can even open it in another DAW, you don't need to worry about opening the protools session file or making sure you have all the same plugins. Putting all the stems lined up together at 0dB in any daw gives you your full mix (or full mix without bus compressor). It's a great way to get a print of "the mix" while still maintaining the individual tracks. If you someday need to do a 5.1 mix of your song or a dance remix or another artist and producer are going to do the song, no problem... you have the stems to do it from.

[Stig Eliassen]

Originally Posted by O.G. Killa

I print stems and mixes all at the same time within protools. The thing about any software is it isn't always backward compatible even though they say it is.

Five years from now the plugins you used maybe have been upgraded and outdated or the plugin company went out of business and you had to stop using their plugins because they were no longer compatible with new OS releases, etc... and so 5 years from now when opening a session you did today, none of the plugins will open correctly. I have had this happen to me personally on many occasions. Soft Synths, plugins, daws, etc... the only thing that has actually remained constant since the late 80's/early 90's are WAV and AIF files. WAV and AIF files I made in 1991 still open today in any daw. But a session I did in StudioVision or Cakewalk Pro Audio or Digital Performer in 1993 won't open today with 100% reliability. But WAV files printed from those sessions will.

So I record my multitrack mix to instrument stems, so that the mix of each group of instruments is recorded in addition to the full mix. I normally do stereo tracks for everything...

I'll have Drumset, Drum loops, Perc, Bass, GTR A-C, Keys A-C, Strings A&B, Brass A&B, Woodwinds A&B, Lead Vocal, Dbl Vocals, BG Vocals, Adlib vocals, and FXs stems depending on the piece of music.

All of those stems then feed Full Mix, Instrumental Mix (No Vocals), and Alt Mix tracks (I use the "mult" feature of PT outputs but you could also do sends). With 256 busses now in PT9 and 10, it's easy to do this and not run out of busses.

The great thing about protools and delay compensation is that you can setup all of this simultaneously and set all these stem and mix tracks to "input Monitor" mode (little green "I" on each track) and solo safe. Then you start mixing your tracks as you normally would. Once the mix is ready, you record enable all of your stems and mix tracks and print them all simultaneously.

Then 5 years down the road, if you need to open up that song for whatever reason (maybe a famous artist wants to buy the song from you or the song might be used in a film) you have all the stereo WAV files of each instrument group. You can even open it in another DAW, you don't need to worry about opening the protools session file or making sure you have all the same plugins. Putting all the stems lined up together at 0dB in any daw gives you your full mix (or full mix without bus compressor). It's a great way to get a print of "the mix" while still maintaining the individual tracks. If you someday need to do a 5.1 mix of your song or a dance remix or another artist and producer are going to do the song, no problem... you have the stems to do it from.

That's definitely a nice and tidy way to do it. How do you deal with FX (reverbs, delays)? I often let multiple "groups" (e.g. vox, guitars, keys) share the same reverbs and delays, so there's no way for me to print those "group" returns separately in one pass.

Thoughts?