V-Racks, Large Templates, and Workflow

[BKK-OZ]

I had asked Killa for pics of templates....

I wonder if there would be any point in sharing the templates themselves?

[FMiguelez]

I had asked Killa for pics of templates....

I wonder if there would be any point in sharing the templates themselves?

It would probably be as useful as sharing compressor or EQ settings

Looking at other people's templates can be good to get different ideas or check out other workflows, but since they reflect personal idiosyncrasies, you rarely find a happy match (unless you like a general idea and adapt it to make it your own way).

[BKK-OZ]

It would probably be as useful as sharing compressor or EQ settings

So, you got any compressor or EQ settings I can have a look at?

[Killahurts]

I had asked Killa for pics of templates, but this is all so mentally intensive when “thought about”, that any pics from anyone would help....

I don't have an easy method of posting pics here. I've done it before, with one of those free pic hosting sites, but..

I tried V-Racks for a while, but I ended up going back to having VIs as actual tracks. It just offers more flexibility, and I can see everything in the TO. This is really important for my console/controller as well, as it doesn't see the V-Racks, only what is an actual track.

I don't know if there is any real processing gains to be had with V-Racks or not, but until it becomes a problem, I'm sticking with full-on tracks.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

If you switch sequences a lot and use the same VIs they need to reload every time. Not so with vracks. Big time saver especially on multi-cue projects.

[Killahurts]

If you switch sequences a lot and use the same VIs they need to reload every time. Not so with vracks. Big time saver especially on multi-cue projects.

Absolutely right! That was the biggest reason I tried V-Racks out for VIs in the first place. I really wanted it to work for my workflow, but alas..

With V-Racks, any track volume automation would have to be done with MIDI, which just doesn't have the precision I need.. I could just take the time to render the tracks to audio, but then I would have to be absolutely committed to the part the way it is, because to change a note later would constitute opening the whole thing back up, an even bigger time waster..

Also, if I'm going to render MIDI into audio, I like to use the Freeze command (rather than BTD), because it sets everything up for me, turns off the old track, puts it into the right outputs, aux sends, etc. I can't seem to get the V-Rack tracks to freeze, I guess because they're not selectable in the TO.

[frankf]

If you switch sequences a lot and use the same VIs they need to reload every time. Not so with vracks. Big time saver especially on multi-cue projects.

Absolutely right! That was the biggest reason I tried V-Racks out for VIs in the first place. I really wanted it to work for my workflow, but alas..

With V-Racks, any track volume automation would have to be done with MIDI, which just doesn't have the precision I need.. I could just take the time to render the tracks to audio, but then I would have to be absolutely committed to the part the way it is, because to change a note later would constitute opening the whole thing back up, an even bigger time waster..

Also, if I'm going to render MIDI into audio, I like to use the Freeze command (rather than BTD), because it sets everything up for me, turns off the old track, puts it into the right outputs, aux sends, etc. I can't seem to get the V-Rack tracks to freeze, I guess because they're not selectable in the TO.

My VIs live in a V-rack. I return the main outputs via a named bus to an aux track. Same with additional bundles published by the VI. Set the VI instance level at 0 in the v-rack and forget about it. All the automation, freezing that you mention you need are done with the aux tracks. Some here bus directly to a stereo track instead of an aux. Either way you get all the advantages of the v-rack plus the features you want and benefits of v-racks that MLC mentioned.


Frank Ferrucci

[ironchef_marc]

Yes indeed you simply return your V-Racks to an aux in TO you can freeze and do regular volume automation.

Another advantage I find (as I explained in an earlier post here) your template can have your favorite sounds/modules/VI etc. all set up (routed and labelled) but all disabled so when starting a new project or new cue you simply enable what you need. That way your template will load fast.

[toodamnhip]

If you switch sequences a lot and use the same VIs they need to reload every time. Not so with vracks. Big time saver especially on multi-cue projects.

You can set VE Pro to “preserve” and “decouple”, this will allow you to change DP sequences without changing VE Pro.

[FMiguelez]

If you switch sequences a lot and use the same VIs they need to reload every time. Not so with vracks. Big time saver especially on multi-cue projects.

You can set VE Pro to “preserve” and “decouple”, this will allow you to change DP sequences without changing VE Pro.

+1

One just needs to be VERY careful when using those modes. It's easy to accidentally mess up what they load (or what DP saves from them) with certain combinations of the above. I always save the VE Pro projects locally in case some of that happens (and it has happened lots of times here)

Never the less, I still like having all my VIs in V-Rakcs. Currently, I've been thinking about returning my reverbs and delays to the TO and duplicate this chunk as many times to match the number of pieces I may want, especially if I modify my template to accommodate more than one piece per project (if they are too different they would need different FXs settings, and the plug parameters can't be automated in V-Racks).

[Killahurts]

My VIs live in a V-rack. I return the main outputs via a named bus to an aux track. Same with additional bundles published by the VI. Set the VI instance level at 0 in the v-rack and forget about it. All the automation, freezing that you mention you need are done with the aux tracks. Some here bus directly to a stereo track instead of an aux. Either way you get all the advantages of the v-rack plus the features you want and benefits of v-racks that MLC mentioned.

Awesome.. I never even thought of that! The only issue I can see is that (IIRC) DP has a limit of 64 busses, that's 32 stereo busses. I have 12 (6 stereo) busses that feed FX sends, so that leaves 20 stereo VIs I could have.. is that accurate?

Even if so, that may be enough for most of the work I do.

[frankf]

Awesome.. I never even thought of that! The only issue I can see is that (IIRC) DP has a limit of 64 busses, that's 32 stereo busses. I have 12 (6 stereo) busses that feed FX sends, so that leaves 20 stereo VIs I could have.. is that accurate?

Even if so, that may be enough for most of the work I do.

You know I've never counted and I have a lot of busses. I'll have to take a look at my templates and the manual. My reverbs live in a (separate) v-rack also, some, like Altiverb with multiple instances and I bus to them and from them. The model I use for all this is really that of a hardware mixer with external hardware synth modules and samplers and effects that I "patch" to/from



Frank Ferrucci

[labman]

You can increase your amount of DP busses in, if I remember correctly, the 'studio setup' window. I don't know the name. But I do know you get that prefs box when you option click on the 'gear' - 'configure hardware' icon tool.

[Shooshie]

To my knowledge, DP has no limits of any kind except RAM. It's always been like that.

Shooshie

[FMiguelez]

One only has access to 100 stereo internal DP buses (I wish we could have at least twice as many).

That's one reason I always recommed using AUDIO tracks (and not Aux tracks) for the returns of VIs. Otherwise, one just wastes buses for nothing (if you want to print them easily). It's just redundant...