real-time alternative to bounce-to-disk

[pcm]

DP's offline BTD is fast, but if you have synths or outboard gear, you can't use it as those elements won't be included.

Coming from the large-format console / 2" world, I would have assumed that DP would allow you to simply record whatever is going through the master fader. Not so. I called tech support twice today, and neither tech could figure out a way to do that. I sure never had. They had suggestions concerning "printing" the outboard effects returns, but that is unacceptable to workflow, as one may at any moment want to tweak a reverb send, and how are you going to do that if you have already printed the reverb returns? Not to mention the extra time it takes. Bad idea.

Suggested solution #2: Use a pair of patch cables to patch the outputs of 1-2, and route them back into inputs 3-4. Create a new audio track with it's inputs set to 3-4, and you're set. Nice and simple, but requires a pair of D-A and A-D conversions. I ran these very mixes a month ago when I still owned a motu hd192. At the time, I deemed that an okay solution. t certainly didn't sound "bad".

All my motu PCI gear has since been sold (replaced by PTHD cards), so now I have a Traveler in it's place, for use with DP, iTunes, etc. I tried the same patch trick with the Traveler. Guess what? It clearly doesn't sound as good as the hd192. Noticeably less body, noticeably inferior sounding. I base this on the fact that I was punching into the very same mix pair that I ran with the hd192. Same patch setup. A totally level playing field. The difference was super easy to hear. Okay, that solution is out. Bad idea.

So, a call to the techs. Shouldn't one be able to print a mix of what is on the master fader, WITHOUT leaving the system? A real mixing board is designed to do exactly that. Neither had a clue.

I tried to assign the master fader output to a bus, with the idea that I would then create a new stereo audio track with that bus as it's input. But then the master fader was no longer fed by the rest of the mix. No meter reading. No go. I tried a few other routing variations, but none did this simple task.

Okay, now the solution. Something I have never seen discussed here, or anywhere. Indeed, motu's own techs didn't know it.

(This trick works on the newer fw interfaces, not sure about any other ones).

There is an input (input only) bundle called Mix1. It returns the first mix bus from the MOTU Cuemix Console back to DP. This is supposedly so you can record the Cuemix console. For what reason, who knows, but it's there. However, there is a little paragraph hiding in the Traveler manual that describes a menu item called "Mix1 Return Includes Computer Output". It is not selected by default. Selecting it "mirrors back" your master fader to DP. If you then create a new stereo audio track, and select "mix1" as it's input, voila!, you can now record EVERYTHING you've been hearing on your speakers.

This works much like the Pro Tools real-time bounce to disk. EVERYTHING gets recorded: synths, outboard reverb returns, everything you hear on the speakers.

BTW, my earlier test confirmed that the convertors on the hd192 were very clearly better than the Travelers, as I was punching into the SAME TRACK with the otherwise identical mix. So the difference was easy to hear. When I did this same test using the above routing, it was clearly better than my previous analog-patch that used the hd192. By about the same degree. Of course it should have been better, as the routing was completely internal, no conversions.

To clarify, the above patch allows you to run a mix TOTALLY inside of DP, much like BTD, but in real-time, and with all the elements that BTD doesn't get.

I hope someone finds this info useful.[/i]

[supersonic]

Very neat.
Should go into tips.

[KarlSutton]

you may have saved me - can't wait to check this out

what is the latest version of CueMix?

[auptown]

pcm,

I'm not sure if there is something that I am missing in your post, but to I've always worked like this:

-Send all tracks to a stereo bus (say, bus 1-2)
-Put a master fader on that bus. I use mastering plug-ins on this master.
-Make an Aux track that has bus 1-2 as its input and whatever audio source is driving my monitors as its output. In my case, the 2408 out 1-2.
-Make a stereo audio track that has bus 1-2 as its input, and the control room monitors as its output.

Now, the Aux track (I label it CR) can be used to quickly control monitor levels, or I can leave it at 0 and use my outboard monitor controller. The master fader is just that.

I leave the stereo audio track (I label it MIX) muted normally, but anytime I want to record the mix I just punch it into record. Also, the mixes are labelled MIX-1 and so forth in the soundbites window.

Hope this helps.

[dactarus]

Hi,

Since BTD is crashing DP in my system more or less everytime, (DP5.01 with 10.3.9 on a dual 867 G4,), I changed my template project and now all my audio & aux tracks are assigned to a buss output (for exemple 9-10, instead of my main output 1-2). I've a stereo audio track, named "bounce", with 9-10 for input, and 1-2 for output, so I can record my mix in realtime without "getting out" of my computer (I use a mk1 828, so no cue mix here...). Too avoid monitoring latency, I doubled this "bounce audio" track with a "bounce aux" track : if i'm not boucing but just working on my poject, I mute (or disable) the "audio bounce", and I can hear my mix thru the "aux bounce".
I'd prefer BTD to work, but the workarounds I saw in some dsiscussions (like uncheck-check some parameters in the studio setup / harware config at every load, or clear and re-generate bundles) doesn't work in my config...?
Emmanuel

[dactarus]

Sorry, I didn't see Auptown 's post before writing mine...

[supersonic]

The approach you've stated works too but pcm's tip makes it very clean and involves a little bit less clicking. For those who're still looking for the "Mix1 Return Includes Computer Output" option it is located under the File menu in the CueMix application.

[Mr_Clifford]

Unfortunately pcm's solution (and good on him for finding it and posting, BTW) only works if you run MOTU hardware. For everyone else the AUX routing system will work fine and, if set up in a template, won't involve any extra setting up.

A lot of people in Pro Tools use this setup rather than Bounce To Disk because of the fact that if PT spits its bundle during the 'bounce' (as it commonly does even on expensive systems) and brings up a warning box, with BTD you lose the whole mix and have to try again, whereas with the AUX routing system you just rewind bar or two and pick up from where you left off - it's totally sample accuarate so you don't even need to crossfade between the takes.

[mongoose]

There is an input (input only) bundle called Mix1. ..."Mix1 Return Includes Computer Output". ...o clarify, the above patch allows you to run a mix TOTALLY inside of DP, much like BTD, but in real-time, and with all the elements that BTD doesn't get,,,/i]

One question: do we know if this returns a mix that's genuinely at the bit depth and sampling rate used in the project, or does some conversion happen in the digital loop from DP->CueMix->DP?

-m

[toodamnhip]

I too have been returning the comp audio BACK into DP and recording the 828 for AGES.

This is old hat to me...and , I hate one thing about it, it is super super easy to clip going back in this way. You see, I only use this methos when I still have live synths in the 828 inputs.... When everything is right, I record all synths to audio and DO NOT use this method...

The stereo IN track will clip from about minus 2 db using this method. Funny, when you record into a track in other scenarios, there seems to be a bit of forgiveness in the system. You can acutally hit digital zero and be ok if you hit it light. But routing through the comp BACK into DP is terribly fussing with terrible crackling if within 2 db of zero.
I do not reccommend this.

Bounce your synths, create a new bus in DP call "Int Mix Bus"...
Route evrything that was going out to your mains to the int mix Bus, including the master fader, create a stereo track, make it's input int mix bub, route this tracks outputs to your main outputs for monitoring...

Believe me,...I am 100% correct that this way is the best way,.,,

David

[TOD]

I too have been returning the comp audio BACK into DP and recording the 828 for AGES.

This is old hat to me...and , I hate one thing about it, it is super super easy to clip going back in this way. You see, I only use this methos when I still have live synths in the 828 inputs.... When everything is right, I record all synths to audio and DO NOT use this method...

The stereo IN track will clip from about minus 2 db using this method. Funny, when you record into a track in other scenarios, there seems to be a bit of forgiveness in the system. You can acutally hit digital zero and be ok if you hit it light. But routing through the comp BACK into DP is terribly fussing with terrible crackling if within 2 db of zero.
I do not reccommend this.

The Bottom Line is there is definitely a bug in BTD. I've been under the gun this last month and cannot waste time relistening to every bounce to make sure all instruments were included. I've gone the bussing route also.

Bounce your synths, create a new bus in DP call "Int Mix Bus"...
Route evrything that was going out to your mains to the int mix Bus, including the master fader, create a stereo track, make it's input int mix bub, route this tracks outputs to your main outputs for monitoring...

Believe me,...I am 100% correct that this way is the best way,.,,

David

[toodamnhip]

If you really think about it, except for individual parts, in order to save time, bouncing a whole mix to disk, i.e. BTD, is farily irresponsible.

One needs to hear any final mix, moreover, after BTD or recording to a track, it should be listened to again to ensure no clicks or crackles. the only reason btd is acceptable on a sub mix level, i.e. , individual parts, is because any anomoliês can be chacked when recording the whole mix to a stereo track

[TOD]

Believe me toodamnhip I always practice "quality control" and listen to my final mix after the BTD, but now I have to BTD 3,4 even 5 times and listen to each mix to be sure noting was missed. BTD should work the first time so I only have to listen one time then car test it and that should be all.

[toodamnhip]

Believe me toodamnhip I always practice "quality control" and listen to my final mix after the BTD, but now I have to BTD 3,4 even 5 times and listen to each mix to be sure noting was missed. BTD should work the first time so I only have to listen one time then car test it and that should be all.

Listen..
as long as this problem has been around, with many times heated debate occuring, with many saying there is no problem, many saying there is. WIth people suspecting tiny , delicacies being somehow different, worse usually. SOmesay BTD gives even a more ROBUST sound..man..hell with it..

It is obviously unstable...

I say that for the most part, put it out of your mind...

If I have ONE file, witha mastering set, and it is sounding good, then, and only then, I don;t mind a BTD and then listening to it after...

But a whole mix...?

Forget it...

It';s out of my mind...never even consider it

[toodamnhip]

Believe me toodamnhip I always practice "quality control" and listen to my final mix after the BTD, but now I have to BTD 3,4 even 5 times and listen to each mix to be sure noting was missed. BTD should work the first time so I only have to listen one time then car test it and that should be all.

Listen..
as long as this problem has been around, with many times heated debate occuring, with many saying there is no problem, many saying there is. WIth people suspecting tiny , delicacies being somehow different, worse usually. SOmesay BTD gives even a more ROBUST sound..man..hell with it..

It is obviously unstable...

I say that for the most part, put it out of your mind...

If I have ONE file, witha mastering set, and it is sounding good, then, and only then, I don;t mind a BTD and then listening to it after...

But a whole mix...?

Forget it...

It';s out of my mind...never even consider it