How to filmscore in Digital Performer

[HCMarkus]

You are very welcome. Chunks are just so cool. Just be careful about getting DP projects TOO big... For albums, I still recommend the one "project" per song approach, although I did do an album (mostly acoustic, but including a few big numbers) this summer in one DP project, and survived! So did the album.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Here is what I would like to do:

1) I would like to create streamers and flutter/punches to a video and export it to use in Logic Studio or Sonar 8. First which one of the 3 video options do I use?

2) When I bounced to disk to get the streamers onto video everything works great when opened in logic but in Sonar on the Pc the video wont playbut thumbnails are created. Is this normal? Or do I need Quicktime Pro to play the file in Sonar 8?

3) I know the find tempo feature in DP is the best out of all the other DAW's on the market. Yet I never really understood what composers use it for? Perhaps someone can explain how and for what they use it for?

There's a great book published by MOTU on these subjects. It's simply called "The Manual" and sells for about $500 on the street. If you upgrade from the Logic manual direct from MOTU I think it's about $300. In either case, the purchase of The Manual comes with a free copy of Digital Performer!

[dexterflex]

Thanks but perhaps you could read my original question rather than telling me to use the manual. As I said man people consider Digital Performer to be the program when it comes to filmscoring. So as I would like to get into this field I purchased the software I thought I should be using since all the "Pros" are using it. But frankly I must say the MIDI editing features are really lacking compared to cubase or Logic. I mean I doubt I will ever score a movie with a real orchestra so my mockups will have to be top notch. And to be honest I kinda regret buying DP. Perhaps the problem is I used logic and cubase in the past. And now that cubase 5 has VST expression and more piano roll features I think I just might jump ship rather than do the DP7 update. And me asking questions about scoring to film using DP was to see if their was perhaps something missing wish I misunderstood from the manual.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Well, I can't agree at all. The main reason I went to DP was for it's extensive MIDI abilities. WHat do you feel it's lacking in that area? Is there something it doesn't do???

[dexterflex]

Well in cubase the piano roll view allows you to view notes in velocity, Part, Channel, Gridmatch. Also like in logic the notes with higher velocity have a darker colour. Also quick nudge tools and octave buttons, Chord display. Mind you the streamers and score que in DP is great. I also like the idea of custom icons like in logic. Great to use VSL icons and other VST library icons when working with a big template. I guess the problem is I've used a few suquencers and each one had a few things that I felt I really liked.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Dp does most if not all of that. You just need to know where to look. Again, the manual is (or should be) your friend. I have no doubt DP is the MIDI editor hands down.

[audios]

Hey guys,

So I've been doing some reading on the internet but I'm still unclear about a few things.

1) What program do you guys use to burn-in smpte timecode into the video? I've read that most the time the director will give you a video with it already on the picture but for scoring practice I would have to do that myself.

2) what frame rate are most of you using? And how will I know which one to use?

I have been using FCP to window burn for a long time until i found this little gem. Works perfectly once you have the right QT format (Either H.264 or .DV)

http://www.tokitest.fr/english/tokitc.html

[audios]

Read again: I never said DP wasn't capable of doing post sound (technically, any multi-track DAW that can sync to video is capable of being used for post sound; I once even witnessed a Tascam 688 MIDIStudio eight-track cassette recorder being used to post a film!), I just can't imagine doing it. I actually know people who have posted relatively simple broadcast quality sound jobs with DP, and now, with Final Cut Pro integration, I'm sure it's even easier. However, ProTools and, to a lesser degree, Nuendo are better suited to the task. Logic doesn't even factor into that equation. That's no slight against DP, but it started out life and probably still remains a composer's tool, while ProTools was always a straight-up audio rig geared towards post sound and multitrack audio recording/engineering. The fact that you can engineer and mix a professional audio project inside DP, and, to a lesser extent, compose music inside of ProTools shouldn't be overlooked, but even as a die-hard "DP for everything" advocate, I would have to reach for ProTools, or hire someone with a ProTools rig, if I wanted to post sound for a movie, TV show or video.

It's probably an unfair and outdated assessment, though, because DP's audio capabilities, especially for a native DAW, are getting better and better all the time, while Digidesign has decided to shore up ProTools' MIDI capabilities. At this point, I would at least feel comfortable (especially considering DP is the only DAW I now use) to mix songs/albums inside of DP, instead of the old days, where I'd want to use DP for composing only and actually mix the audio in ProTools or something else. Eventually, I'm sure both programs will get to the point where they're about equal on the audio and MIDI fronts.

I couldn't disagree more (about using PT instead of DP for dubbing sessions) I have been posting commercials (broadcast and cable deliverables), documentaries, short films, and theatrical features, ADR sessions (both in studio and Zephyr) in DP since 1998 without error, complaint from any distributor or facing something I couldn't accomplish in DP vs PT. I worked with Pro Tools in 1994 with a new non-linear editor called AVID, on its introduction and found that it was going to be a useful tool someday but the expense then and now for a system that will accomplish the same sonic quality as DP was foreboding.

You mentioned this too and I had to laugh;

I once even witnessed a Tascam 688 MIDIStudio eight-track cassette recorder being used to post a film!)

Reason being is that during the 70's my studio cut audio for commercials and programming in an analog room using a NEVE 8038 console and a 3M-79 24-track to a Studer 2-Track. I remember the director bringing in a giant SONY 3/4" editing deck, plugging into one audio channel and play the 2-track mix on the fly with watch the 3/4" video master. Sync you ask? Sync was my thumb on either the feed reel or take-iup reel to flange the master audio to sync while recording the video. i got to where a 30-second spot could be done in maybe 2-3 passes.


My first DAW was 2-channel Turtle Beach, followed by a 2-channel Sound Forge DAW and the Spectrasonics (before Atmosphere) multichannel DAW. When it came time to go to a MAC rather than PC, i looked very hard at PT and DP. Visited with engineers, dubbing mixers in LA and London, factory rep's, etc., before making the decision to get DP. In my room i bounce back and forth on projects. One may be a sound editing/designing job and the next may be scoring a feature. So i needed the best of both worlds in my daily work-flow. Most of the features i do (with some exceptions) are independently released for DVD or download. And i have sent up deliverable stems for MAG and direct transfers to 35mm and 70mm film and no differences in quality. Pro Tools can do the same, but a HD3 or TDM system approaching $25K with peripherals, is just not practical. Also, 90% of my work leaves my room and goes to a dubbing stage for final mixing in stereo and 5.1 fold downs. So if the bits are correct (usually 24/96K) and in sync with the work-print, why use Pro Tools? And I would also argue that It isn't more efficient than DP, just more costly to create the bits the same way DP does. It comes down to A/D and D/A, proper engineering techniques that i transferred from the analog days and a DAW that is deep enough in features as DP is to deliver what the producer needs. I just find that DP does it better than Pro Tools and way less expensive of an investment. If my room was a full blown dubbing room in LA, Pro Tools might be a better choice because everyone seems to think its the only choice for state of ye art. So you'd need to be compatible. And for that reason, I'm sure PT may be the better choice under that roof.

I have PT 7.4 here in my room because some producers insist in sending me PT sessions to fix, edit or complete sound edits or score. The first thing i do is export all the stems as BWAV's and import them into a DP session, do all my work, then export back to Pro tools and send them their precious PT session with the files they wanted. But my work-flow always remains in DP. Forget OMF type-2 transfers. DP wants $1200 just for the plug to accept OMF files. DP does it inclusively.

I think Digidesign did a marvelous marketing campaign from day one. They touted themselves as the "industry standard" and do to this day. And, they were for a long time. But when there is one company with a monopoly on a concept it always invites competition. Which is good. Since they (Digidesign) placed themselves in that spotlight, engineers, dubbing rooms and project studios all over the world felt as though they had to have Pro Tools in order to be professional and be users of the "standard of the industry". Not so true these days. i think that Nuendo kicks PT's rear as a live session DAW with a PC system. i have heard identical sessions recorded in Nashville and Austin and they were a/b'd between Pro Tools and Nuendo, same UAL-2 plugs, A/D-D/A Apogees, etc., etc., and I defy anyone with a pair of real ears to tell the differences. There are none, except cash outlay for the systems.

OK, enough soap boxing. To each his own i suppose. But for me, I'd rather save the difference in cost for my vacation/retirement house in USVI.

[digidave]

I have PT 7.4 here in my room because some producers insist in sending me PT sessions to fix, edit or complete sound edits or score. The first thing i do is export all the stems as BWAV's and import them into a DP session, do all my work, then export back to Pro tools and send them their precious PT session with the files they wanted. But my work-flow always remains in DP. Forget OMF type-2 transfers. DP wants $1200 just for the plug to accept OMF files. DP does it inclusively.

I, too, am feeling pressure from some producers to accommodate the ProTools "industry standard". Do you mean Digidesign wants $1200 just for the OMF plug? Wow. So, how do you handle the export/import process? (What do you mean by "stems"? I see no mention of that term in the DP manual.) If you are just importing PT audio files into your DP session, do you have to manually set up frame rates, start times, offsets and whatnot? Sounds like it could be a little tedious.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Of course not all related terms are going to be in the manual, just as you won't find "augmented chords" or "spotting session" in the manual. DAW software is a tool designed to do what you need, not tell you everything you need to know in order to score a film.

Tedious? I prefer intensive. Producing a good score and delivering it in the format needed, on time, with the right levels, etc. is a fairly technical thing to do and it does require specialized knowledge and skills. Those are both outside the scope of any program manual and surely outside the scope of this discussion and forum. If you have specific questions about problems you are encountering, you will usually get an answer here. But the craft and terms (such as stems) are best obtained through education, whether that is at a school, a books(s), online research, apprenticing, experience, or just Googling the terms.

Such as this... link

[digidave]

So "STEMS" is lingo for submixes that, when combined, if all referenced to 0dB, will replicate the complete full stereo mix, while also offering the flexibility to adjust these elements to accommodate the picture. Please correct me if this is wrong.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

That's pretty much it. Editors may make different kinds of requests as to what you put in each stem such as each instrument, low frequency instruments, solo v. ensemble, percussion v. melodic, etc. based on what their needs are. In the hands of less experienced, insensitive, or completely unmusical editors, stems can destroy your score. In the hands of a talented editor, it can enhance it.

I one gave complete stems (actually my DP files, which I will NEVER do again!) to an Emmy nominated editor. There was a composite sound effect (I did SFX on that picture as well) and he took the sound apart in the surround mix and placed the three composite elements of the effect across the surround field. It sounded cool, but totally destroyed the effect. In the end I had to completely re-do the the surround mix. Unfortunately, in the 35mm print, an unnamed rep from a large and popular noise reducing and encoding company along with a few monkeys in a post studio convinced the producer the mix should be mono and "distressed" by muting the high end. The premiere was a disaster. Not only could you not hear a note of music or any SFX but the very loudest, but even the dialogue was barely audible. Needless to say, the film never made it to any great success.

First time producer, BTW. He was convinced he was "reinventing" filmmaking. Yeah, like Edsel reinvented the automobile. Oh yeah, stems... back, on topic.

[dp-user]

Often separate stems of dialogue, music and effects are required at the final stage as well to ease in localizing the video/film. The dialogue track and be replaced with a local-language-dubbing stem, and the effects track can be touched up for cases where the effects should be changed for different local sounds (the classic one here being swapping out a European double-ring telephone sound for the American single-ring sound). I guess my point is that most people think about stems as atomic element sub-mixes that are used as input to the final mix, but it's useful to bear in mind that they have use in "final" delivery and archiving as well...

[audios]

I one gave complete stems (actually my DP files, which I will NEVER do again!) to an Emmy nominated editor. There was a composite sound effect (I did SFX on that picture as well) and he took the sound apart in the surround mix and placed the three composite elements of the effect across the surround field.

MIDILIFE- Check this thread and all else who want to jump in;


http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... =6&t=39864

[azusa749a]

Such as this... link

Hey MLC, thanks for this little gem.