Master Bus Help

electropoet · Post by **electropoet** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:14 pm

Hey,
I'm finding that using a master volume track is a pain in the ass. I've started using a stereo audio track with monitor enabled and I'm finding it much better for 2 reasons. A)when I want to mix down the entire mix (outboard synths included) its much easier to just record enable the track. B)more importantly..for the final mix I like to reassign that master track (the audio master track I've set up) to say outputs 3/4 so I can run the entire mix through an outboard pre/distressor to warm things up...and I run into problems doing that with the regular master track.

Using a master volume track with the output set to 1/2 on a motu 2408 (the mirrored master outs) really seems to limit my options. For one thing...if all the tracks are set to main outs, and the master track is set to outs 1 and 2...if you try to switch the routing and feed the mix to a different set of outputs (and process the mix with the outboard pres, etc) then the master fader doesn't do sh*@ anymore...the tracks still output to the MOTU 2408 outputs 1 and 2...any one else have this dilemma?

It gets kind of tedious explaining...just wondering how y'all set up bussing and various audio bundles...for the record I use a little of everything...outboard sound modules, softsynths (reason, atmosphere, DP5 synths), multiple fx busses for plug-ins, obviously audio tracks...and i like the run the final mix through an outboard pre and compressor rather than just bounce...i think it sounds better...

please chime in with any techniques that you've found work particularly well with regards to routing and bussing...coming from other sequencers...this frequently irritates me more than anything in DP.

Thanks.
Scott

Phil O · Post by **Phil O** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 7:04 am

AFAIK (and I could be wrong) master faders can't be used for routing. Think of a master fader as the control for whatever output it's assigned to. If you want to have control over an output AND it's routing use an aux track. That's the way I use them anyway.

Phil

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:05 am

I can't remember specifically, but in using an audio track, don't you get an extra latency then of the buffer setting before it hits the output. I only mention this because of tracking purposes, for final work I could see it.

I used to do exactly what you are doing, although I mix solely in the box, so I don't run out to any outboard gear (hey that may change some day).

However, what I do now is create three busses

SYNTH BUS
DRUM BUS
VOCAL BUS

And I run all the outputs of the audio tracks/VIs whatever into these. Then, I create 3 AUX tracks that go to main out.

Now, the beauty of the aux tracks is while they do go to my master fader, I use the sends to go to something called MIX. When I want to record down a sample of everything not really being a final mix, I send MIX to an audio track. That audio track also goes to main out, so I can just disable the three aux buses then and still have all the inserts on the main channel to use for bouncing something final out. This is ideal for me.

electropoet · Post by **electropoet** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:59 pm

I don't think so...i was able to find a post where someone was using an audio track as the master track...didn't seem to complain. I just don't find the master track really all that necessary...wanted to see if someone else could explain the virtues of the master track.

TOD · Post by **TOD** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:11 am

I've also started using an audio track as my "master" however I still have a master track with my, err, mastering plugs on it. I just bus it to the stereo track. Even in 5.11, I still lose elements with bouncing, so It just makes sense to record the final mix this way.

electropoet · Post by **electropoet** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:41 pm

I've been messing around and I agree...having THE master track as an audio track makes the most since...looks like you can use a motu master track to control volume if you'd like....but i don't see the point if you want to record the final mix rather than bounce. Anyways...still looking for feedback.

rockitcity · Post by **rockitcity** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:05 pm

electropoet wrote:I don't think so...i was able to find a post where someone was using an audio track as the master track...didn't seem to complain. I just don't find the master track really all that necessary...wanted to see if someone else could explain the virtues of the master track.

I use a Master track all the time. I assign all my source track outputs to a "Mix Bus". This would include any VI's and external processor returns. (You can also have groups as grimepcoch suggested, with the group outputs assigned to the Mix Bus). The master track has this "Mix Bus" as its input, and it outputs to the main monitors. With the Input Monitoring function in DP 5.11, you can have the track record enabled and input monitored so you don't actually have to be in record to hear the mix. You can also still apply a Master Fader to the Mix Bus to control overall record level and put some final processing on the mix.

The advantages are that you don't have to render VI's or record reverb returns. When you have finished your automation, you just record the track, and hear it go down real-time. You can do punch-ins for sections that you want to update without bouncing the entire mix again (although you will have to consolidate the bites once you are happy with the result.)

The only disadvantage is that you can't do an actual "bounce-to-disk" faster than real-time. Personally, I'd rather hear the mix in real time as it goes down, since you'd have to listen to the bounced file anyway.

This is really great for long-form projects as well, since you can lay down the mix as you go. I only wish that DP had destructive record capability so I wouldn't have to consolidate the final track; oh, and automation write-to-end would be a huge time-saver as well, but that's another thread...

Bob