Hello Guys.

Yesterday I posted a track here on the site, the thing is I am not much into Mixing and mastering I prefer composing but I admit this is something I better learn to do.
My question is I keep changing the music till the last second so I keep it in MIDI and then bounce the whole song and master it.
is there an advantage to bouncing each separate part to audio first ? and should I do it with effects send and Inserts or just the Raw Instrument and the re-apply the effects and the sends ?
can someone point me to the way of doing this. I've seen some videos but they always start from bounced track without showing how they got there.
I hope my question is clear sorry for the weak English.

Thank you in advance

 

An obvious advantage would be the CPU consumption, especially if you bounce with FX.

Another, often mentioned advantage, could be progression. Once you bounced a track, you don't change it and move on in the arragement/composition. But since you said that you're changing the the music 'til the end this step would only result in more work for you, not less.

 

Last edited: Feb 26, 2021

I think that @No Avenger provided you with the best answer. I am going to expand on it.

Finality/Commitment- You just cant keep on going. There has to be a time when you need to stop. Rendering to audio will force that to take place.
CPU/Resources - Less CPU/Ram consumption. You can take advantage of oversampling, and using some of those heavy plugins that are known for bringing projects to a halt. (did I mention DIva or AA)
Arrangement/Editing It becomes easier and you can do many things. Take a track and reverse it. Pitch bend it. Chop it. Invert sections. Easier to look at a waveform than midi notes.
Consistency - Your synths may sound different each time they process the same MIDI instructions, As a result your mix may not sound the same the next time around.
Compatibility/collaboration - No more worries about compatibility issues when wanting to collaborate with others. No fear of not being able to use your project 10 years from now due to plugin incompatibility.

 

Usually I bounce, manually edit/restore in rx (clicks, some resonance part (select frequency and gain), adaptive phase rotation if offset from center (better for extra headroom, everything in center of axis), mute if Noise or some stuff louder than silence, dc offset etc etc). Then paste in project.
There are many interesting stuff happens outside DAW as well.... I also clean all sample shots/Drum hits/fx sample which are in projects. Usually all sample need cleaning/Processing, even there is almost silent artifact - after compression, expansion, exciting, saturation, equing it maybe louder. All recordings on mix go to rx. Many other things etc.......before mastering and after mastering audio goes to some revision, extra cleaning, src, dithering and so on. That's is why my audio is digitally clean, but analog-emulated and mojo-dirtified. Vocals also have no clicks, mouth crackling, background audio, rumble, etc.
But it eats too much time...

 

These fucking Russians come up with some shit. "Mojo-dirtified"

 

thank you for the input.

 

Thank you for the input. one note though is I keep things in midi as I don't look at midi as much as I look at the Score it helps me a lot in arranging chords, harmonies and overlapping melodies. force of habit I guess as I started in Finale...

 

Thank you for the input, much appreciated.

 

Simple answer is very loud moaning YESSSSS!!!

 

I rather do not, But have to because of cpu usage.

 

it takes balls to bounce.

 

When it's time to bounce I make a separate project file, so there are two project files: one with midi tracks (just in case I ever go back to it), the other with bounced tracks (for mixing).

 

most people forget that before you can produce something you have to create a works, so be happy that you already got the most important part. ;)


now to your question, you can do that, but you dont have to. most people will not do that and prefer to export a stereo premaster right from the music arrangement/mixing session or however you want to call that - simply because it is possible.


but it can also be interesting to export stems and then sleep over it and the next day do the gain staging and the audio mastering.

this would replicate the work step "recording to tape/into a DAW" for your ITB composing/using virtual instruments and will, among other things, force you to decide when the composition is finished(!) and the mixing begins.

i will give you one more example where it can be good practice - or to be exact, unavoidable - and that is when you use different programs.

for example some people use programming languages to make music and then later a classic DAW to mix it traditionally. or you might watn to compose and arrange on your laptop and at home you have protools hardware. here you also might want to export stems and totally seperate the two work steps from each other.

 

...and cpu use and compatibility are also good points which might fit to you or not.

and it is fact a good practice not to use EDL & co nonsense but just export whole stems which all cover the full length of the track no matter what is on them. you will be compatible with almost everything which is able to read and play audiofiles of x quality and y channels.

 

ok, a long question: I feel like I'm about halfway done with a track after committing it all to audio in Logic. I process most everything with ITB effects after recording each part/stem, but not as input inserts during recording. I like the plugins I have available to use, and do not have much in terms of outboard effects. Is it even a "good practice" to record a source, ex: hardware synth, with effects applied on the way in to the DAW? You get whatever you print, but it also sounds really elaborate to set up and expect it to all function correctly and repetitively.(with more room to make mistakes)...

 

Depends on your approach, and context in which they will be used. There is not a strict rule when it comes to recording. I personally find myself recording dry 80% unless I decide to run the synth through a preamp or a guitar amp. Indeed, the majority of the time I want the synth engine to be the focus, and not he other way around. Moreover, you want as much flexibility as you can have. Applying and committing to FX decisions early can be counterproductive. Once you start adding other elements, the FX that sounded so great by itself is not longer cutting it. One thing to keep in mind is that synths onboard FX are very limited and there are great available hardware and software options.

 

this certainly never crossed my mind...

 

Thank you for the input and your time. much appreciated

 

I work exclusively ITB. in fact the only keyboard I have, my Roland XV88 is used solely for inputting notes, so I am not the one to help you 100%. but I think it all comes down to how good a synth player you are. as you said can you put up with the mistakes, if any? if not I think it's more flexible to apply effects later.

 

i freeze tracks with VSTi's and such for safekeeping, save the project
then i usually unfreeze the tracks and then do the mix out
might be psychological, but i think some sampled instruments and some fx sound better in realtime output
might be a difference of 64-bit processing in Cakewalk vs the 32-bit frozen tracks, im not sure
of course then it can take up to an hour or so to do the mixdown, but im used to that lol

this isnt any dogmatic studio position on the subject, its just how i do
good luck