STOP USING BOUNCE MIX IN PRO TOOLS! (How To Print a Mix in Pro Tools)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- STOP USING BOUNCE MIX IN PRO TOOLS - How To Print a Mix in Pro Tools
Composer Daniel Willett demonstrates how to print a mix inside of Avid Pro Tools as an alternative to using the Bounce Mix function.
This video advises against using the Bounce Mix function in Pro Tools and teaches you how to print your mix easily inside of Pro Tools.
Please like and subscribe to this channel!
- FOLLOW ME on Social Media-
Instagram: / composer_danielwillett
Soundcloud: / danielwillett
- LISTEN TO MY MUSIC -
Spotify: Daniel Willett: open.spotify.c...
Knights of Red: open.spotify.c...
USE DANIEL'S MUSIC FOR YOUR VIDEOS: www.storyblock...
Email: contact@danielwillett.com
Tags: Bounce Mix in Pro Tools, How to print a mix in pro tools, how to bounce a mix in pro tools, avid pro tools bounce mix, pro tools bounce mix, pro tools print mix, avid pro tools export mix, export mix in pro tools, export master in pro tools, how to bounce in pro tools, bounce pro tools, how to bounce a song in pro tools, bounce mix, bounce down in pro tools, print a mix in pro tools, export mix pro tools, bounce tracks in pro tools, avid pro tools mix down, pro tools mix down
Avid Pro Tools: www.avid.com/a...
TO GET YOUR PRINTED MIX OUT OF PRO TOOLS; You need to “Export Region” (Shift Command K in Mac)
FOR SOLOING TRACKS: CMD/CNTRL click on the MIX BUSS to put it in solo safe mode. That way you can still hear tracks when you solo them. You can also put your buss effects in solo safe mode.
I really like the idea of having all versions within Pro Tools, but I don't have “Export Region” under File/Export. The options I have don't allow export as mp3. Do I have to bounce for mp3?
Do you mean export clip as file to get your mix out of ProTools ?
Then you can choose MP3 or full wav
I swore you gonna show me how to get that print mix out pro tools
Not saying printing isn’t the way to go but the “quality” argument is completely false. Countless null tests have been done by other channels, and by myself, and they null 100% of the time. So you may want to take that out of your list of positives when discussing benefits to printing.
That should be the way it works in theory, and it is the way it works with most plugins, but as I stated in the video I've had experiences with certain plugins where they don't print correctly when I use Bounce Mix. Also, for some reason whenever I've done a lot of side chaining, Bounce Mix messes up the timing of the pumping effect. Both of these issues cause mixes that certainty do no null with a real time print.
I think the sidechain may be a delay compensation issue, pro tools has always been weird about features like this only being in their HDX/ultimate versions. Not so much a plugin problem but just pro tools going "lol eff your plugin delay I'm bouncing". Not sure if its different in the new editions they just made but thats likely why your sidechains get weird.
@@mstr.alexandre2709 Yes, I think that’s correct. 😊
Honestly, if you have plugins compromising your attempts to bounce file or print, the most professional solution would be to identify the plugins and not use them. As for your other assertions, they are mostly just preferable practices, they are not necessarily or certainly better. This video would do more good in asking for solutions rather asserting practices as better, ime. Best of luck to you.
@@gmichaelhall It’s definitely better for me and so many people that watched this video were not even aware that this was an option. I come from the day of analog consoles and hardware inserts. Back then, printing was the only option. I’m happy to share this option with the younger generation so at least they know about it.
Thanks for your comment! 😊
This is ridiculous, the bounce method works just fine.
100%😂 plus there is a way when you Bounce you Click "import after bouncing" that give you a print version just like this when your finish the Bounce with no efforts! Maybe its not the same thing but it does the same thing!
Sorry bro but you have no ears
@@veroneliot277 I don't think so
It's not ridiculous sir, print in the session, it's a more professional method of doing it and seeing how it looks the wave and choose different options of mastering
@@veroneliot277agree 💯 % 😂😂😂😂
To say something like 'STOP USING' is very SILLY!
You have your own reason for you, but it won't match other's workflow. So, wording like 'WRONG' or 'STOP' is too click bait and stupid.
- Your friend's engineer uses outboard gear? If yes, then this method is the way to go. There is no other better choice. (Realtime bounce can do the job too, but I agree with you on this method)
- There are so many cases where Plugins have the option to process better when making 'offline' bounce. In this case, realtime print is not give you the best sound.
- Some case, your computer doesn't have enough processor to play realtime with stable result. Offline bounce is the only way to go (without freezing tracks or commit when it isn't final decision yet)
You need to know that many modern Plugins now has the option to do oversampling and pristine process which almost impossible to play it in realtime.
So, please don't say 'STOP USING' or 'WRONG'. This doesn't educate viewers the right way.
Proving the “quality” difference is quite simple.
Spoilers - There is no difference. But there are circumstances under which bounces will differ.
Bouncing to tracks is great in some circumstances - but what about when you want a bounce that isn’t in the native sample rate? Knowing the tools is one thing - understanding them is something else entirely. Listeners should read/study up further on topics discussed.
Thanks for your comment! Yes, I agree that we should all continue to learn about this subject, especially with plugins that all function a little differently and new updates coming out constantly, but so many people are not even aware that printing inside the session is even an option. I’ve gotten so many positive comment from people telling me as much and thanking me for showing them a different way.
For me printing the mix inside the session is a much better option for all the reasons that I discuss in the video. I actually appreciate bounce mix though, just not for final mixes/masters. 😊
@@ComposerDanielWillett I agree. It’s the same as exporting a track vs bouncing it out… it sounds different, period.
@@joeblow1229 If you print the Master or bounce the Master its the same, the only advantage of printing its that you can hear whats going on.
@@martins1254 it’s not… try it for yourself. Bouncing a track through the master buss vs exporting a track is different. Digital summing has a sound, period. Not saying it’s bad or good or whatever, but it does. See for yourself.
@@joeblow1229 BS Period. Theres no export track in pro tools, you can export a clip.
This is nothing new, its the old way to print audio in pro tools. When Bounce didnt exist you had to print the mix.
I agree! Nothing new here, but many new school engineers don’t even realize that this is an option. Also, I wanted to make a video to share some of the drawbacks of the Bounce Mix function.
There's no added organizational benefit compared to the "Import after bounce" function in the bounce dialog. Unchecking "Offline" does a real-time bounce with no controls (apart from cancel) available during playback (which you probably don't need or want anyway while printing). I don't really agree with the wording "printing in Pro Tools" because everything described is happening in Pro Tools regardless of which method you use to bounce the mix
Why do content creators say, I'm going to show you how to do it 5 times before they actually do it? No, seriously?
Sorry but this is not true, ProTools automation does not behave 1:1 exactly the same on realtime playback, BUT the bounce function does have identical automation performance every time. This was an issue before PT9 or 10 I believe but since then they fixed it so that the bounce function has 100% repeatable automation
Errrrr - Guys you can just bounce the mix like normal and click 'import after bounce' and you will achieve all of this without the faff and having to sit there while it records in real time 👍
Too many steps! Great video though! FML
Printing can come in handy for using the better parts from 2 or more different mixes. 25+ years ago we did it all the time w/1/2" tape. It was painful but a lot easier than a recall on an SSL 4000!
I remember those days! Thank God for Pro Tools! 😊
Hello, I have been working in the industry for years, using this method of recording the mix and I have always had problems with small clicks, even reviewing each audio clip so that not a single fade is missing.
I never knew why sometimes when I do the mix it generates those clicks, and finally I chose to bounce to mix and since then it hasn't generated any type of clicks.
The method does not matter and you cannot categorically say that this is the valid method and that everyone uses it at a professional level, because it is not 100% true since, as we all know, Pro Tools has its errors and is not perfect.
Any method is good, bounce to mix or record the mix on another track..the two of them are totally valid at a professional level
Of course you don’t explain then how to export this master file I just made in ProTools? I thought you were gonna say then you’re gonna bounce the master file you just created in ProTools so I have no idea how you’re getting this file out a ProTools
Yeah, I really wish that I had shown that in the video. The answer is: Export Region (shift command K) on a Mac.
@@ComposerDanielWillett thank you
Thanks this is great, but how do you access the printed track as a file outside of Pro tools? Thanks
It'll be on your audio file folder for the session
This was the old way to turn all your tracks into stems, in pro tools. Haven't had to do it in cubase since they introduced faster than real time bounce. The reason we used to use this for stems, is so you don't have to real time bounce ever track individually, which would take as long as number of tracks X project length = (ain't nobody got time for that), verses all tracks at the same time for only once through the project length.
Now, in modern versions of pro tools, we have faster than real time bounce. Still WAY behind cubase, but we have it. So don't waste your time printing inside the project.
Also, please turn down your mix fader, you're project is peaking my guy.
And how is this different to Bounce to Mix? This is just print mix in project that anyone should do. Your name of video suggest that there is something wrong with audio quality of Bounce to mix function.
I have several cases where some plugins don’t work in bounce and yet they work fine when playing in Protools. This method of printing stops that happening.
@@boyonahill9717 Bounding offline is same as playing in Pro Tools.
@@boyonahill9717 In some case its better when printing to uncheck bounce offline, especially when using outboard gear in realtime.
For those who’ve been saying you can’t hear audio while Pro Tools bounces, that’s not the case if you enable real time bouncing. With that feature, you can hear it fine while it bounces down at normal playback speed. I’d be interested to know whether the reported plugin issues occurred during real time bouncing. As for me, I’ve never encountered that problem in a real time bounce.
I’ve never tried that, but I suspect that would solve the problem. Thanks for your comment!
Could be plugin or most likely latency issues. Plus the option to ignore click and pops (errors) may be set to on. I had that issue a while back from setting that and didn't realize buffer,etc. issues until I was bouncing and it would crash when I turned it off, letting me know I had to fix the issues in the session, otherwise the bounce would never complete. Those issues are gonna be there whether its a print or bounce, especially if hardware is being used.
It’s the offline selection that either allows the song to play during bounce or not
That's the way to go except that if you stay in the same PT session for all your mix versions, you have no way to go back to a previous version session. Instead I do save as for each version of my mixes which I think is more flexible.
I'm not sure why you wouldn't have any of the previous changes/versions in the session. they would still be there.. all the changes on the individual tracks are not destroyed in a non-linear DAW. the method this guy is showing is what we used to do a long time ago to save computing power..and for comping-- someone commented they used it when tape was used... honestly, he hasn't really shown any advantage to doing this nowadays.. everything he says can be done using bounce. you can bounce different mixes and if you really want to, you can import them into Pro Tools to compare their waveforms. but he's advocating using eyes to compare mixes. as an audio engineer, one should be advocating using your ears not comparing visual representations of the audio...
plus he hasn't really done anything to get the track out of pro tools.. it's still stuck in a project. is he going to export it is he going to bounce that individual track? bounce has advantages that his method does not take into account.. sample rate conversions, file type, meta data.. these are all why you would want to use bounce. I've never experienced a situation he described in which his plugins were not being properly represented with bounce.. if that ever happened to me, I would be livid at avid..so I can understand his argument on that point even if I can't relate.
Playlisting is your friend....
@@nickloss2377very well written and I agree!I remember when there was no offline bounce option in pro tools and that was a headache when trying to be efficient.
no issues with bounce mix here, .wav or mp3, however i have seen it done your way by most producers. You also did not convert your midi to audio before mixing, what of that?
I hardly ever do! Sometimes I wished that I had when an instrument that I used to have doesn’t work anymore, for instance like when I updated to an M1 Mac.
Printing is the way to go if you are using some analog outboard OR if you want to be able to print your STEMS and mix at the same time (I have a free template for this if you are interested, although my channel is geared towards French speaking people, you can find the template in the description of my latest vid about stem printing) ... Printing can be useful for a lot of reasons but as for the quality difference, do the null test and see for yourself (you might want to disable any analog emulation before doing the test) ;) Peace
You know you can select all tracks routed to monitors in one step? You know you can create a mix bus and track in one step? To say Stop Using Bounce Mix is just silly.
How can you select all tracks routed to the monitors in one step? Cheers!
@@heyiplaybassguitar From the manual...
Pro Tools lets you select or show tracks based on the track input or output assignment, send assign- ment, or hardware insert assignment. This can be useful for quickly identifying all tracks that use a specific input, internal bus, output bus, or hard- ware insert.
Right-click the assignment selector and choose from the following options:
Select Assignments To This option selects all tracks that use a specific input, internal bus, output bus, or hardware insert.
etc
Liked the video, and was glad to see your content was better than the click-bait title. But I almost didn’t even bother checking out your channel because of your fake “stance” in the title. Now, I’ll stay tuned to see what you have to offer…but I’ve got my guard up.
How is it “clickbait” when I’m suggesting that people do exactly what I say in the title?
Well you'll explain all tv post engineers that they are doing the wrong way...What is good for you is not necessarily good for others.
it's not better it's just an alternative.
This video is misleading.. Someone show this guy how to uncheck the "offline" box and check the "import after bounce" box and all the supposed benefits are exactly the same..
@@yehudalanger Exactly! they gave us more options for these situations a long time ago.
Back in PT8, where you had to sit through the bounce when you didnt want to,
i could just imagine his outrage lol
Its fine that nobody HE knows, uses the bounce method and he prefers it better,
but to say no professionals use it, is just disingenuous at best.
17 years and counting of professional experience, begs to differ with the notion
Absolute BS.
My question is, after you print , how do you get the audio out of Pro tools? you still have to bounce i guess.
No, check my pinned comment.
It is a debated subject. Bounce can be tricky for 2 reasons: you don’t listen to your final product while doing the export. Some exotic plug-in you might have in your session can malfunction in bounce, specially with automation. Otherwise now bounce it pretty safe and nowadays computers can take the load of work. You gotta be sure of what you are doing with your routing with printing your mix in the same session. It is probably the trickier option for beginners.
You definitely can listen whole track in Bounce mode, just unclick Offline option in bottom.
@@PavolBrezina sure you can, I wasn’t precise enough and was referring (in my head I admit) to bouncing with a video sync to check your final mix on the video. I wrote you don’t listen to your final product because ideally you are supposed to check it after bouncing.
@@PavolBrezina the whole premise of this video feels like this guy never found that box..
None of this is an issue with pro tools because I commit most of my tracks before bouncing, meaning very little CPU is being used and I have the fastest mac computer, so I'm fine w bounce to disk. I've done audio comparisons, no difference.
@Pocket and that's the main part. There's no audio difference because it's the same result, just done different ways. There's no separate processing going on, it's just re-recording the targeted signal, just like a bounce does. Bouncing and printing the same song back to back, bundfolded/untitled, one cannot tell the two apart.
given that there aren't any sonic differences between bouncing/printing - it's actually still faster to offline bounce the mix, import to new track, and create playlists to have your mix history in the session for referencing. same result, much less time spent waiting 🤝
I've been a professional mixer for 12 years and I've always used the bounce function. No quality difference. A more practical approach would be to ditch plugins that don't bounce correctly
Thanks for this, despite what everyone says, I always wondered why my bounces sounded so weird when listened to away from the project session. I check both one time and noticed massive phase issues and other shit when played together. I printed a track and checked, no phase issues no weird changes, no changes in the wave form or transients either. I get why they do a live print over bouncing. It can be for numerous reasons why a bounce changes the mix, but im glad printing fixes this issue.
Nice video. I want to ask what about if some tracks(like verbs,delays and parallel auxes)we don't want to send them to mix buss and compress them again with the buss compressors or whatever inserts there will be in the mix buss. How then we can print the mix identical to our mixed song? Thanks again
Just a reminder, folks: You need to make sure you've changed any plugins that have offline oversampling/quality options to reflect how you want them in real-time when you do this.
How do you get the printed mix out of pro tools
You need to “export region”. Shift Command K on Mac.
Could commit audio track and not have to print in real time.
I've been trying to print my mix from a console for about 5 hours and your method destroys my stereo image every time 🤦 Wish me luck folks. Its 3:30 in the morning and I have important things to do tomorrow.
No, you can't tell me what to do! 😂
I like bouncing out to master in WaveLab. There is zero difference in null tests between these two methods.
Sometimes when I use 3rd party plugins, they don't work as well in pro tools. It's the reason I stay away from using it. Sadly, I only use it to record.
Daniel, I just did my first print mix inside Pro Tools and it came out awesome! Now what do I do with it? I don't see a way to export the print mix track? Thanks
I got it... CTRL SHIFT K 👍👊🙏
Awesome! Congrats on your first printed mix!😊💥
I did not hear any compelling reasons not to use bounce mix. Just saw you create a whole bunch of extra work. Sry
It appears that we are going back to recording in the old-fashioned manner. All the anti-analog people. its coming a back .
When printing, don't forget to bypass the heat plugin on the track if this one is activated.
My goodness I think you need to build a better template so you can print in your session or Bounce without the troublesome task of selecting tracks to print stage you demonstrated. Being tired at the end of the day is not a good time to figure out what tracks to select or not. The minute difference in sound between bounce and print pales in comparison to double busing or missing a track to print.
I used to do this when I was doing music, but not anymore since I’m doing hour and a half long podcasts for personal projects and I don’t want to sit through the entire print lol
Good video btw!
Thanks! I totally get that. I would do the same. 😊👍🏼
I've used PT over 20yrs, and noticed other users doing this, but thought...why? When there's a dedicated bounce feature...had no clue that some plugins didn't play nice with the bounce feature. I guess I do have one question though...You selected and switched over to an aux track/audio track combo to print the mix, but what is the advantages of switching at the end rather than just setting this all up from the beginning and omitting that step altogether? Or is there some necessity to using a master track throughout the mix process leading up to the final print? Thanks so much!
There’s no reason that you have to start out with the master buss. So yes, you can do that!
So maybe its time to comparison both of the mixes and then flip the phase and see if there is a different ?
How do you apply 32 times oversampling on plugins in realtime?
Right.
so after u have ur print track, u basically still use the bounce function in pt to get that quality out..
prints are best. more detailed data captured.
Been printing my mix back into my session as an audio track for years.
Outdated information. This was fixed in ptt 11….years ago
Coining this as the way the professionals mix is gate keeping and honestly isn't true. I work in the industry as a mixing engineer and happily use the bounce function, sometimes I use the import to session after bounce feature too. Workflows are interchangeable for each individual, there's not one correct way to do this job!
How am I “gate keeping” when I’m showing everyone how to do it themselves? I agree that there are multiple ways to do the job. I even state in the video that I also occasionally use bounce mix. However, bounce mix still doesn’t work for me when side chaining, even with the latest version of Pro Tools. I’m simple presenting an alternative to bounce mix that for me is a better option.
But how do you get it out of pro tools? Its still inside there.
How do you print if you are mastering and wabt to change from lets say 48KHz 24 bits to 44.1 KHz 16 bits?
I will print the mix from now on.
Why I decided to change it? For me, there was some balance issue, like a kick in the track was right inside pro tools but after bouncing I had it like 0.5 db too loud and I had it in general with lower end.
Who the hell doesn't print their mix in Protools?
I thought that was common sense
Isn’t it also a plus if you have analog equipment and want to print
I think the sound quality difference primarily was when people were using 48 bit TDM systems.
Everybody wasting time looking this video😂
10 mins steps to replace 2 clicks bounce?
Did not work. The shift and option buttons did jack all.
You did't explain how to access that printed file, but I would imagine that you consolodate it after you cut off the extra space at the beginning and end, and then locate it in your audio files folder. Would this do anything to improve the depth of the sound field like they say analong summing does?
After you print it, you need to export the audio file to your desired location on your hard drive. Go to (FILE - EXPORT AUDIO) As far as improving the depth of field, no it doesn’t do that.
Very interesting, great video, thank you. :)
What about “import audio file after bounce” option? Too much mambo jambo for such easy operation. Don’t care if pros or “pros” do it, the reason bounce to disk exists is because we need to save time in the process. No more higher quality is added by this complicated method.
I agree! We all want to save time but bounce mix isn’t even an option for me when side chaining. I just tried bouncing a mix again with the most recent Pro Tools and the side chaining still gets messed up when I bounce. When they fix this I may consider using bounce mix again. For now printing in the session works better for me. 😊
@@ComposerDanielWillett
Agreed, running latest 2022.6
Abs still having side chain Fx
Inconsistencies
Avid if your listening!
Would love OT bouncing too be 100% accurate
i'm doing mainly tv-post work and Bounce Mix is such a great time saver… my sessions right from the start are set up as you did it (mixing into an aux instead of a master fader), with a master just as a volume fader (and for any tools like SoundID Ref or perhaps Waves NX stuff). when i'm finished with a mix all i have to do is to change the output of my mix aux to whatever unused bus and use bounce mix… then i just import the audio file back in to the session and set the input of the track to my mix aux, too.
this way i can also have multiple versions of the mix on different playlists etc., and i can also go to some section where i want to change something and just record that little section onto the track with my master. it's all there, very organized and easy to find (if you please name your tracks before recording onto them… nobody needs files named Audio_01 in their sessions, i'd say…).
when i'm happy with any changes i made etc., then i just consolidate everything and the Cmd-Shift-K to export the final thing. (my habit is also naming the "master" audio track to "xxx NameOfTheTrack" so i can just search for any unused files named xxx blablabla and delete them).
Thanks for your comment! I think it will help certain people that are using Pro Tools in a similar way. If I were in your shoes, I would do it that exact same thing. I actually prefer printing, mostly just because of the issues I’ve had with side-chaining going wrong during bounce mix. I’m sure they will fix this at some point and then maybe I will change my stubborn ways. 😆
@@ComposerDanielWillett yeah, i get your point with the side-chaining stuff and some plugins doing funky stuff… and of course when you're mostly doing music, chances are you have some external audio, too, like synths or a nice hardware reverb or whatever… and then bounce mix has nothing to offer printing to a new track won't do more easily.
keep up the good work with the videos! i'm sure there are some great suggestions for everybody : )
cheers,
frank.
Do you bounce the print track?
@@SMEL no. once i got all changes done (recorded onto the track with my initial bounce… e.g. a few seconds here and there in the middle of a 1-hour-program), or after checking for loudness compliance etc, i consolidate the the whole thing (usually from marker 1 (start) to marker 2 (end of program), rename the clip (deleting the "xxx" prefix that i mentioned, and finally export it as a new file (cmd+shift+k on a mac).
i hope that's what you meant…?
@@brusecco oh wow! I can see how that's different. I will have to try that! Thanks!
That master look a lil weak 😂😂😂😂
how could you have a copy of your work if you do not bounce it?
HI,I FOLLOW YOUR INSTRUCTIONS STEP BY STEP BUT I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE PRINT, THE WAVELENGTH ARE NOT EVEN & IM ALSO GETTING SOME DISTORTION WHILE ITS PRINTING, IS THIS NORMAL? OR WHAT AM I DOING WRONG?...
It could be a lot of things but my main guess is something with the routing. Double check all your routing and make sure everything is going to the mix buss. If you have tracks that are bussed to aux send that are separate from the mix buss make sure those are still routed to the correct aux sends.
Plz put a deesser on your mic next time.
so what do you do after you record it to a channel so other people can hear it after its done? how do you get it out of protools?
Export the audio file into a folder of your choosing.
yes thank you so much!! :D
Yeah did you do a null test?
Really, the MIXBUS should be in your project template. I always START with a MIXBUS and MASTER, use MIXBUS to put bus compression, and any other ITB mastering things. ONLY use the master to put the limiter and the dither on. Then you can just make a PRINT bus SEND on the MIXBUS (post fader) to get everything PRE MASTER w/o dither and limiting. I can't believe how many times people ask, why do you have a MIXBUS and you don't just use the MASTER...smh.
also MASTER is POST FADER (which is just a PT thing), also, you can look at the waveform on the PRINT track to check for ugly peaks and sections that are out of balance, L/R channel is a significantly different volume.
I also notice a quality degradation when I Bounce in Logic Pro. There is less sparkle and the spatial image is flatter. Are these the degradation issues you notice? Have you heard Logic users complain about this issue and how could I try out your method in Logic?
I don’t really know Logic. Technically all DAWs should bounce down perfectly fine unless there’s a problematic plugin or something weirds going on.
@@ComposerDanielWillett Did you say in your video that Bounce causes quality degradation in the mix and that Print avoids this? How does Print get around the problem and is it related to digital summing?
Just curious, why don’t you eliminate the master bus from the start and just use the stereo aux? Or can you not monitor from an aux?
There’s really no reason to until your ready to print your mix. I find it easier to wait until then. 😊
@@ComposerDanielWillett cool 👍
For some reason I’m not getting audio through my mix bus does anyone know why this may be
It could be a lot of things. It’s really hard to say without seeing your session. My best advice is to go back through the video and make sure that you didn’t miss a step.
The other thing I'm not understanding when I follow these steps and finish the first Mix 1 - now if I want to just listen back to track and do tweaks, I can't hear any of the tracks anymore. I'm sure I'm just doing something wrong.
If you want to go back and mix some more you need to change your “mix” track output back to your main monitors output.
@@ComposerDanielWillett great thanks!
How do you get the mix from PT to the client when the mix is still in PT?
Hey Jonathan! See my pinned comment in this video! Cheers!
for some reason this is not working for me at all I have followed these steps to the T and when I arm my audio track to record it doesn't record anything- any help would be greatly appreciated my session is set up like this: I create groups of the different instruments accordingly so drums, bass, keys etc. I have a vca master that controls them after I get them to their right individual levels then I send them all to an aux master. I sent the master aux's to one mix then to the stereo audio input and nothing happens not sure what is going on.
It’s really tough to say without seeing your session. The signal flow should be as follows:
Audio Track/Instrument Tracks -> Aux Track(mix buss) -> Stereo Audio Track.
Then record the signal flowing through the aux track onto the stereo audio track.
@@ComposerDanielWillett ok thank you I will try that again I appreciate it
I was a bit cynical when I watched this a month ago, but recently the lead vocal of my current mix keeps coming out louder than it sounds in Pro Tools when using bounce to disk. There are 3 plug -ins on the L Vox so maybe that's the issue. Going to try this and see if it helps.
did it help?
Hi Daniel, great video but how do you export the printed track? And what if you bounce realtime? Do you also get the same issues?
All the best, P
Thanks! To get your track out, you need to “export region” (Shift Command K) in Mac. I’ve never tried a real time bounce, that might actually fix the side chaining issues but I still like to print the mix and save them all in different playlists in the session.
@@ComposerDanielWillett thanks for your respons and I will sure try this out 👍👍
@@pascalmolenaar7636 Awesome! Glad to help!
@@ComposerDanielWillett That surprised me, Ive never done a bounce except real time.
Now what do I do if my PC is not strong enough to handle a mixsession with plenty plugins that I want to oversample? With soothe2 for example, I can choose to oversample 4x when offline, so when bouncing if I understand correctly. Is there a way to do this while printing? That would surprise me positively
Can somebody help me? I’m a novice in Pro Tools and I attempted to print my tracks. Around 80min / 130min it stopped because the disk was full (it wasn’t). I tried making three different print clips in my podcast but then I cannot consolidate the final clip. Please help. 130 min podcast, Windows 11 user. Pro Tools Artist
If I were you, I would not print my mix. I would use the “bounce to disk” function in your case. This way you don’t have to wait for the whole thing to print in real time.
@@ComposerDanielWillett i did that first and the volume was turned way down. A friend recommended the print method which was successful but now ctrl shift k wont work. Thoughts?
When I turn up the volume on my speakers to hear the bounced audio it’s slightly distorted which is not the case when listening in Pro Tools. This has seriously been so frustrating. I manage one road block to finish this project and then there is another.
@@jackjohannessen5995 You should be able to highlight your audio and then go to file-export.
@@ComposerDanielWillett I will try that if I can get my file to open. Now it’s telling me the playback engine does not support sample rate of 44.1 kHz…. This is new 🤦♂️
Do you have to delete the Master Fader after you set up the Mix Bus track? Would it be a problem to not delete it?
You don’t have to, but why would you want to keep it?
Trouble with bouncing when there is a side-chain can be because of a multi-mono vs multi-channel plug-in. Other discrepencies in sound between bounce and print can be due to not using delay compensation. Workflow issues like having multiple mix versions are easily dealt with through other workflows like "import audio after bounce".
I have always hated bounce to disk, and it is funny, I stopped looking for a better way years ago. Now here you are. Thank you.
Im glad that this was helpful. Thanks!
Great video. Thanks
So how do you get the print out of the session?
You need to “export region”. Shift command K, on Mac.
Who is this kid?
This is all well and good for certain situations like if you only have about 20 tracks or so but it makes NO sense if you have like over 100 tracks you have to reassign to a mix buss for this kind of bounce. That would just be a nightmare
Thank you but I'm confused.. When I print it creates 2 mono tracks in my Audio Files folder. How do I get a single stereo file? Do you later Bounce the best printed mix to create a single file?
Ive been doing this for years. Not because I think it sounds better, (it doesnt) but so that I can have a final export of the mix in the session itself in case I end up deleting the file once its outside the session i can go back to the pro tools file and grab the final master again
Srsly?!?
This is a cool video. I like trying to understand why flows like this are used. When you mentioned mastering, your workflow here made more sense to me. Bouncing will always be an appropriate tool for the appropriate project--BI cues for TV, as an example.
Thank you Nate! 💥
Interesting video!! Just curious - rather than routing all tracks to the aux input (before going to the stereo audio track), couldn’t you just set the OUTPUT of all tracks directly to the stereo audio track? And skip the aux?
Or is there an added benefit to going thru an aux beforehand? Thanks!
With an AUX track you can route the output to a regular stereo audio track so that you can print.
You can apply mixbus fx this way before 'printing' the final mix. Mixbus compression (e.g. multiband or SSL bus compressor is popular), EQ of choice, saturation, clipping, etc. Not necessarily in that order.
I set up the mixbus Aux before I start mixing. Once I have a basic balance mix (fader and panning only), I then activate my mixbus fx before I start activating fx plugins to other tracks. I then mix into the mixbus processing.
Hi!
One thing regarding plugins not functioning correctly. In your example you said pumper, this is the same for all timed plugins (LFO Tool, shaperbox, gatekeeper, LFO´s inside synths, Kontakt instruments with Animator and so on). This is actually caused when a plugin with a lot of latency is inserted in to the session. I had this case with Avid for years and I still get the occaitional email that they are still working on it....but nothing is fixed yet (Not even with pumper). The issue is all Avid DLY comp and not third party plugins.
The best workaround is to send the track(s) with for example pumper or lfo tool to an aux track, but this is not stable every time either. What I do is that I either freeze the track or commit the track (the track with timed plugin) before latency heavy plugins are inserted to the session. To make changes to a frozen track with for example lfo tool, you first need to deactivate the latency heavy plugin(s)....make changes....freeze track....and then activate the plugin(s) that is causing the issue.
Worst PT bug ever IMHO.
One more tip: Kontakt instruments that has the option to start on key input instead of sync to host will sync correctly if trigger on key is selected.
Btw,
All this also apply if you are using side chain input on plugins. The timing will be messed up if the session contains plugins with a high latency. Master fader can have as much latency as you want, it will not affect the aforementioned issues.
Thanks for sharing that info and your experience with this issue. Great comment!
Thanx for the video. Good tips & info! 😉
Agree!Next question :HOW ABOUT RE -RECORDING AUX TRACK (ANALOG) FOR UPBITS PURPOSE?Let s say for whaever reason you have to mix a 16 bit mixstarting tracks !Have you done that ?What are the ref for this tehnique?
For that purpose you can open a blank session with the adequate bit depth and sample-rate and then import tracks from your original session. All the process will be done with these new settings. I’m not sure it will bring so much value to your mix.
Know your shortcuts, Buddy! I bounce inside the session, too, but in a much easier way. That video shouldn't have been longer than 3 minutes...
Hi, just a question first, you speak about the Bounce function, but do not says if you are using real time bounce or Offline.
Then an experience of mine, I have been able to prove technically three-four years ago, that certain plugins do not behave exactly the same between the two modes ! (and I confirm that some Sidechain busses acted weird Offline, but this is solved now (2022.6) :
I even enquired to a well known company about an EQ plugin that clearly had a weird behaviour on the first milliseconds of the first region in a track when in offline mode (Waveform seemed very strange). And guess what, they told me they were conscious of the fact and that it would be solved in future versions. That took years to come because obviously developing new plugins is priority for many small companies.
That really sent a chill in my back, as I was right in the middle of an album. I proceded to rebounce everything in real time, and since then everything seems ok.
As to practical issues, I use Wavelab 11 montage windows to mange mixes in a project so I don't need the mix inside my session, unless I am modifying something
Thanks for sharing your experience! I was referring to offline bounce having issues. Real time bounce may have solved my issues but if I’m going to do a real time bounce I may as well just print the mix in my session. Many of us have experienced what you have experienced with certain plugins. I’ve had a few people tell me that there’s no difference and that bounce and print will null every time. This is only true if your using certain plugins.
Thanks for your comment!
There are certain plugins who offer different quality for offline bouncing. An example is a classic like U-He Diva Synthesizer, where the purpose is to offer higher quality in mixdown vs. lower quality/more CPU headroom during tracking. It might helpful reading manuals to understand this phenomenon. Most often you'll find that you can disable this 'option' or set it to the same processing quality for each processing method. Generally speaking there is no difference in offline/online bounce as it is exact the same process at the end of the day, unless there are either situations like the above mentioned, or there are bugs in the software involved. This does not take into consideration that there can be sonically and/or measurable differences from one bounce/mixdown to another, when using plugins that model analog or other 'random' behaviour. But this wont make a difference to whether you print realtime or 'Bounce Mix' offline (or online). It's the same thing going on. 😀
@@perhoier2881 There are technical issues it seems with some plugins that don't behave exactly the same for some bizarre reasons
@@markhaliday There's always technical issues with software, and when there's an aspect a given piece of software need to take into consideration, the option of failure exists. (That might be the case for certain plugins. I'm not aware of any specific examples though. So I'd think it is very rare.) An example of such an aspect is the concept of offline versus online bouncing. That information is available from the host at anytime, with the purpose for a plugin to process it's data differently in the given situation (like in my example with U-he Diva above). But besides that, all processing can be handled exactly the same. It's almost common sense in way of coding. In other words it should not be a big issue to get it right. And if done right the processing will sound exactly the same. And yes I've been a plugin developer myself years ago, if you should wonder, 'what do that guy know'. 😉