Drum submixes - some advice please

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dr. Jeep
  • Start date Start date
D

Dr. Jeep

New member
Ok - I am thinking about putting my drums down to a stereo track as a submix. They sound good now - compression, placement, verb. Anything that I should keep in mind before doing this? If my mix changes, I suppose I will have to redo the drum session and do another submix. I just need to free up some processing power - and I have heard this is a good way of doing so.

Are submixes the way to go?
 
If you're nervous, back up this session first. Worst case, you just go back to where you are now.
 
Dr. Jeep said:
Figured as much. Is this a pretty common practice?


I don't do it for drum submixes, but I do it a LOT for other things - especially when experimenting - you can always go back to an old mix. It is one of the great advantages of working with a DAW. Recall baby! :D
 
You leave the drums as individual tracks? What are the other submixes you do?
 
Dr. Jeep said:
You leave the drums as individual tracks? What are the other submixes you do?


I don't do it for submixes at all. For many other things I do though, I like to be able to go back to a different starting point. Or, I may do three different vocal treatmenats, and save each session seperatly. Or, whatever.
 
Dr. Jeep said:
Ok - I am thinking about putting my drums down to a stereo track as a submix. They sound good now - compression, placement, verb. Anything that I should keep in mind before doing this? If my mix changes, I suppose I will have to redo the drum session and do another submix. I just need to free up some processing power - and I have heard this is a good way of doing so.

Are submixes the way to go?

What software are you using for mixing? Many of the good software packages offer "freeze" on a track (this is where any/all current processing is applied to the track, then the original tracks/effects/etc is saved, but won't be played back or use CPU, rather, you use the new "freeze" track). When you want to make an adjustment to a "frozen" tracks, you "un-freeze" it, make your adjustment, then freeze it again.

While rendering a submix is more of less the same thing, in the end, it would take longer because if you want to make a new submix, you have to reprocess MANY tracks, as opposed to with freeze, you only have to render the track you changed, which takes FAR less time.

If you don't have "freeze" in your software, then do what you have been doing and start saving your pennies for a faster cpu and possibly better software that has "freeze". ;)
 
ProTools LE - MBox hardware. My computer is pretty fast - but the more plugins the more processor intensive it becomes. I don't know if ProTools LE has freeze?
 
Dr. Jeep said:
ProTools LE - MBox hardware. My computer is pretty fast - but the more plugins the more processor intensive it becomes. I don't know if ProTools LE has freeze?

a little tiny round button on the bottom (R) of the faders in the mix window i believe.....
the options should be "dyn" or "off"

and if your not sure, i'd mix the kick and snare just a touch louder than you want (in the sub mix)....
it's better than the alternative.
 
yes, and although i know that it turns the track off (processer and drive will not look for audio) i think you may still have to remove the plugins?????
not sure about that.

but having the dyn set to "off" will deffinately free up another voice.
 
So I could submix my drums - bounce them to a stereo track - and leave the individual tracks "off" so that they won't tax the processor? That way I can have them available in the session if the need arises to go back and edit them?

I think that's what you are saying.
 
Dr. Jeep said:
So I could submix my drums - bounce them to a stereo track - and leave the individual tracks "off" so that they won't tax the processor? That way I can have them available in the session if the need arises to go back and edit them?

I think that's what you are saying.

I think "freeze" is a more sophisticated feature that FordVan was talking about. The "dyn" button is for "disabling" tracks. I believe this is different, it grays out the entire track and your CPU won't do anything with it.

I am pretty sure you would have to "record" a stereo drum mix first using all your drum tracks, THEN disable the original tracks to free things up

I will look it up tonight in my PT manual and see if I can find some clarification. I have PT LE 6.8 with MBox 2.
 
Rock. I think Sushimon is on with that. I have disabled tracks during recording to keep CPU low - but I haven't made that a dynamic part of the mix. I may do that when I mix down so things stay fluid. I pretty much have the same config - ProTools LE + MBOX.
 
MORE INFO for PTOOLS for inactive tracks

sushi-mon said:
I think "freeze" is a more sophisticated feature that FordVan was talking about. The "dyn" button is for "disabling" tracks. I believe this is different, it grays out the entire track and your CPU won't do anything with it.

I am pretty sure you would have to "record" a stereo drum mix first using all your drum tracks, THEN disable the original tracks to free things up

I will look it up tonight in my PT manual and see if I can find some clarification. I have PT LE 6.8 with MBox 2.

OK, I did some research last night and today.

1. The "dyn" button is to let Pro-tools assign a voice or not have a voice for a track. So it enables or disables a voice for a track. To be heard, or be processed. PT LE allows 32 voices, so if you were at 33 or maxed out your CPU or something, you could disable one uneeded track "voice" to enable another track to be heard.

2. You could also do this by disabling or turning off all sends and outputs for a track. BUT, the track would still be assigned a voice.

I tried both extensively, and the only difference I can find between the two above options, is making one less voice. Thoughts ?

3. Making a track "inactive" is a much heaftier beast and freezes the entire track as Ford Van suggested, but I can't find it called "freeze" in PT only as the "making tracks inactive" feature. This section of the manual describes the above 3 ways to make tracks inactive, but does not really discuss any intricacies about them. This freeze feature makes everything on the track disabled (even plug ins are labeled "inactive"). So this feature dis-allows you to make any adjustments to things on the track; levels; fader; dsp. etc. Options one and two above, still appear to allow you to mess around with the track, and although there is no signal going to DSPs, it is still enabled so still using up space.

So, to make more CPU room, making uneeded tracks "frozen" or as PT calls it "inactive" gives you the biggest bang for the buck.

Sush
 
A Dynamic version of a submix with frozen tracks

I do exactly this but in a more "dynamic" way. I use LIVE5. I create a submix. Freeze the tracks going to that submix. Now I have a submix that I can adjust the overall volume of while at the same time I can go back and adjust kick or snare in the frozen track. Also, I've freed up CPU power due to the freeze. Really nice feature of LIVE5. Don't know if others can do it. Not certain if this realeases enough CPU for your needs as I have a dual core 3GHZ Pentium D system. But LIVE5 does not yet support dual core so I still need to economize my mixing sessions.

Tobias


Dr. Jeep said:
So I could submix my drums - bounce them to a stereo track - and leave the individual tracks "off" so that they won't tax the processor? That way I can have them available in the session if the need arises to go back and edit them?

I think that's what you are saying.
 
SUBMIX for PT

I did a little more research and I still don't quite understand it all, but here goes regarding your sub-mix question.

You have say 8 drum tracks and you get them all nice and mixed and all the DSPs and EQs, and compression for each channel worked out.

At this point, you probably want to "record" a stereo submix of your drum mix by record enabling a new stereo track in PTools with its inputs being the drum mix bus. This whittles the 8 tracks down to whatever sample rate and bit length you chose when you opened your session into 2 tracks. Make sure you save the session as "drum tracks pre-mix 1" so you can recall the session.

To go further, make sure you save the session as "drum tracks post-mix 1". Then you should make all the 8 original drum tracks "inactive" by freezing them entirely. This way, the CPU ingnores them and all their dsps, etc are inactive too, and you can't screw with any of the track settings. OR, since you saved the drum pre-mix session, you could delete all those 8 tracks from your workspace and make your ongoing session much less cluttered.

So now you just work with your stereo drum submix. And you can go back to the previous saved session if you want to re-mix the drum tracks to a new mix called "drum tracks post-mix 2" and import that into your new session if necessary.
 
Tobias said:
I do exactly this but in a more "dynamic" way. I use LIVE5. I create a submix. Freeze the tracks going to that submix. Now I have a submix that I can adjust the overall volume of while at the same time I can go back and adjust kick or snare in the frozen track. Also, I've freed up CPU power due to the freeze. Really nice feature of LIVE5. Don't know if others can do it. Not certain if this realeases enough CPU for your needs as I have a dual core 3GHZ Pentium D system. But LIVE5 does not yet support dual core so I still need to economize my mixing sessions.

Tobias

When you say "create" a submix, don't you mean "record" a submix ? If you just create a submix, but don't record it, "freezing" the mixed tracks won't give you any input to the submix.

Just trying to understand what you are saying. :cool:
 
sushi-mon said:
When you say "create" a submix, don't you mean "record" a submix ? If you just create a submix, but don't record it, "freezing" the mixed tracks won't give you any input to the submix.

Just trying to understand what you are saying. :cool:

Literally, I route the output of 5 tracks to a return channel. Route the return channel to the master. I call that my submix. Then I freeze each of the original tracks. I am not bouncing down to a new audio file - this I assume now is what you are trying to do. So, what I have is a virtual mixdown I guess. I still have to carry the load of the original tracks with my CPU, but at least any plugins are minimized by the freezing process. Is this more clear?

Someone above laid out the other example: go ahead and bounce the tracks to a new one, then close down the original tracks. You will always have them on your hard disk for later use. This actually is kind of like creating stem files. Create multiple sub mixes of different parts of the song and use those as the main tracks as you create additional parts. Then, if one is out of balance in the new mix (most likely in my experience and why I made sure I got plenty of GHZ in my new DAW) all you have to do is go back and open up the sumbix (now a separate song) and then make changes, and then import the stem file (submix) back into your working version.

Here is an excerpt of an article on stems. Could not get the link to work:

Divide and Conquer

By Julian McBrowne

Sep 1, 2004 12:00 PM


In the not-so-old days of not-so-total recall, engineers hedged their bets by printing a slew of alternate mixes at the end of every mix session. They'd print mixes with vocal up, vocal down, bass up, bass down, and so forth. If a revision was called for, and you were lucky, you had an appropriate version tucked away on a DAT. If not, it was back to the studio for an expensive recall session. Somewhere I have a listing of 21 alternate mixes that one record company required for a final-mix delivery.

If you're mixing from a DAW multitrack, in which syncing up multiple files without adding additional noise is a simple proposition, a technique called stem mixing gives you the ability to generate virtually limitless alternate mixes without having to go back to the multitrack master and recall your mix session. In a nutshell, it entails separating various mix elements into subgroups to be recombined later (see Fig. 1) and printing them as separate files, called “stems.”

Tobias

Tobias
 
Last edited:
The dyn feature can be used as listed before - making a track inactive so that later you can activate it and tweak it - or disable it during a mix to free up voicing for more tracks. I have been using this during sessions to concentrate on my active tracks.

The stem mixing is another way of exporting tracks to their own session, then making a submix "stem" to be used in the master session. I really don't know which is better, seeing as they serve similar ends.

Here's a for instance on the use of dyn:

I took 2 guitar tracks - set them up with 5-6 plugins a piece for the tone, eq, saturation etc. I tried them out with the rest of the mix. I will "submix" them into individual tracks - i.e. print their effects to the Audio files folder and then import the "printed" tracks back into the session. But instead of erasing the tracks of plugin'd guitars, I will make them completely inactive, including plugins - then make them a group and turn them off. They will still be there if I need to tweak them later.

With my LE system I need to do this, cause my computer would otherwise be out of CPU power.
 
Back
Top