How to Interleave a L and R mix

  • Thread starter Thread starter xfinsterx
  • Start date Start date
X

xfinsterx

New member
Ive had it with "Bounce to Disk"
Bussing and recording the mix to a stereo track (Still ITB) just sounds better to me.
But how do i interleave the MIX L and R so i can rip a CD?
Only way i know of is to bounce to disk...
And im not doing that anymore.
Any help?
 
Last edited:
Bounce to disk as a stereo interleaved file instead of multiple mono.
 
Im completely ridding the whole Bounce to Disk function.
To bounce would defeat the purpose....which is to avoid the bounce.
 
Stumped?
Cause i am...
Perhaps one of the mastering guys would know?
 
I gotta wonder what software you're using where saving a mix to WAV sounds so much worse than keeping the mix in the software?

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I gotta wonder what software you're using where saving a mix to WAV sounds so much worse than keeping the mix in the software?

G.
Click to expand...

Glen.
Where in my post did i say that BTD sounds bad?
I didnt.
Im simply saying that recording the audio sounds better TO ME.

and as of now i need to figure out how to get this new little discovery to a cd.
 
xfinsterx said:
Glen.
Where in my post did i say that BTD sounds bad?
I didnt.
Im simply saying that recording the audio sounds better TO ME.

and as of now i need to figure out how to get this new little discovery to a cd.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. It sounds to me like you're saying that the stereo mix sounds better in the editor before saving to a file than the saved file does. Is that incorrect? If so, then I'm sorry for misunderstanding.

But if that's basically correct, I'm saying there's either something wrong with the way your editor is saving or with the playback of the saved file. There should be no audible difference as the saved file should be a bit-for-bit copy of what the editor is playing.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
if that's basically correct, I'm saying there's either something wrong with the way your editor is saving or with the playback of the saved file. There should be no audible difference as the saved file should be a bit-for-bit copy of what the editor is playing.

G.
Click to expand...

Well, not necessarily! Long ago, I was reading about how many plugin's actually processed the sound differently during playback than they did on renders, because of a variety of different reasons having to do with efficiency. I have NO idea where those articles are now.

This is NOT the first guy to complain about renders sounding different than playback, AND he is a ProTools LE user, which is an app notorious for sounding different on renders!

There is a VST plugin called TapeIt which you can insert on your Stereo Buss in your editor and record what is playing back in real time. http://www.silverspike.com/?Products:TapeIt

It is free too. :D

As to WHY Mr.xfinsterx can post this on his website, http://www.geomana.com/about.php but comes to homerecording.com to ask a silly question about recording what is playing back on a DAW, I don't know what to think of that!

Then he links to Falcon Studios, which one of the 3 best studios in Portland Oregon, so I am assuming he (most likely) interns there. Why not ask Dennis what he would do? Sean would be helpful I am sure!

;)
 
Ford Van said:
Well, not necessarily! Long ago, I was reading about how many plugin's actually processed the sound differently during playback than they did on renders, because of a variety of different reasons having to do with efficiency. I have NO idea where those articles are now.

This is NOT the first guy to complain about renders sounding different than playback, AND he is a ProTools LE user, which is an app notorious for sounding different on renders!

There is a VST plugin called TapeIt which you can insert on your Stereo Buss in your editor and record what is playing back in real time. http://www.silverspike.com/?Products:TapeIt

It is free too. :D

As to WHY Mr.xfinsterx can post this on his website, http://www.geomana.com/about.php but comes to homerecording.com to ask a silly question about recording what is playing back on a DAW, I don't know what to think of that!

Then he links to Falcon Studios, which one of the 3 best studios in Portland Oregon, so I am assuming he (most likely) interns there. Why not ask Dennis what he would do? Sean would be helpful I am sure!

;)
Click to expand...


You are right about the Bounce to Disk.
It just dosent sound as good.
And thanks for the link.
The first part of your post is mighty helpful! :)

Now about me asking questions here on this site..... :(

I certainly never claimed to know it all Ford Van.
And asking a question just because you run a studio dosent mean that the question shouldnt be asked!

As for where i work i have no need to explain it to you.
Nor do i have a problem with asking questions at this awesome place.
The only reason Dennis has ANY interest in me is because i had some good working knowledge to begin with!

....alot of which i garnered from the minds at this site.

Do you run a studio here in Portland Or do you work here?

If so why not put your name on your posts?

You afraid to rep?! :D J/K
 
Last edited:
I was reppin' around here before you ever thought about being a recording engineer!

;)
 
Ford Van said:
Well, not necessarily! Long ago, I was reading about how many plugin's actually processed the sound differently during playback than they did on renders, because of a variety of different reasons having to do with efficiency. I have NO idea where those articles are now.
Click to expand...
I understand that happening in video where there is what's usually referred to as "preview quality" versus "render quality", and the only reason they do that is because the computer may not have enough horsepower to render the video effect in real time, so they provide a "preview quality" when playing back in the editor. The difference there, though, is that the preview quality is LESS than the final render quality.

In audio, though, any such difference for that reason is completly unnecessary, there is plenty of bandwidth for audio effects unless/until you build the number of simultaneous tracks and effects to the point of system bog. The usual remedy for that is to "lock" a track, which is essentially just pre-rendering the track; temporarily rendering part of the mix to save bandwidth.

I believe you that there may be some drek out there that gives the sound a different color in pre-rendering and post-rendering. Any software, whether the editor itself or a plug-in, is just not doing it's job right.

If PTLE does this, that's just gotta be a nail in the coffin for that piece of software. It amazes me that it even made it to market like that, to be honest.

G.
 
Ford Van said:
I was reppin' around here before you ever thought about being a recording engineer!

;)
Click to expand...

Is that Ford Van as in "A van down by the river"
:D
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I understand that happening in video where there is what's usually referred to as "preview quality" versus "render quality", and the only reason they do that is because the computer may not have enough horsepower to render the video effect in real time, so they provide a "preview quality" when playing back in the editor. The difference there, though, is that the preview quality is LESS than the final render quality.

In audio, though, any such difference for that reason is completly unnecessary, there is plenty of bandwidth for audio effects unless/until you build the number of simultaneous tracks and effects to the point of system bog. The usual remedy for that is to "lock" a track, which is essentially just pre-rendering the track; temporarily rendering part of the mix to save bandwidth.

I believe you that there may be some drek out there that gives the sound a different color in pre-rendering and post-rendering. Any software, whether the editor itself or a plug-in, is just not doing it's job right.

If PTLE does this, that's just gotta be a nail in the coffin for that piece of software. It amazes me that it even made it to market like that, to be honest.

G.
Click to expand...

Ive heard the same thing said about PT HD too.
When i render in Digital Performer i dont notice it as bad though....
hmm perhaps thats my answer right there....
 
Can't you just add a stereo audio track and record the mix onto that?
 
Farview said:
Can't you just add a stereo audio track and record the mix onto that?
Click to expand...

Yeah thats what im doing but then its in the Audio files folder as L and R.
Im just not clear how to interleave them.
But i think that DP may be the solution.
:D
 
xfinsterx said:
Yeah thats what im doing but then its in the Audio files folder as L and R.
Im just not clear how to interleave them.
But i think that DP may be the solution.
:D
Click to expand...

protools does not use interleaved files. peroid. dual mono only, it only looks like "stereo", but it's not....
so, can't be done in protools.

most masters will take dual mono, just make sure to label them L and R
 
xfinsterx said:
Ive heard the same thing said about PT HD too.
Click to expand...
Wow. I've honestly got to say that it completly flabbergasses me that a product that does that can actually make it to the field.

When I was at D-Vision, if any of our stuff did that (or our competitor's stuff, FTM) on anything close to a regular basis, it would be called a serious bug and would never make it out of QA. And even if it did, our field beta testers would chuck it right out of the testing program as an editor they couldn't take seriously.

It simply amazes me that one of the most popular editors on the market not only does it, but does it and manages to stay popular. I mean, what good is an editor that can't save it's work accurately?

Oh, well...I guess I'll just have to leave it at Wow! and thanks for the revalation.

G.
 
Man, i think Pro Tools is a killer program honestly. :o
And besides the LE version not having Plug delay compensation, and the bounce function being a tad shakey its actually great. :cool:

On another note.
The Dp interleave sounds much better to my ears!
Problem solved. :D
 
I figured it out!
You go to the audio files menu WHILE IN the edit window, and highlight the the audio file then choose export interleave, and wham!
Good to go. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top