Quote:
Originally Posted by Vogon  Mmm. Or they are confident enough in their skill to to commit as they track. |
Are you joking? I find it unbelievable that this many people on here need to look at a flow chart of digital signal flow. You don't seem to realize that you are talking about something with zero upside whatsoever, and the potential downside of causing you to retrack the entire session.
To even suggest that anyone should ever track through (and print destructively via) AT or any other ITB plug within the host system post A/D... is to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of digital processing.
If a client comes in and says they want to track through AT, the only logical thing for the engineer to do is to assume the client doesn't understand the details of what they are saying... and then to record non-destructively with AT in the monitor path. The client won't know any different because it is EXACTLY the same from a playback standpoint... they heard AT in the monitor path while they were tracking, they hear it exactly the same in the monitor path as those exact same ones and zeros come off the HD... Exactly what they heard going in is exactly what they'll hear every time it plays... except if there's a phrase or two that comes up as problematic when it's mixed down weeks later, at a $500/hour facility, when the artist is on the other side of the world...
... your name doesn't come up as the single reason everyone's time has been wasted, the artist has to recut the track, etc... and for what? The EXACT same sound either way.
It's not a matter of confidence. It's an IQ test.