The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why do you need a Bin System in a DAW ? DAW Software
Old 16th August 2008
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

Why do you need a Bin System in a DAW ?

Why indeed.

I know it sounds silly, and I can hear the voices going,
"Don't you know? Didn't you hear the screams over the years for a working Bin system in Protools?"


And some of us continue to ask/beg/scream for it, and as things stand, we can expect from Digidesign as much attention on this request as we have received in the last ten years.

None.

Many of us use the likes of Soundminer as an extended bin system, but wouldn't you like one in the DAW you're using ? I sure would, and this is why I'm putting together a feature request for the only DAW that seems to respect user opinions and wishes, and that's Reaper. Sure, it isn't perfectly usable for all ours needs, and you may miss some functions you found useful in PT, but it's made more progress in six months, than Protools has made in the past five years, so I have more faith in this new(2.5 year old) DAW giving me the tools, to make my job not just easier, but more enjoyable and creative.

I want to put in a feature request with as many voices from our post production community speaking up as possible.

So here's where I'd like you ladies and gentlemen to step up and write down, simply what you would do with a Bin system, that has:

Multiple Bins, sequences, fx chains, fx settings, track templates, complete track(s) with contents, a clip editor/trimmer and its own keyboard layout. This is the feature request, and now we need to tell the authors of the DAW what we would do with it.

I'll start with four

Uses for such a Bin system:

1) generally, project management, by categorizing files, sequences and tracks by signal groups, reel and editors
2) Collection lists for exports/renders
3) pre-chosen item/sequence sets for repeated tasks
4) sequence mangement for reel conforming/recuts

What would you do with it ?

You will be quoted with name, if that's ok, in the feature request itself. I'll post the link here on this board of course. Get those brains of yours in to gear. Be heard.

Tony

(also posted on the Sound Design list)
Old 16th August 2008
  #2
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

To illustrate what a Bin system is, I've created a small mockup of list windows. The concept is more or less borrowed from the Avid systems. Perhaps someone can give us some screenshots of the Bin system of the AudioVision system.

http://stashbox.org/188529/Reaper_BIN_07_All.png (~300kB PNG)
Old 16th August 2008
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Geert van den Berg's Avatar
 

I think everybody here knows what a bin is, but most people are using Soundminer or another alternative to manage their SFX libraries.

And like you said, almost everybody in post-production uses Pro Tools, and some are using Nuendo...

Also if you have loaded all your FX and tagged them, I think you can even browse the tags via Digidesign's own Digibase, which is part of PT.
Old 17th August 2008
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

It looks like I have gone about this the wrong way.

This is a call for support of a feature many of us have requested from DAW manufacturers for years. We used to have a decent BIN system in AudioVision, but that's now defunct, unsupported and buried by Avid/Digidesign who bought it and decided to ignore the benefits the bin system brings to our work.

We have a decent change of getting this kind of functionality done by the developers of the Reaper DAW. Our chances are orders of magnitude higher than with Digidesign, or Steinberg. For example, the main developer, Justin Frankel, actually went back and forth with a number of post production people to get the scrub and jog functionality usable. Those developers try to get a function right before releasing it and are open to good suggestions even then. Plus, they bugfix stuff almost overnight. I've never used such a stable program in all my 20 years of editing.

What I need, is support and interest from craftspeople. I believe a bin system to be a huge time saver, as it has been in the past, and I want you folks to tell these developers that.

There's at least two ways to show support for this.

Write down what a good bin system here and sign it with your name and occupation. I will be able to include this in my feature request and it will make this request seem to come from a single professional, but from a larger group.

Second, you could post your support in the Feature Request forum of Reaper. Start a thread with your own idea of such a feature and post a link here and on other forums and lists.

We have too few post production people even bothering to take a look at Reaper, or even suggesting something in the forums. I hope this changes, else it's another DAW that won't take our craft very serious again.
Old 17th August 2008
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Geert van den Berg's Avatar
 

I am not against your effort.

I think this kind of bin functionality would definately add something worthwhile to any DAW.

(I also think it would be nice if Digidesign would expand on Digibase and make use of folder/bins in the regionslist and maybe also in its Audio Files folder.)

On the other hand I don't think anyone is really missing a lot when combining PT with Soundminer. Explain what makes this more functional?

It would be great if Justin Frankel expands the post functionality for Reaper. It's a very interesting application, but even with the expanded functionality the program will not instantly get a much larger userbase. This will take some time and many people I know are very satisfied with PT. (it's like the universaly used text editor MS Word, everybody knows how to use it, because it is simple).
Old 17th August 2008
  #6
Lives for gear
 
danijel's Avatar
Airon, this wall of silence is due to the fact that very few people on this forum use Reaper (if any), and they couldn't care less about adding bins to it.

Your motives are noble, and your spirit is high, but you'd sooner convince this crowd to petition for rabbitfish liberties in the Caspian sea.
Old 17th August 2008
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

Soundminer, yeah, that's a substitute for many here.

So nobody remembers how AudioVision worked on that issue then ? Fine.

Select a bunch of regions across a section of time, and drop that in to a Bin. You get a sequence. Soundminer doesn't know a damn thing about sequences. Consolidate that sequence in to its own folder on your library drive, and it'll be stored there forever. Save the Bin with it, and you'll be able to recall that sequence by loading that Bin file, which could contain any number of sequences.

Have you designed a stack of backgrounds you wanted to keep around, without having to bounce, because the fx mixer would flay you for keeping those choices from him?

How about that huge sequence of foleys, that had so much great material, but you didn't have the time to label and catalog each and every little file ?

Did you ever wonder if keeping a ready to use sequence of an entire reel of either dialog, fx, backgrounds or foleys at the ready, could save you time when that tenth picture recut comes in and Protools will simply crash when that bigass region group of your material just won't open up properly again and you lost some of the stuff you need to a previous cut, say a few hundred foley cues ?

Will every detail of your latest gunshot design be easy to pull up, when you designed another twenty effects in the same session ?

Did you ever wonder how easy it could be to keep alternate version of a complete scene handy, without creating another thirty tracks ?

Soundminer is a single sound librarian, and while it's good at that, it is not a Bin system.

As for Reaper not being interesting to us Protools users, you'd better think again.

From what I read, they're looking at Reaper VERY closely, as is every other DAW manufacturer from what I hear and read about the new versions. The new Protools 8 or whatever it'll be called, definitely did look at Reaper, that much I can say.

It is safe to assume that features in Reaper, that prove themselves to be useful and are the cause of envy and user migration, will have a decent chance of making it in to future revisions of Protools.

Don't think for a second that Digidesign cares about our needs directly. There's ample evidence to support the contrary, time and time again. Just ask any beta tester out there.

I'm not asking you to use Reaper, though it would be a shame to pass up on trying(uncrippled too I might add) this program to see if it can fulfill some of your needs.

I am asking you folks to use your imaginations on how a Bin system that can function at a level of AudioVision and Avid bins, could be of use to your workflows. It may take a few minutes of your time, because you may have never used a good bin system, but all arguments and even a simple "we could use this, please do it - John Q. Editor" will help in convincing the developers of Reaper, that this is a highly sought after functionality, worth their programming time.

And anything that improves the chances of us getting a little more attention from Digidesign on this matter, will help as well.
Old 17th August 2008
  #8
Lives for gear
 
minister's Avatar
Airon,

I am ALL FOR your call for Avid-style bins, like the ones in AudioVision. Only Better.

Actually, about 2 years ago, I had the ear of Digidesign on this VERY issue. Talked about it for months. And we are still without them.

I will PM you with some details and see if there is a lead I can send your way.....but, Digi has lots of fish to fry....
Old 17th August 2008
  #9
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by minister View Post
Airon,

I am ALL FOR your call for Avid-style bins, like the ones in AudioVision. Only Better.

Actually, about 2 years ago, I had the ear of Digidesign on this VERY issue. Talked about it for months. And we are still without them.

I will PM you with some details and see if there is a lead I can send your way.....but, Digi has lots of fish to fry....
Airon-

I can only assume that adding that functionality is very intrusive- I am sure everyone at Digi appreciates the call for it- But for me to consider Reaper is absurd- Post is about compatibility- Digi owns the market at least here in Hollywood. I sincerely doubt that it would even matter if Reaper gained bins, because it is not a viable platform for the post work here.

It is sort of like a craftsmen blaming his hammer for his shortcomings. PT is being used on nearly every film, so it is working. It might not be perfect, but it is good enough.
Old 18th August 2008
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

That's not the issue Charles. I completely understand the need for compatibility on delivery of elements. I simply don't expect any significant change to originate from Digidesign in this matter.

When something so blatantly useful works so well, and spreads around to other applications, it'll be a greater incentive for other DAW makers to keep up.

Digibase is about as useful as a hammer that I take to my monitor. It crashed so many times and spoiled so much work, I have no interest in even venturing in to that window ever again, even though I'd like to use something like that inside a DAW.

It's interesting to note that Logic has a decent Bin, a usable database and a decent media browser, as does Nuendo. None of them have anything remotely like AudioVision however, and here's where I intend to up the ante, because it simply will not happen at Digidesign, and I'm not waiting another ten years, when they might not even be around any longer.

Compatibility indeed, but I'm not too sure it'll be that much of a huge deal, translating Repaer, Nuendo or Logic sessions to working Protools sessions either now or in the future. A flat 5.1 file isn't as big a deal and somebody will find a way to translate surround panning automation.

We could start here with Reaper, else there won't be much happening. That I am certain of. We should not wait, even though we're using a different tool for much of our placement and delivery work.
Old 18th August 2008
  #11
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

you will note I made no mention of Digibase-

I have an effects library with a quarter of a million records- I do not want that hauled around around inside PT....


What I am saying is that PT is what it is- It is stable and an industry standard. Back when AV was around, it was not. But AV had grave limitations as well like track count. so lets not get too misty eyed....
Old 18th August 2008
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Henchman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airon View Post
We have a decent change of getting this kind of functionality done by the developers of the Reaper DAW.
Who cares? No one uses Reaper in Post.

If a tree falls in the forest....
Old 18th August 2008
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Airon's Avatar
 

Charles, that goes without saying.

Henchman, that's not the point. It may be used by some. It will be used by some. And it could be a good example that people will point to and say "They did it, why can't you."

And still I hear nothing on how any of you would wish to use a Bin system. Does it not have any advantages for you, even theoretically ?

Do people have to build everything ready for you to use, and will none of you provide any input for developers ? I want to motivate a developer by supporting a request with consenting voices of craftspeople, so i don't stand by myself. Is this asking too much of some of you?
Old 18th August 2008
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Henchman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airon View Post
Charles, that goes without saying.

Henchman, that's not the point. It may be used by some. It will be used by some. And it could be a good example that people will point to and say "They did it, why can't you."

And still I hear nothing on how any of you would wish to use a Bin system. Does it not have any advantages for you, even theoretically ?

Do people have to build everything ready for you to use, and will none of you provide any input for developers ? I want to motivate a developer by supporting a request with consenting voices of craftspeople, so i don't stand by myself. Is this asking too much of some of you?
Time to enter the real world. There are a couple of platforms that if you want to work in LA, are worth learning. Pro-Tools, Nuendo and there are one or 2 places that have Fairlights.

Reaper doesn't even register as a blip.
Developers who count, don't care about you trying to motivate them.
Old 18th August 2008
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Geert van den Berg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airon View Post
Soundminer, yeah, that's a substitute for many here.

So nobody remembers how AudioVision worked on that issue then ? Fine.

As for Reaper not being interesting to us Protools users, you'd better think again.

From what I read, they're looking at Reaper VERY closely, as is every other DAW manufacturer from what I hear and read about the new versions. The new Protools 8 or whatever it'll be called, definitely did look at Reaper, that much I can say.

It is safe to assume that features in Reaper, that prove themselves to be useful and are the cause of envy and user migration, will have a decent chance of making it in to future revisions of Protools.

I am asking you folks to use your imaginations on how a Bin system that can function at a level of AudioVision and Avid bins, could be of use to your workflows. It may take a few minutes of your time, because you may have never used a good bin system, but all arguments and even a simple "we could use this, please do it - John Q. Editor" will help in convincing the developers of Reaper, that this is a highly sought after functionality, worth their programming time.
I have not had the pleasure of working with AudioVision, thanks for your explanation.

Like I said, I was not against your efforts, so you can put me on the list.

I was going to say, you could use 'region groups' in PT, but you already mentioned this wasn't working right for you.
Old 18th August 2008
  #16
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airon View Post
Charles, that goes without saying.

Henchman, that's not the point. It may be used by some. It will be used by some. And it could be a good example that people will point to and say "They did it, why can't you."

And still I hear nothing on how any of you would wish to use a Bin system. Does it not have any advantages for you, even theoretically ?

Do people have to build everything ready for you to use, and will none of you provide any input for developers ? I want to motivate a developer by supporting a request with consenting voices of craftspeople, so i don't stand by myself. Is this asking too much of some of you?
It seems that already know what you want, and are just trying to validate that-

those features are worth the effort, Reaper should try to add them. I think it might be a bigger job than you might think, but if they can be made to work, I would expect there might be an audience for them.
Old 18th August 2008
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Would love it. Don't think it's going to happen

I would love having bins and being able to create sequences of layered effects or whole show segments that could just be pulled into an existing timeline would be great. It's the one thing that I really miss about AudioVision. It was also a fantastic way of organizing sounds on a project basis.

Que Sera...a lot of us have asked for it and it obviously is not high on the update priority list, so we find clunky workarounds.
Old 19th August 2008
  #18
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airon View Post
Select a bunch of regions across a section of time, and drop that in to a Bin. You get a sequence. Soundminer doesn't know a damn thing about sequences. Consolidate that sequence in to its own folder on your library drive, and it'll be stored there forever. Save the Bin with it, and you'll be able to recall that sequence by loading that Bin file, which could contain any number of sequences.

Have you designed a stack of backgrounds you wanted to keep around, without having to bounce, because the fx mixer would flay you for keeping those choices from him?

How about that huge sequence of foleys, that had so much great material, but you didn't have the time to label and catalog each and every little file ?

Did you ever wonder if keeping a ready to use sequence of an entire reel of either dialog, fx, backgrounds or foleys at the ready, could save you time when that tenth picture recut comes in and Protools will simply crash when that bigass region group of your material just won't open up properly again and you lost some of the stuff you need to a previous cut, say a few hundred foley cues ?

Will every detail of your latest gunshot design be easy to pull up, when you designed another twenty effects in the same session ?

Did you ever wonder how easy it could be to keep alternate version of a complete scene handy, without creating another thirty tracks ?
Wouldn't track folders (that you could import with "Import Session Data" and enable/disable etc) cover a huge bit of this functionality? (Of course combined with other smart work flow approaches).

And how about "Export session data to session" to either a new and separate session or to the end of an existing session. (By end I mean as seen from the console view). This way one could quickly consolidate stuff into a "library" session.
So I vote for track folders and extended "Export session data" in PT.

And of course there is import/export region groups and region definitions.


Quote:
It is safe to assume that features in Reaper, that prove themselves to be useful and are the cause of envy and user migration, will have a decent chance of making it in to future revisions of Protools.
Why not try and get a list of post engineers that support your idea of bins and submit that to DigiDesign? (It would also make it more likely to appear in Reaper and other DAWs).


Quote:
I am asking you folks to use your imaginations on how a Bin system that can function at a level of AudioVision and Avid bins, could be of use to your workflows. It may take a few minutes of your time, because you may have never used a good bin system, but all arguments and even a simple "we could use this, please do it - John Q. Editor" will help in convincing the developers of Reaper, that this is a highly sought after functionality, worth their programming time.
It is great that you are doing this but I have never used Reaper. Before I support any feature request for any application I prefer to be very knowledgeable about that application. Not least so I can understand how it would fit in with existing functionality and give my views on how best to do the integration.

Alistair
Old 19th August 2008
  #19
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

region groups accomplishes much of that actually.
Old 19th August 2008
  #20
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
region groups accomplishes much of that actually.
Yes but unless I am mistaken, it doesn't export the actual audio which makes it unusable as a way to create a "sequence library. Nor does it export automation, plug-ins, routing etc.

Alistair
Old 19th August 2008
  #21
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Yes but unless I am mistaken, it doesn't export the actual audio which makes it unusable as a way to create a "sequence library. Nor does it export automation, plug-ins, routing etc.

Alistair
Nor did AudioVisions clip editor- so lets compare apples to Fords....

If you want the mixer topography there is "Save Session Copy as" to do an an archive of the selected work.


If you are doing rebalances or moving work from one predub to another, the Region Groups are very handy.... I use them a lot for that actually.
Old 19th August 2008
  #22
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Nor did AudioVisions clip editor- so lets compare apples to Fords....
I thought you were responding to my suggestions for improvements to PT. They have nothing to do with AudioVision but these additions (which would probably be much easier to implement than the whole bin system the OP is talking about) would allow most if not all of the functionality that he/she is asking for. (It would also add some useful functionality for other things)

My apologies if you were not responding to my post.

Quote:
If you want the mixer topography there is "Save Session Copy as" to do an an archive of the selected work.
Can you export a number of tracks (and buses) separately? I wasn't aware of that. I better check the manual and learn something new!

I would still think it would be nifty to be able to append a few tracks (or whatever) from the an open session to an existing "library" session.

Quote:
If you are doing rebalances or moving work from one predub to another, the Region Groups are very handy.... I use them a lot for that actually.
Agreed.

Alistair
Old 19th August 2008
  #23
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
I thought you were responding to my suggestions for improvements to PT. They have nothing to do with AudioVision but these additions (which would probably be much easier to implement than the whole bin system the OP is talking about) would allow most if not all of the functionality that he/she is asking for. (It would also add some useful functionality for other things)

My apologies if you were not responding to my post.



Can you export a number of tracks (and buses) separately? I wasn't aware of that. I better check the manual and learn something new!

I would still think it would be nifty to be able to append a few tracks (or whatever) from the an open session to an existing "library" session.



Agreed.

Alistair
Alistair,

I was responding to this comment-

Originally Posted by UnderTow
Yes but unless I am mistaken, it doesn't export the actual audio which makes it unusable as a way to create a "sequence library. Nor does it export automation, plug-ins, routing etc.

Alistair


Region Groups do preserve the sync relationships and track types that are in use, but do not preserve the mixer topography- I think it MIGHT be useful for a few people- but I can see it being a hinderance as well- if the the destination session does not have the same topography and such- so though it might be useful, I think it is a convenience ultimately.

ProTools does have many limitations- I have, for 10 years complained about the edit window background, which radiates unwanted light on a dub stage which has still not been addressed. I would think that to be substantially easier to implement. But- when I look at how reliable the application has become, I have to say I am content with as long as it helps me feed my family.

BUT.... ProTools is not sacred, and if someone invents a longer lasting light bulb I think the community should be open to checking it out.
Old 19th August 2008
  #24
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Alistair,

I was responding to this comment-

<snipped for brevity>

Region Groups do preserve the sync relationships and track types that are in use, but do not preserve the mixer topography- I think it MIGHT be useful for a few people- but I can see it being a hinderance as well- if the the destination session does not have the same topography and such- so though it might be useful, I think it is a convenience ultimately.
That is exactly why I think exporting sections of a session to another session could be a workflow advantage. The import session options would take care of any routing issues when reimporting. But mainly, I think it would be useful to be able to dump part of a session into a new session that one can look at later when one has more time.

Yes this a convenience issue. Isn't everything in a DAW about convenience?

Quote:
ProTools does have many limitations- I have, for 10 years complained about the edit window background, which radiates unwanted light on a dub stage which has still not been addressed. I would think that to be substantially easier to implement. But- when I look at how reliable the application has become, I have
to say I am content with as long as it helps me feed my family.
That sounds very easy to implement, yes. Anyway, PT certainly gets the job done but it can be improved.

Alistair
Old 20th August 2008
  #25
Lives for gear
 
danijel's Avatar
Airon, damn you

Whatever I do these last couple of days, I imagine how everything would be easyer if I had bins..... and I feel almost crippled.

For example, I keep many layered ambiences as Stenberg XML (several tracks exported), so when I import them, I get new tracks, and I have to move all the clips and automation (if any) to my project's ambience tracks and then delete the imported ones.

I wish I had 'embedded timelines' (like 'movies' in ex-Macromedia Flash), so that in the main project I have only one or two tracks of ambiances which hold meta-clips that can be double-clicked into full timelines on their own.....
Old 20th August 2008
  #26
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by danijel View Post
Airon, damn you

Whatever I do these last couple of days, I imagine how everything would be easyer if I had bins..... and I feel almost crippled.

For example, I keep many layered ambiences as Stenberg XML (several tracks exported), so when I import them, I get new tracks, and I have to move all the clips and automation (if any) to my project's ambience tracks and then delete the imported ones.

I wish I had 'embedded timelines' (like 'movies' in ex-Macromedia Flash), so that in the main project I have only one or two tracks of ambiances which hold meta-clips that can be double-clicked into full timelines on their own.....
that would be like the spill feature on most consoles- and it would be very cool- The problem though is that you could not get to a nested element without having to know where it is- (which can be an issue if you are running a lot of tracks) Have you tried the show/hide presets for that?
Old 20th August 2008
  #27
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Here, we use the bin in nuendo a lot.
We create a library in which we create folders referring to every shooting days, then we put the sources (broadcast waves) in their corresponding days, we don't copy them, just link them to their original emplacement (usually on the server).
That way if there's a missing take or something we can easily go through the sources, listen to them if needed, find what we want and simply drag it into the project. At that point we copy the file into the audio folder.
That's how we use it...
We don't use it in protools.
(we still have fairlights in here too lol)
Old 20th August 2008
  #28
Lives for gear
 
danijel's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
that would be like the spill feature on most consoles- and it would be very cool- The problem though is that you could not get to a nested element without having to know where it is- (which can be an issue if you are running a lot of tracks) Have you tried the show/hide presets for that?
If I just wanted to reduce the track-clutter, the closest thing I have are folder tracks. But that doesn't help with moving things between projects....
Anyway, I don't use the folder tracks, because, for some reason, when you 'select all from cursor to end' and move (as when you reconform to a new video version), the clips in the folders don't move, so it's almost useless - I'd have to get all of the tracks out of the folder, re-conform, and than pack them back in
Old 20th August 2008
  #29
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by danijel View Post
If I just wanted to reduce the track-clutter, the closest thing I have are folder tracks. But that doesn't help with moving things between projects....
Anyway, I don't use the folder tracks, because, for some reason, when you 'select all from cursor to end' and move (as when you reconform to a new video version), the clips in the folders don't move, so it's almost useless - I'd have to get all of the tracks out of the folder, re-conform, and than pack them back in
I can sympathize with that- hidden tracks in ProTools do not follow conforms either.

there are different ways to reduce the mixer footprint- the problem is this though- most people prefer different ways to accomplish it-


I do wish there were folders in the PT region bin to organize the classes of sound- .
Old 20th August 2008
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Jesse Peterson's Avatar
 

I think the avid style bin system for an audio app is a good idea.. but I don't think it's worth anyone's R&D money to implement something that everyone has a work around for.

For example.. in nuendo, let's say I have a nice amb bed, multiple tracks in surround with plugs and automation etc. I like this bed and I know I'd like to use a variant in the future.. File/Export/Selected tracks. This function creates an XML file and a folder for the source audio. Anytime I want to pull up this amb again, File/import/track archive.. poof, there it is added to my session.. then just slide it into place. It'll retain all plugins, settings, levels and automation

Just like a bin would.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
RainbowStorm / So much gear, so little time
0
markbcrew / Music Computers
5
Demian / So much gear, so little time
5
Logan Connery / Music Computers
6
spherop / So much gear, so little time
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump