| Author
|
Stem/Group Organization
|
willsanquil
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
93
Posts :
2822
Posted : Jul 11, 2010 11:06:20
|
Hi folks! Was just pondering something....
It's widely acknowledged that the language that you use effects how your brain functions and how it interprets reality. So, following from that is it possible that the way in which you organize your tracks effects your workflow and creative process?
For instance, right now my project template is comprised of the following groups:
Kick/Bass group
Leads group
Percussion Group
Pads/Atmospheres/Textures group
FX Group
So, whenever I create a sound its automatically getting slotted into one of those groups...and I'm not sure I like that - I want to have a workflow and creative process that is not restrictive, but is also relatively organized. I'm running into crossover issues with my groups..like the line between a lead and an FX, or even the concept of a 'lead' itself may not be necessarily relevant.
Besides that, The goal is also to make mixing down into stems relatively simple so that I can streamline the process of chopping those stems into clips for Ableton performance in session view - also intent to go with the APC40 which has 8 rows for session clips, so I want my track groups to be compatible with that.
So, does anyone have any suggestions?
Do you think it matters, or effects your workflow?
What groups do you use, and why?
Just wondering what other producers use and what works, cheers!
  If you want to make an apple pie from scratch...you must first invent the universe
www.soundcloud.com/tasp
www.soundcloud.com/kinematic-records |
|
|
|
Scolopendra
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
64
Posted : Jul 11, 2010 13:30
|
|
I have the same groups in my projects. It makes it easier to apply different types of signal-processors to sounds with different roles and in different timbres e.g a hint of stereo-widening and exciting for leads or pads etc. It's also good to keep your projects neat and clean so if anything needs to be changed, you don't get lost. |
|
|
|
Medea
Aedem/Medea
Started Topics :
127
Posts :
1132
Posted : Jul 11, 2010 17:22
|
i use the same groups:
Kick/Bass group
Leads group
Percussion Group
Pads/Atmospheres/Textures group
FX Group
+
a) 2 additional separate groups for hardware synths, because they need some special routing
b) 3 reverb tracks
http://soundcloud.com/aedem |
|
|
|
daark
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
58
Posts :
1397
Posted : Jul 11, 2010 18:09
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : Jul 11, 2010 18:20
|
to have few stem like that for live can be usefull it all depends your workflow, now for mixing there is no rules you could have a lot more groups ,depends what the track need, to have a template like that for me i see it as a limitation for example a sound could need to be in 2 groups before ending in your fx group?
grouping sound like you do i do it when the track is well advanced or finished just to fine tune a bit .
some friends work like you with groups and fx chains loaded in them and have great sound , it s really about finding what ever works for you |
|
|
|
willsanquil
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
93
Posts :
2822
Posted : Jul 11, 2010 22:45
|
IDK if that's what I'm talking about PoM - the groups are mainly for organizational purposes - the only group I routinely use sends on or add plugins to is the Kick/Bass group which gets some light compression and maybe a light saturation/distortion effect.
Well, all the other groups get a High Pass at the mix stage to clean shit up.
Usually there are too many different things in the other groups to add an FX chain to them - and I don't really understand the 'sound could need to be in two groups before ending in your FX group'
I mean...its not like the groups have different routing paths like 1 goes to 2 goes to 3, the different audio/midi tracks are just organized into expandable groups
It's tricky because on the one hand I want to have an efficient organized workflow (and be able to open up past projects and not see a horrible un-labeled mess) but I also don't want to be restricted by said workflow creatively. hrm.
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch...you must first invent the universe
www.soundcloud.com/tasp
www.soundcloud.com/kinematic-records |
|
|
|
dija
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
48
Posts :
483
Posted : Oct 22, 2010 03:07
|
|
mudpeople
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
113
Posts :
1785
Posted : Oct 24, 2010 16:03
|
Generally when i write a track I put the kick/bass into its own send and all perc into another. Instruments generally have their own track, if one is playing in more than 1 I usually dont bother sending em at first. I use Renoise for the bulk of writing, initial mixing down and EQing, then I like to output stems and load em up in Live and edit em that way, mainly cuz Renoise doesnt automatically set the length of a file if I load a WAV into it. A Renoise track of mine usually has at least 3 instruments, k/b send and perc send. Once I get the stems in Live I usually duplicate teh hell out of the tracks, panning them all to taste. The one im working on currently has smth like 37 tracks... 
Generally I have all channels with the same stem file in it all next to each other, it seems to help me visualize the panning settings better, or maybe I just like the way it looks idk... Each stem usually is a diff. color so its not hard to see which channels are what.
But whatever works, thats always been my personal mantra. One person's familiar technique is another's alien sign language.
. |
|
|
|
