# Cubase/Nuendo: Is there a way to freeze multiple tracks at once?



## Fab (Dec 29, 2021)

Hi everyone, I hope you all enjoying the holidays!


It takes quite a while for my PC to freeze tracks so if I could set cubase/nuendo up to do all of the instrument tracks in my project at once it would free me up to go make a tea or something.

I know people like the project logical editor so maybe it's a job for it.

I can imagine the programming...

if track is selected and it's an instrument track and it hasn't already been frozen, then freeze track.

Let me know if there is a work around to get something like this.

thanks


----------



## Bender-offender (Dec 29, 2021)

To answer your title: Nope. Sadly, it’s been frustrating and one of the most requested features for years.


----------



## Fab (Dec 29, 2021)

Bender-offender said:


> To answer your title: Nope. Sadly, it’s been frustrating and one of the most requested features for years.


Ah poop!

Thanks for letting me know.


----------



## Zedcars (Dec 29, 2021)

I wonder what the advantages are to freezing a track verses just using ‘Render-In-Place’? I haven’t used the Freeze function in many years as I found it too restrictive and, as you say, can’t be done in batches.

With Render-In-Place I can set up exactly how I want it to work and then just select all the parts I want to render and use ‘with current settings’. I have this linked to a touch control button on my iPad and it’s super fast and convenient.

Then, if need be, I can disable the VST track to conserve resources (that can be automated too with the Render-In-Place combined with Disable Track as a macro).


----------



## Freudon33 (Dec 30, 2021)

Hello
Yes with a macro you can render in place the show tracks and
the tracks will be deactivated and hidden
for my part I complete by creating a new folder for the audio tracks
by renaming it compared to the original folder
Macro




PLE


----------



## filipjonathan (Dec 30, 2021)

I wish!!


----------



## KEM (Dec 30, 2021)

You, me, and every other Cubase user for the last few decades has been wanting this feature  

Will it ever happen? Who knows, but I hope it does


----------



## zigzag (Dec 31, 2021)

Zedcars said:


> I wonder what the advantages are to freezing a track verses just using ‘Render-In-Place’? I haven’t used the Freeze function in many years as I found it too restrictive and, as you say, can’t be done in batches.
> 
> With Render-In-Place I can set up exactly how I want it to work and then just select all the parts I want to render and use ‘with current settings’. I have this linked to a touch control button on my iPad and it’s super fast and convenient.
> 
> Then, if need be, I can disable the VST track to conserve resources (that can be automated too with the Render-In-Place combined with Disable Track as a macro).


- Unfreezing (and refreezing) is easier. With Render-In-Place you have to delete the old track and audio file manually (if I remember correctly). 
- Freezing a track doesn't increase tracks count.


----------



## Zedcars (Dec 31, 2021)

zigzag said:


> - Unfreezing (and refreezing) is easier. With Render-In-Place you have to delete the old track and audio file manually (if I remember correctly).
> - Freezing a track doesn't increase tracks count.


I would have thought that because using Render-In-Place on many Parts/Tracks is much quicker than Freezing (which can only be done one track at a time), that although deleting many tracks created with Render-In-Place (as opposed to unfreezing) does take a bit longer, it would nevertheless be easier/quicker in the long run. Especially if you create macros to put the rendered tracks in specific folders.

As regards to increasing track count: I’m not sure why that is really a problem. You can disable the original track with a macro encompassing both commands so that saves on CPU and memory load. And as for the rendered audio track: well a normal audio track _should_ (theoretically) use no more resources than a freeze track (since they are both just playing back an audio file(s)).


----------



## zigzag (Dec 31, 2021)

Zedcars said:


> I would have thought that because using Render-In-Place on many Parts/Tracks is much quicker than Freezing (which can only be done one track at a time), that although deleting many tracks created with Render-In-Place (as opposed to unfreezing) does take a bit longer, it would nevertheless be easier/quicker in the long run. Especially if you create macros to put the rendered tracks in specific folders.
> 
> As regards to increasing track count: I’m not sure why that is really a problem. You can disable the original track with a macro encompassing both commands so that saves on CPU and memory load. And as for the rendered audio track: well a normal audio track _should_ (theoretically) use no more resources than a freeze track (since they are both just playing back an audio file(s)).


Bigger track count slightly increases project management complexity. If Steinberg adds ability to freeze/unfreeze multiple tracks at the same time, freezing would become viable option. But as things stand currently, I agree that Render-In-Place is better.


----------

