# Logic X - A modular template approach



## Blake Ewing (Mar 24, 2014)

Hey guys,

I've just put up a new entry on my site with a technique for using a modular template in Logic X.

Logic X - A modular template approach

So far, this method has been working really well for me in most situations, but I'd love to hear if there's a fatal flaw in my plan here that I haven't run into yet, or other alternate methods of madness!


----------



## gsilbers (Mar 24, 2014)

cool thanks


----------



## Tatu (Mar 24, 2014)

I'm also slowly turning towards this approach. Saving track stacks as presets is a heck of a time saver.


----------



## PJMorgan (Mar 24, 2014)

I have a main template setup up but I've also adopted the modular approach. I've so far got a Lass Lite, Cinebrass, Geist & multi guitar track stacks.

There are a few things I would definitely change in your setup guide though. Instead of creating a multitimbral track with the desired amount of tracks, just use a standard software instrument, load kontakt multi output version. Then add the required amount of aux tracks via the + button, select all aux tracks, right click & make aux tracks visible in the main tracks window. Even though there's no record button on the aux tracks you can still record on a selected track or create midi region on them. IMO much less cluttered than using multi-timbral plus mixer tracks. 

Also is there really a need to the 1st part of step 5 if your using the batch function create outputs etc....?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 24, 2014)

The problem with this is that with multitimbral instances in Logic Pro, it all goes to 1 core when i track is armed and put in "live mode". (In general, VE Pro is better for multitimbral.)

IMHO you would be better served to load up more Kontakt instances and then create a Track Stack for them and save them as a patch, as Kontakt instances are not that CPU hungry.


----------



## Saxer (Mar 24, 2014)

yepp... might be no problem with some pads, but problems will probably start with scripting intense patches.

track stacks are a great thing! i like to load what i need into a song instead of handling gigantic templates too. but it doesn't work without problems here.

i'm using logic 10.0.4 (can't update at the moment, have to wait for system update on my new mac, still configuring... http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37593 ).
in 10.0.4 the track stack function is still rather buggy - when loading the outputs are changed and strange things happen sometimes (loading multiple single instruments instead of one multi-instrument etc). i hope, this will be solved in 10.0.6! hopefully next week i will try...

exf-sends and aux-channels are annother thing to think of. when the channels inside track stacks use sends with efx it might confuse logic when the sends are already assigned and a track stack is loaded.

i have less problems when importing tracks from other songs. i thought about having a template storehouse song and just import what i need.


----------



## PJMorgan (Mar 24, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ 24th March 2014 said:


> The problem with this is that with multitimbral instances in Logic Pro, it all goes to 1 core when i track is armed and put in "live mode". (In general, VE Pro is better for multitimbral.)
> 
> IMHO you would be better served to load up more Kontakt instances and then create a Track Stack for them and save them as a patch, as Kontakt instances are not that CPU hungry.



This is true & the most annoying thing about Logic, although it has improved a bit since v10. Also the single core problem is pretty sporadic, sometimes showing a small load & other times a heavy load on projects. 

I'm thinking of getting VE Pro at some stage & running it on my Mac mini (no slave, for now) mostly for kontakt & multi-timbral instruments. Would there be much of a difference in CPU load doing it this way?


----------



## Blake Ewing (Mar 24, 2014)

*@PJMorgan* re: using aux tracks, that's what I've done in this setup. I'm not sure I understand the difference you're describing.

re: the 1st part of step 5, you're quite possibly right. I was using an already setup patch I made a while back, and was trying to reverse engineer what I had done on that.

*@Saxer* re: EFX sends. This was a problem at first. But, I then made my default main fx sends in the upper numbered range and that cleared up some space.

*@EastWest Lurker* I think you're probably correct in most cases to use separate Kontakt instances or VEPro to accomplish this with a leaner use of CPU. And, I think that will be the next type of setup for me.

And to everyone reading the journal entry, I don't want my perhaps clumsy implementation of this to trip up my main point though (or to claim it is the only way to achieve the goal), which is this:

*For me, and hopefully others - to the extent you haven't thought about this before, a modular approach using tracks stacks saved as user patches in Logic X can save time, lead to different way of thinking about templates, and can perhaps lead to an overall cleaner experience when working with those templates.*


----------



## Saxer (Mar 24, 2014)

yepp, the concept itself is great! and good idea to use aux with higher numbers in the basic template. i will probably use this in future! thanks!


----------



## PJMorgan (Mar 24, 2014)

Blake Ewing @ 24th March 2014 said:


> *@PJMorgan* re: using aux tracks, that's what I've done in this setup. I'm not sure I understand the difference you're describing.



OK sorry my bad :oops: .....but you could save a little more time in not having to tick the mult-timbral check box, because once you load a multi-ouput/timbral plugin like Kontakt on an instrument track the add aux option is still there 

I've a lot of track templates like this in the library & it can save a lot of time. I've been working on a couple of guitar based tracks recently that I thought needed some strings, add an instrument track, select LASS Strings in the library user patches, job done. This is how I used to work in Reaper too, it's really handy especially when you couldn't be bothered working in & trying to find your way around a 70 track template.


----------



## Yogi108 (May 23, 2015)

Hi Blake:

I ran into your journal entry and I tried implementing it using the 9 String Ensemble articulation patches in Albion II within Logic X... The only difference is I loaded it using VE Pro. I therefore had to implement a few extra steps, especially when it came to the outputs in VE Pro as well as in Kontakt within VE Pro... It seems to be working great, and as you emphasized... it looks to be very efficient in opening up the whole set within logic as a user patch!

I'm curious to see if you use VE Pro...? I wonder if using this extra step might help with the CPU... I am assuming limiting the number of instances within each patch and also the type of instrument that is being loaded (Albion in Kontakt vs... HS in Play) may alter results... Obviously having a less powerful system would affect things as well. 

I LOVE the ability to switch between articulations directly on Logic, being that that is where the midi is being recorded... Have you developed this any further? Any other tips or tricks that you've learned along the way would be greatly appreciated! 

Thanks! Rod


----------



## mc_deli (May 24, 2015)

Interesting to see this. I tried saving and recalling patches a few weeks ago but I had strange behaviour whereby when I recalled the track stack patch, only the main VI track would load and not the midi sub-tracks. 
:(

This thread has at least inspired me to try again as I think this is a very useful feature of X.


----------



## Blake Ewing (May 24, 2015)

Yogi108 @ Sat May 23 said:


> Hi Blake:
> 
> I ran into your journal entry and I tried implementing it using the 9 String Ensemble articulation patches in Albion II within Logic X... The only difference is I loaded it using VE Pro. I therefore had to implement a few extra steps, especially when it came to the outputs in VE Pro as well as in Kontakt within VE Pro... It seems to be working great, and as you emphasized... it looks to be very efficient in opening up the whole set within logic as a user patch!
> 
> ...



Hi Rod - I'm glad this has been of some use.

I have used VE Pro in the past, when I used a slave PC along with my Mac. Many, many people work this way, and there are incredible benefits both in monetary cost and efficiency.

I've since moved on to a one computer setup (Mac only) out of personal preference and workflow. Though, I could still use VE or VE Pro within this setup for some benefit (even though I don't).

As far as articulation switching, you could use a UACC template for the Spitfire stuff (I made one available for download on my site *here*), or perhaps if you're feeling super techy something like the AG Toolkit or the more simple Art Conductor (and I'm sure there are others) allows you to use automation lanes for articulation changes that chase.



> Interesting to see this. I tried saving and recalling patches a few weeks ago but I had strange behaviour whereby when I recalled the track stack patch, only the main VI track would load and not the midi sub-tracks.
> Sad
> 
> This thread has at least inspired me to try again as I think this is a very useful feature of X.



*@mc_deli*

I had this happen when I used a saved user patch (in this case a kontakt 5 blank slate with some common settings I use already instantiated) as the basis for building another track stack user patch. It would only bring up the original instrument and not the others, which sounds like what is happening to you.


----------



## Yogi108 (May 24, 2015)

Thanks Blake! Currently I am only using a single Mac myself. I ended up getting the full EW Hollywood orchestra when they had they're huge sale around Easter, and I added VE Pro in the hopes of optimizing the CPU on the computer. I haven't done a full orchestra template and I'm leaning more towards less is more... But even without a slave PC, I think it is helping to have the VE Pro running the plugins so Logic can focus on other things... 

I downloaded the Touch OSC template you created. I tried it out with Albion II and it seemed to work just fine. The only thing that was a bit confusing was having what looks to be all the possible articulations, and knowing which ones are actually available for the patch I am working with... I'm guessing in part it's just spending some time with it... Though I wondered if maybe I might be able to just delete the articulations it doesn't use and saving each OSC module on its own? What do you think? 

I also went ahead and purchased Art Condictor. They just sent an update with Mural and Sable templates! Hopefully they can do the same for Albion! 

If you (and anyone else) can share what work flow you are currently focusing in on, I'd love to hear all about it! For me the balance between the learning curve of all the music technology stuff vs the creative flow is something I'm still working out. I feel like it's part of developing your sound and work flow, but it's always great to hear from others in terms of [/url]what they do and how they are working through this process. Thanks! 

Rod Contreras -Private Piano Instructor and Composer
[www.encinitaspiano.com]


----------



## kclements (May 28, 2015)

Hey Blake - 

Funny, I've switched to this method about 4 months or so ago. After I was getting tired of always waiting for a lot of samples to load - I thought this might be a better way to use "templates"

So far, I like it. I think I would like to add some aux sends right off the bat for verb and delay and such, and then add instruments as needed. 

But very good article. I need to go back and read again and pick up some more tips'

Thanks
kc


----------



## Blake Ewing (May 28, 2015)

kclements @ Thu May 28 said:


> So far, I like it. I think I would like to add some aux sends right off the bat for verb and delay and such, and then add instruments as needed.



Yes kc, I agree.

I usually start my new Logic projects with a "New from Template" file. That way I can load a blank arrange page to add in instruments (or saved user patches as in this blog example), but my windows, sends, auxes and master channel fx plugs are already loaded and in my preferred default states.

-Blake


----------



## Yogi108 (May 29, 2015)

Has anyone tried using VE Pro in conjunction with the multi-timbral approach mentioned above? I set it all up and saved the Patch in Logic, but when I try and load it again, the patch does not load with the multiple tracks within the saved track stack... It's just a single track and it doesn't seem to be connected to the VE Pro Metaframe...


----------



## IFM (May 29, 2015)

I've not tried to save a track stack as a preset...duh and I should. And you can save them with multiple instances of course.

My initial template designs were always around modular. Logic's presets and menu system were the way I always liked to work till my last template version. Now I'm going back as my libraries have grown too large. I've kept up with some presets.

Basically my approach now is I create "project' templates based on what I'm working on and the main starting template before that just has my routing, preferences, and screen sets done up.

Chris


----------



## stonzthro (May 29, 2015)

An alternative for VE-Pro users would be to create one mega template to import from, meaning you always start with a simple template 9or empty project) and then import what you need from your mega template. 

Not exactly the same approach, but it is modular - you just load it a different way.


----------



## Yogi108 (May 30, 2015)

It seems like most people use VE Pro with the East west stuff... I wonder ifit's overkill for me to use VE Pro when using Spitfire... Do any of you Spitfire users use VE Pro within Logic? I was assuming that VE Pro should be used with most libraries, but from the sounds of it, with Hollywood Strings in particular (which obviously used Play instead of Kontakt)... this is where it's really necessary... Any thoughts?


----------



## samphony (May 31, 2015)

I get less CPU spikes when involving VEP. THe heavy scripted sable libraries cause this sometimes. It really depends on your workflow even when working on a single machine VEP can be of great benefit. I do mixed setups. A fresh load as you go is of great benefit when one tries to achieve new exiting soundworlds. I lean towards writing and designing from scratch once I'm happy I open a bigger template and import my stuff from the previous sound design/theme sketcher sessions.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 31, 2015)

Yogi108 @ Sat May 30 said:


> It seems like most people use VE Pro with the East west stuff... I wonder ifit's overkill for me to use VE Pro when using Spitfire... Do any of you Spitfire users use VE Pro within Logic? I was assuming that VE Pro should be used with most libraries, but from the sounds of it, with Hollywood Strings in particular (which obviously used Play instead of Kontakt)... this is where it's really necessary... Any thoughts?



VE Pro is a huge help with any library and with any DAW. The more demanding the library, and my understanding is that the Spitfire libraries are pretty demanding, the more it helps.

I helped an LA composer who uses tons of Spitfire set it up in VE Pro on his Mac Pro and it definitely helped him. Obviously, on a slave computer it helps even more.

I am skeptical about this modular approach however. Load your templates up in the morning while you are making your coffee and forget about it


----------



## Blake Ewing (May 31, 2015)

EastWest Lurker @ Sun May 31 said:


> I am skeptical about this modular approach however. Load your templates up in the morning while you are making your coffee and forget about it



Valid point. For me however, it isn't as much about load times as it is not wanting to scroll through hundreds of tracks or folders while I'm working. Plus, I don't drink coffee. :D


----------



## Yogi108 (May 31, 2015)

Blake... If you ever come to Encinitas, I'll treat you to some Pannikin coffee... There is life before and after... LOL... 

I'm thinking for now I'll not use VE Pro within this modular approach until my computer shows signs of fatigue... Hopefully it will hold up... So far the only times I've noticed an issue is, ironically, when I close a VE Pro instance that is running Kontakt... It glitches but as soon as I reopen the VE Pro window... it starts working again...

I took the dive and purchased Sable Complete using the bespoken drive service... I can't wait to start working with it! 

I noticed in one of the screen shots, Blake... you have "Sable V1, V2 and VC". I'm curious if you could share some details on what these presets include... 

Thanks for everyone for their feedback! Always so informative!

Rod Contreras
Music Educator / Composer
www.encinitaspiano.com


----------



## Blake Ewing (Jun 2, 2015)

Yogi108 @ Sun May 31 said:


> I noticed in one of the screen shots, Blake... you have "Sable V1, V2 and VC". I'm curious if you could share some details on what these presets include...



Rod,

I took a look at my user patches, and those have been replaced or deleted to accommodate updates, etc. So, I'm afraid I don't remember exactly what those presets were. Most likely, I chose my most commonly used patches at the time, and made a patch out of those for each section (which is basically what I would do now, too).

I'm also doing one Kontakt instance per patch now (unless I'm specifically layering something), and I usually go ahead and set up sends and auxes along with track specific plugs I know I will most likely use.

-Blake


----------



## The Darris (Jun 2, 2015)

I use a similar approach in Cubase 7 and 8. You can save your individual instruments on the rack as presets and load them when you need them. However, you still have to set up your routing which takes time but is a lot faster in Cubase 7.5 and 8 now that they fixed the functionality of the Output routing in the instrument rack.


----------



## samphony (Jun 2, 2015)

Different to cubase Logic Pro x can load the routing as well which is really helpful in that regard.


----------



## Yogi108 (Jun 3, 2015)

Great stuff! Thanks Blake! Thanks gentlemen! Such a treasure-trove of musical knowledge is to be much appreciated! I just received the complete Sable Bundle from Spitfire! can't wait to get going with it! Hope to post something soon...


----------



## BillionsUponUs (Apr 4, 2016)

Hi everybody,
I've begun building modules like this also.
The only problem (big problem) is that when I try to save a user patch, nothing happens. no user patch is saved. 


Blake Ewing said:


> Rod,
> 
> I took a look at my user patches, and those have been replaced or deleted to accommodate updates, etc. So, I'm afraid I don't remember exactly what those presets were. Most likely, I chose my most commonly used patches at the time, and made a patch out of those for each section (which is basically what I would do now, too).
> 
> ...



Why 1 kontakt instance per patch?


----------



## Saxer (Apr 5, 2016)

Logics import options from song to song are the easiest way for me to import complete template blocks including auxes and fx in no time and bug-free.

Multiple instruments (track stacks) saved and recalled into and from the library is still buggy in Logic. Always something is randomly missing: output settings, track names and coloures and sometimes even plugins.


----------



## samphony (Apr 5, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Logics import options from song to song are the easiest way for me to import complete template blocks including auxes and fx in no time and bug-free.
> 
> Multiple instruments (track stacks) saved and recalled into and from the library is still buggy in Logic. Always something is randomly missing: output settings, track names and coloures and sometimes even plugins.



I just wish the dev team would bring back an option to have the import area as a separate window.


----------



## mc_deli (Apr 5, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Logics import options from song to song are the easiest way for me to import complete template blocks including auxes and fx in no time and bug-free.
> 
> Multiple instruments (track stacks) saved and recalled into and from the library is still buggy in Logic. Always something is randomly missing: output settings, track names and coloures and sometimes even plugins.


I have the opposite experience to this. I found importing tracks stacks to be unpredictable but saved and recalled track stack patches work great.

Go figure!

If you can't find saved patches check the paths and finder..,


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 5, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Logics import options from song to song are the easiest way for me to import complete template blocks including auxes and fx in no time and bug-free.
> 
> Multiple instruments (track stacks) saved and recalled into and from the library is still buggy in Logic. Always something is randomly missing: output settings, track names and coloures and sometimes even plugins.



Really Saxer? I have not seen that here at all. Some Aux conflicts though when loading from the library into a project already laden with auxes.


----------



## Saxer (Apr 5, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> Really Saxer? I have not seen that here at all. Some Aux conflicts though when loading from the library into a project already laden with auxes.


Hm, maybe I'm just lucky or my imported settings are too simple 
Actually I try to keep them inside a track stack. For example I import a horn section which is a track stack including four tracks with one horn each and reverb insert on the header track. One eq per channel. Same with trombones, trumpets, woodwinds, strings (one track stack each). 
No problems when I import them via file menu/import/Logic songs. 
Buggy when I import them via library.


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 5, 2016)

Are you talking about a Folder stack or a Summing stack?


----------



## Saxer (Apr 5, 2016)

Summing


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 5, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Summing



It sounds to me like you are using a Summing stack for what a Folder stack was designed to do, unless i am misunderstanding your intention.

For those who don't know: A Summing stack is designed for making a playable instrument out of multiple instruments e.g i want a Violin 1 legato patch made up of HS and KH Concert Strings 2 sending to a QL Spaces. I put these in a Summing Stack and voila, I have a patch I can save in the library and bring in to any project. 

A folder stack is e.g. I have 5 HS instruments and 5 KH instruments that I want to organize int a folder that I can collapse and expand. These are importable but I would save them in a template, not the library.


----------



## airwavemusic (Apr 5, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> It sounds to me like you are using a Summing stack for what a Folder stack was designed to do, unless i am misunderstanding your intention.
> 
> For those who don't know: A Summing stack is designed for making a playable instrument out of multiple instruments e.g i want a Violin 1 legato patch made up of HS and KH Concert Strings 2 sending to a QL Spaces. I put these in a Summing Stack and voila, I have a patch I can save in the library and bring in to any project.
> 
> A folder stack is e.g. I have 5 HS instruments and 5 KH instruments that I want to organize int a folder that I can collapse and expand. These are importable but I would save them in a template, not the library.



Want to add my two cents. Actually summing stacks are designed as groups in ableton live with the extra ability to play stacked tracks. The good trick when organizing a template is to first make summing stacks of all the instruments one uses then, stack those stacks into a folder stack. You can't do that by selecting all your summings, but you can pick one, create a folder stack of your summing then drag the others in the same folder. 

That's when doing that into logic that I feel the pain of ableton live users. Because folders don't exist yet. Major pain. 

Back on topic, I'm personally not a fan of saved channel strips in logic. I'd rather keep the kontakt instruments ready to use with purged samples on all channels in the template. And sure, for the more impatient people vep on the same machine is a must have, this way you can load your synths only in the template while everything else is ready to be loaded in vep. 

Loading my 194 track template with all samples purged takes me about 10 minutes. Saving the first time takes about eight. After that it's pretty much straightforward. I'm considering vep too, in order to optimize those horrible cup spikes I get with libraries such as drum lab


----------



## Saxer (Apr 6, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> It sounds to me like you are using a Summing stack for what a Folder stack was designed to do, unless i am misunderstanding your intention.
> 
> For those who don't know: A Summing stack is designed for making a playable instrument out of multiple instruments e.g i want a Violin 1 legato patch made up of HS and KH Concert Strings 2 sending to a QL Spaces. I put these in a Summing Stack and voila, I have a patch I can save in the library and bring in to any project.
> 
> A folder stack is e.g. I have 5 HS instruments and 5 KH instruments that I want to organize int a folder that I can collapse and expand. These are importable but I would save them in a template, not the library.


Probably it was the intention to make stacked sounds when developing Summing stacks (like Racks in Ableton or Combinators in Reason). But it is also the fastest way of creating a sub-group containing a bunch of tracks. The Drum Machine Designer uses it too. You can easily collaps the whole stack (in my case an "Orchestra section") to one main track. And I have one main mixer track for each section. But when I open the Summing track all tracks inside behave like any normal single track. I only close track stacks when I need more space on screen.
So the Summing tracks do what I would have done anyway: have an aux as a sub group in the mixer for each section. And I can even record dynamic curves on the header track and each of the sub tracks follows the curve if I want to.


----------



## soundgeek (Apr 6, 2016)

If you wan't to create a stacked instrument that includes sends to effects on AUX tracks, you have to create your summing stack from the mixer :
- select your tracks including the AUX tracks you want in your stack.
- Choose to create the summing stack using the mixer "Options" menu.
When using such a saved "stacked instrument" in a new project, logic will use the first available bus and AUX track number to recreate an identical routing.

If you don't want this, for example if you always use exactly the same bus number for a specific thing on all your projects, and want your instrument to be saved including this routing, just create your summing stack without including the AUX track. However if you use such an instrument in a project that doesn't use the specified bus in the same way, you may get unexpected results ...


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 6, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Probably it was the intention to make stacked sounds when developing Summing stacks (like Racks in Ableton or Combinators in Reason). But it is also the fastest way of creating a sub-group containing a bunch of tracks. The Drum Machine Designer uses it too. You can easily collaps the whole stack (in my case an "Orchestra section") to one main track. And I have one main mixer track for each section. But when I open the Summing track all tracks inside behave like any normal single track. I only close track stacks when I need more space on screen.
> So the Summing tracks do what I would have done anyway: have an aux as a sub group in the mixer for each section. And I can even record dynamic curves on the header track and each of the sub tracks follows the curve if I want to.



Understood, but you could do that more efficiently CPU wise and transparently with a Track Stack and VCA faders, which don't affect your reverbs.


----------



## anp27 (Jul 17, 2016)

Interesting approach! My immediate reaction is, what benefits does this Modular approach have as opposed to just saving your sounds in a template?


----------



## Saxer (Jul 19, 2016)

anp27 said:


> What benefits does this Modular approach have as opposed to just saving your sounds in a template?


Smaller template... less loading time, less scrolling tracks on screen, less CPU and RAM = faster an easier work.


----------



## anp27 (Jul 20, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Smaller template... less loading time, less scrolling tracks on screen, less CPU and RAM = faster an easier work.



Hmmm, that does makes sense, thanks!


----------



## jonnybutter (Aug 22, 2016)

_Multiple instruments (track stacks) saved and recalled into and from the library is still buggy in Logic. Always something is randomly missing: output settings, track names and coloures and sometimes even plugins._

Unfortunately true. Defeats the purpose of saving a set up. I just upgraded to LPX 10.2.4, and I'd heard this was fixed, but..no. It's still a mess. 

I love the modular approach outlined in the OP (excellent tutorial, btw!) and have been trying to do this with patches for several months. They just don't save/recall correctly, as others have reported. And there's the strange context restriction as to what kind of patch you can load (e.g. you have to have an aux selected to access the aux submenu in your patches library. ?). And even though it seems to be (at least in part) aux conflicts at the heart of this bugginess, you can't save a *folder* stack as a patch.

I've wasted another chunk of time this morning trying to get this to work. Makes me grouchy. Just about the last thing you want to do is set up mini-templates and have them not save/recall correctly - pointless tedium.

Anyway, the modular approach really makes sense for me and the way I work, so I was very excited to hear about User Patches when they were first introduced. Wish they would get this part figured out.


----------



## Saxer (Aug 25, 2016)

Yepp... I use the import function to load sections from other songs. It's much more reliable than saving track stacks in Logics library browser.


----------



## jonnybutter (Aug 25, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Yepp... I use the import function to load sections from other songs. It's much more reliable than saving track stacks in Logics library browser.



That is a great tip, Saxer. I will investigate. Many thanks!


----------



## anp27 (Sep 24, 2016)

Saxer said:


> exf-sends and aux-channels are annother thing to think of. when the channels inside track stacks use sends with efx it might confuse logic when the sends are already assigned and a track stack is loaded.





Saxer said:


> and good idea to use aux with higher numbers in the basic template. i will probably use this in future!



Not quite following this... could you please explain?


----------



## mc_deli (Sep 25, 2016)

Loading patches that are folder tracks with kontakt multis works for me. The only thing that doesn't get loaded are automation lane assignments.

But, I don't save any aux assignments or sends with the patches


----------



## John Busby (Oct 11, 2016)

mind = blown....
#thread


----------



## John Busby (Oct 11, 2016)

okay so...
i'm just now seeing the value of a well organized template and i'm on the fence about it
reading through this thread i'm not sure what the best approach is; is there such thing as a best approach?
i mean several of you raise excellent points and work flows, i hope i'm on the right track with this...

so here's what i think i need, and i'm looking for any helpful input here. i'm running logic pro x btw
- a template with folder stacks of (1) instance of kontakt per track, say string section, brass section, woods etc.
- all the sections have their proper routing in the parent track with aux sends and fx etc.
- purge all the samples in the instruments and reload as needed?

i mean with this, it wouldn't necessarily take that long to load plus i wouldn't have to worry about loading the patches into the project and worry with the routing because that would already be there.
the samples themselves would be the only thing that would need loading.
any thoughts?


----------



## Chris Hurst (Mar 8, 2017)

Just found this thread. I've adopted this method as well, after tinkering with Reaper recently and seeing if Logic could do something similar to what I found to be a real time saving process in Reaper. I've tried all sorts with Templates, but find that my requirements change frequently, so loading up a template for each session didn't really work for me.

It is similar to the way you can insert a track template in Reaper which would bring in a whole library if you wanted, already split out as you want it (number of Midi tracks, Kontakt output routing etc) but it can import it disabled, fully purged and use no CPU/Memory footprint at all. Amazingly flexible, but powerful time saving feature....of which Reaper has lots. And lots. If you are willing to put the time in and customise it....and get past the fact that the plugins/menus/GUI isn't the most aesthetically pleasing!

...I just can't leave Logic behind though...something about it keeps pulling me back to it!

I do use the modular approach with a sort of pre-configured routing template though. So I'll have some blank instances of Kontakt already set up in Track Stacks of Winds, Perc, Strings, Brass, Synths etc which are all outputting to groups, which have their own Reverb sends all set up. That way all my reverb routing and grouping is exactly the same each time and set up in a way that I use all the time, so that comes in each time I load up a blank template.


----------

