# To Template or To Not



## ryanstrong (Oct 21, 2015)

I spent quite a bit of time setting up, routing, reverbing a pretty large template... about 500 tracks with all my VI's placed in and purged etc. I worked for a while with it and initially loved it!

But recently I set up a "bare template" - meaning I had a few Kontakt instances loaded bare, VEP instances with my slave loaded bare with everything routed correctly and set up my main reverb sends. SO while I wrote I went and loaded a VI as I needed it or as I thought about it vs scrolling around my massive template... and it felt pretty good.

This was brought up in a live Twitch with Daniel James and I liked what he said, as he doesn't use a Junkie XL style template, but he likes to THINK about what he wants to use next as an instrument versus BROWSING for what he wants. Which made sense to me on a certain level.

What do you guys think? I'm on the fence, but there's something very... "of the moment" or even "rock and roll" if you will about having a bare template versus having a large pre-loaded template.

Thoughts?


----------



## Zhao Shen (Oct 21, 2015)

I love having a bare template. I think it's good to base it on what sort of project you're working on - if you know exactly what you want or are sticking to 100% orchestral instruments, etc, then you probably won't be doing a huge amount of searching, and templates would probably speed your workflow up a ton. Personally I love the entire process of thinking up which new instruments to add that I might not have thought of for other projects.


----------



## lucor (Oct 21, 2015)

I'm the same way as Daniel. I like to start clean, but I also hate having to do too much work before actually being able to start doing stuff.

That's why the new function of disabling Instrument tracks in Cubase is absolutely perfect for me. I made a template with every single instrument I own; routed, balanced and placed everything and at the end disabled all of it.

So in the end it's a mixture of both for me. I start with a completely bare template, but still have everything at my disposal with a click of one button. I tried all sorts of other workflows, but this one is perfect for me.


----------



## ghostnote (Oct 21, 2015)

I have a basic Template with Piano, Strings, Percussion, Brass and some FX. Constantly switching between sounds, looking for new inspiration. I've noticed that the real inspiration hits in when I'm opening a void Instance of Kontakt or Play. That's the moment the flow kicks in.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 21, 2015)

I have a dozen or so templates for all kinds of projects. Love it and what is really pathetic is that I actually enjoy rebuilding them periodically and he;ping others build them. 

I know, I am a geek


----------



## Vin (Oct 21, 2015)

Tried to like it, didn't like it. Not even for library music. Building templates only led to more procrastination in my case.

I like blank project page.


----------



## Lawson. (Oct 21, 2015)

I have a 750+ track template of pretty much every instrument and articulation you can think of (minus a balalaika but I'm getting that next :D), and I gotta say it's really handy. I just open it up, pick the instrument I want, and start writing.

I originally used to write with no template at all, and I think it actually hindered creativity because I kept trying to find articulations, load them, try them, be like "nope, that's not what I want" and have to keep searching. Now I can just drag the MIDI data to whatever articulation I want and try it. Plus, seeing what options I have help me think out of the box.

HOWEVER, yesterday as I was working on a film, I really wanted something to sketch it out with first but I didn't have it. I'm about 99.5% single instruments in my template, and prefer it that way, but it was a bit annoying not to just hear the whole string section playing and have to use a piano instead.


----------



## goblin (Oct 21, 2015)

Recently got into working with kontakt libraries and reaper and in some videos I've seen I thought it was kind of counterproductive how people had set up, template with 100+ tracks of everything they have that they only might use and that way also wasting ram. Too much clutter for me. I just save the channel and anything loads in just a few seconds with an ssd (which is kind of a must these days anyways). If its work for a project or album, the template builds itself as the production goes on


----------



## TomNoyd (Oct 21, 2015)

My opinion means nothing (but yet I feel a perverse need to share it).

With having a Toshiba laptop with 4 GB of RAM as my _one and only computer_, I'm afraid the "one-ultra-everything" template is not an option for me. So, I usually have to "plan" and have at least a vague idea of what I want to do before I even start composing/producing (genre? instruments? mood? etc). So, a handful of times, I start off blank in my DAW and add what instruments I know (or feel) will work for the piece. 

However, with that said, I try to utilize "mini-band" or "mini-ensemble" templates when I can. I have a small handful of different metal and rock band track templates routed, reverbed, etc. I also have track templates by the section to add on later. For example, my itty-bitty orchestral set up is just Albion (for the most part) - but then after I load that up and I'm in the middle of sketching, I think, "hmmm, I could probably use some Jasper Blunk FF brass for this." Then after just a couple clicks, I have those trumpet, trombone, and horn freebies added in (instead of adding them in track-by-track; instance-by-instance). 

Anyway, my "build with LEGOs" template approach is sort of my compromise between having to add in one track at a time and overloading my poor, tiny laptop with EVERYTHING.


----------



## quantum7 (Oct 21, 2015)

goblin said:


> Recently got into working with kontakt libraries and reaper and in some videos I've seen I thought it was kind of counterproductive how people had set up, template with 100+ tracks of everything they have that they only might use and that way also wasting ram. Too much clutter for me. I just save the channel and anything loads in just a few seconds with an ssd (which is kind of a must these days anyways). If its work for a project or album, the template builds itself as the production goes on



This has been my philosophy on the matter also, but I can definitely understand why templates can come in handy when you have precious little time to get your tracks finished.


----------



## JunoVHS (Oct 21, 2015)

Everyone is different, and huge templates are life savers for many people, just not me, because my brain doesn't work as well on templates.

I found those huge monster templates killed my creativity, and it was too much to manage for me. I'd be in the middle of writing, and I'd have to stop to fix something. In Bitwig (and others) its nice, you can pull tracks/groups from any project and bring it into your current one, so for example if I need full strings I just pull the string group from another project and delete what I don't need. It works for me!


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 21, 2015)

I have an orchestra template. That's less than 100 tracks, including choirs. Having a whole orchestra loaded and ready to play in there makes sense to me in terms of writing and putting ideas together. Anything else, I don't see a point in having in a template. Especially synths - quite an oxymoron in itself. I could set up a 1500 track template that includes even the most obscure kazoo sample hidden somewhere on one of the drives, but what for?

I try to keep this stuff as small and lean as possible. For me, the bigger these monsters get, the more distracting and creativity-killing it gets. I don't even see the benefit of having every single thing in there so I can just pick whatever and play right away, because if I'm supposed to fumble through a 500 tracks template to find one stupid little thing in there, I think it would actually be faster and less distracting to just create a new track and load the instrument from scratch.


----------



## ryanstrong (Oct 21, 2015)

goblin said:


> If its work for a project or album, the template builds itself as the production goes on


+1

Yeah I think the only reason why I initially liked the mega template was because I liked _building_ the mega template. But in practice I'm just not use to it... creatively that is. As someone said, my brain just doesn't think this way.


----------



## Russell Moran (Oct 21, 2015)

In Logic Pro X I start with a 'simple' template - ( audio, keys, drums) and load Track Stacks containing groups of instruments that I've saved as Patches ( say various strings or brass, percussion, world, any odd thing that I like, really). I find the 'giant' template approach too distracting and anyway I usually compose first from my guitar. 

rz


----------



## cyoder (Oct 21, 2015)

I love the "everything loaded template" idea as a dream, but I think it's just not possible for me now. I'd have to sink all kinds of money into getting it to work since my computer at this moment can't handle all too much. But I have this strange problem where Kontakt randomly hangs for 10-15mins while loading an instrument, which of course decimates creative flow, so loading as I go hasn't been working for me. For now I've settled with the in-between solution of a modular template, just loading common groups of instruments that I will use. I'm always brainstorming though.

Best,


----------



## Saxer (Oct 21, 2015)

i have section templates. when i need them i import them from other songs from my templates folder. i don't want everything loaded all the time. too small tracks and too much scrolling.


----------



## Killiard (Oct 21, 2015)

Just one big template for everything for me. I love the "show tracks with data" feature in Cubase. I use it all the time once I've started something and want to try and only use those instruments.


----------



## synergy543 (Oct 21, 2015)

Saxer said:


> i have section templates. when i need them i import them from other songs from my templates folder. i don't want everything loaded all the time. too small tracks and too much scrolling.


This is a great idea Saxer. I'm surprised more people don't use this process as its very easy to import sections as needed with Vienna Ensemble.


----------



## kurtvanzo (Oct 21, 2015)

Saxer said:


> i have section templates. when i need them i import them from other songs from my templates folder. i don't want everything loaded all the time. too small tracks and too much scrolling.


I started with a mega template, but quickly had to switch to section templates and importing the tracks I need into a blank session.
Starting from scratch is okay, but set-up can take a while. And I'm not sure how DJ can remember all his libraries (especially the smaller ones NOT in the Kontakt tab) or what exactly is in each one. I recently calculated only about 30 percent of each library I purchase ends up in the template (on average), so it's saving me having to search through the 70 percent that I know I don't like. Once you get beyond 3 or 4 TB of libraries on SSDs, you kind of want to have a sorting system or some way of filtering out patches. At least this way I can say I have hear every sound I own at least once.  Otherwise, with my memory, true treasures would get lost in the sea of big libraries.


----------



## mdvirtual (Oct 21, 2015)

I think both approaches have their merits.

When I'm scoring a feature I like working with a fairly complete template with all my VE Pro and stem routings in place so the workflow is quick and efficient. I spend a lot of time at the start defining my virtual ensemble for the film, not loading every library I have but focusing the template on the project at hand. That helps me develop a sound for the score and maintain some consistency from cue to cue. I also like to leave some things open ended to allow for experimentation along the way (i.e. spare Kontakt/Zebra/whatever instances pre-routed and ready to play with).

On the other hand there's something very freeing about starting with a blank session and loading things as needed. Somehow it feels like the music could go in any direction vs being constrained by some preconceived notion of what I intended when I set up the template. I experiment more and the music often surprises me as it unfolds (more like channeling vs actively controlling it). I also find I'm more likely to pick up a real instrument vs using what's in the template because it's there in front of me. The danger I've found with the template is that it's very easy to fall into routines and end up with things that sound more "cookie cutter".

Makes me think I should consider the zen path more often...


----------



## mdvirtual (Oct 21, 2015)

synergy543 said:


> This is a great idea Saxer. I'm surprised more people don't use this process as its very easy to import sections as needed with Vienna Ensemble.



Definitely a great idea. I have a variety of instrument groups set up as track templates in Pro Tools so i can pull those in quickly whne I'm composing on the fly.


----------



## synthpunk (Oct 21, 2015)

Switched to blank slates recently and went with a more minimal approach and this works allot better for me now.


----------



## ryanstrong (Oct 21, 2015)

mdvirtual said:


> Somehow it feels like the music could go in any direction vs being constrained by some preconceived notion of what I intended when I set up the template.



This is my exact feeling.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Oct 21, 2015)

cyoder said:


> I love the "everything loaded template" idea as a dream, but I think it's just not possible for me now. I'd have to sink all kinds of money into getting it to work since my computer at this moment can't handle all too much. But I have this strange problem where Kontakt randomly hangs for 10-15mins while loading an instrument, which of course decimates creative flow, so loading as I go hasn't been working for me. For now I've settled with the in-between solution of a modular template, just loading common groups of instruments that I will use. I'm always brainstorming though.
> 
> Best,


I experienced that same problem when loading as well. Turns out the problem was Windows defender. It was scanning every file, including the samples. I created an exclusion of the sample library folders and that fixed it.


----------



## musophrenic (Oct 21, 2015)

synergy543 said:


> This is a great idea Saxer. I'm surprised more people don't use this process as its very easy to import sections as needed with Vienna Ensemble.



Is that ONLY possible with Vienna Ensemble? Because I've been thinking about this idea of section templates, but I wasn't sure it was possible directly within Cubase. Or is it?


----------



## cyoder (Oct 21, 2015)

Darthmorphling said:


> I experienced that same problem when loading as well. Turns out the problem was Windows defender. It was scanning every file, including the samples. I created an exclusion of the sample library folders and that fixed it.


Thanks for the tip, this issue has been causing me to scratch my head for a while now. I'll check that out!


----------



## afterlight82 (Oct 21, 2015)

Kind of similar to Saxer, but a little different. In Cubase, track archives are your friend. (you have to delete the timecode/project start stuff from the xml though). Have a full template, with all loaded (if you can do that, or as much as you can) in VE Pro. But then start from blank if you want to (with all your preferences and mixer window settings pre-set).

If you want strings - well, you go to your track archives, import the track archive called "strings" and select the tracks you want. Job done. It's highly recommended anyway for a big template, in case stuff gets deleted, you don't have to search the ve-pro to find what you need. You can pull in entire track archives, individual tracks...you can have the track archive laid out any what which way you like so you can quickly find the relevant track. Beats waiting for Kontakt for something super simple. You _can_ have your cake and eat it...


----------



## synergy543 (Oct 21, 2015)

musophrenic said:


> Is that ONLY possible with Vienna Ensemble? Because I've been thinking about this idea of section templates, but I wasn't sure it was possible directly within Cubase. Or is it?


As far as I know, its only possible with Vienna Ensemble (VE). I don't own Cubase. Vienna Ensemble runs separate from the DAW so you that can load and unload VE templates while keeping your DAW sequence open. This means you could load strings, record them. Then close all the strings, open up Woodwinds, work on them, record a stem, and close all of the woodwinds in VE. And then continue to open up new sections as needed. For me, this is ideal as I can only play one instrument at a time. And if you want to make changes to any section, you simply load it up and then work on the needed changes.


----------



## Tatu (Oct 21, 2015)

I recently ditched all my templates and prepped just a couple for my needs - one for strings and one which has most of my "hybrid scoring tools". One reason is the ease of adding instruments/buses via presets and all the creative quirks that one can come up with when not relying on everything being set and the other is my systems exponential decrease in performance around 200 tracks.


----------



## benatural (Oct 22, 2015)

I've tried it both ways for extended amounts of time, and have landed somewhere in the middle.

Started with a big template, got overwhelmed and moved to a spare template. Got frustrated sifting through patches and have happily landed (mostly) back in the large template camp.

I start with a sketch template first which has piano and a few ensemble patches. Once I have my sketch I "orchestrate" it with a large template. Cubase folders and track filtering reduce clutter on demand. I like having the big template so I can rapidly swap out articulatons from diff libs to get the sound I want quickly.

It suits the way I write. Too much fiddling around with patch loading is a major creativity killer for me.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 22, 2015)

I can't see the point of NOT having at least a basic orchestral or "epic" template. I have about 3 orch templates, a big band template, an electronica template, a basic rock template with 5 Guitar Rigs all set up for big rock guitars, drums and bass. I have the basic tools I need for these things, and it saves so much time having the basics load up in a minute or two, 5 for the orch stuff over two computers. It would probably be more difficult if I was as much a sample collector as some of you guys. I don't envy you having all those choices. Much


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 22, 2015)

TomNoyd said:


> My opinion means nothing (but yet I feel a perverse need to share it).



This is such a brilliant statement that I had to bring it back again. It's exactly the way I (quite correctly) feel about myself. I'm just a gasbag full of hot air


----------



## IFM (Oct 22, 2015)

Years ago I was not a template user...now I am but that depends on the project. If I plan on doing synth stuff the 'template' is just the basic blank studio one. If a full on composition then it gets the big boy...which I need to remake especially now that I'm doing work in C8 and it's all new.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Oct 22, 2015)

TomNoyd said: ↑
My opinion means nothing (but yet I feel a perverse need to share it).



NYC Composer said:


> This is such a brilliant statement that I had to bring it back again. It's exactly the way I (quite correctly) feel about myself. I'm just a gasbag full of hot air



This guy does those tracks of his on a 4 gig Tosh laptop??????? Hahahaha!!!! 

That's insane!


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 22, 2015)

NYC Composer said:


> This is such a brilliant statement that I had to bring it back again. It's exactly the way I (quite correctly) feel about myself. I'm just a gasbag full of hot air



True, what a fantastic quote. I should use it as a signature.


----------



## jonathanwright (Oct 22, 2015)

Software like VEP has certainly opened the floodgates to creating templates with all the bells and whistles and I've always that that nagging feeling that I _should_ use huge templates regularly because in many ways it does make sense.

However in reality they can kill creativity for me too, I like firing up a blank project (routing already set up though, I have limits) and seeing where it takes me, even thought I'll have a pretty good idea of the track I want to write.

Of course a lot of it depends on your situation. If you're a AAA game composer, working on a long running TV show or a film composer churning out music at breakneck speed then templates are a wonderful thing.


----------



## TomNoyd (Oct 22, 2015)

It's nice to know I'm not the only one who feels like a gasbag full of hot air.  Thank you. 



NYC Composer said:


> I can't see the point of NOT having at least a basic orchestral or "epic" template. I have about 3 orch templates, a big band template, an electronica template, a basic rock template with 5 Guitar Rigs all set up for big rock guitars, drums and bass. I have the basic tools I need for these things, and it saves so much time having the basics load up in a minute or two, 5 for the orch stuff over two computers. It would probably be more difficult if I was as much a sample collector as some of you guys. I don't envy you having all those choices. Much



I wondered how many others had the _multiple, basic_ _starter _template approach - having what you _know_ you'll need without having to sift through patches to find what you want and without having to wait for EVERYTHING to load.



Baron Greuner said:


> This guy does those tracks of his on a 4 gig Tosh laptop??????? Hahahaha!!!!
> 
> That's insane!



Purging (and sometimes rendering/freezing tracks) is. absolutely. essential to me. It's _not _insane if that's your only choice!


----------



## stonzthro (Oct 22, 2015)

The key to using a large template is to not change it once it is set up - keep it as uniform as possible and you might feel less overwhelmed... in time... I did say might... 

Setting up show/hide groups is very helpful too.

Not having a decent or large template is a creativity killer for me - having to load up strings sounds only to find they don't quite work, then routing the sounds to a bus so you can render stems properly... no thanks! 

I'm on Logic and while I could import stacks of tracks/instruments (which link up to VEP nicely) I have all my keyswitch info in the track notes and unfortunately those do not import (thanks Logic) - if they ever fix that, I'll go that route for sure.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Oct 22, 2015)

TomNoyd said:


> It's nice to know I'm not the only one who feels like a gasbag full of hot air.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I meant That's insanely good!


----------



## Saxer (Oct 22, 2015)

musophrenic said:


> Is that ONLY possible with Vienna Ensemble? Because I've been thinking about this idea of section templates, but I wasn't sure it was possible directly within Cubase. Or is it?


i use logic. for most parts i don't need vienna ensemble. i just can import multiple tracks from other logic songs (including routing to aux channels and exf). takes only a few seconds.
but i don't know how it works in cubase.


----------



## Kejero (Oct 23, 2015)

lucor said:


> That's why the new function of disabling Instrument tracks in Cubase is absolutely perfect for me. I made a template with every single instrument I own; routed, balanced and placed everything and at the end disabled all of it.



I'm doing the exact same thing, and so far I've never worked with a solution that works as well as this. I've got a template with about 2600 instrument tracks at the moment, and Cubase is handling it surprisingly well. My workflow has increased exponentially as well.


----------



## tack (Oct 23, 2015)

Kejero said:


> I'm doing the exact same thing, and so far I've never worked with a solution that works as well as this. I've got a template with about 2600 instrument tracks at the moment, and Cubase is handling it surprisingly well.


With a separate Kontakt instance per instrument?


----------



## Vision (Oct 23, 2015)

Saxer said:


> i use logic. for most parts i don't need vienna ensemble. i just can import multiple tracks from other logic songs (including routing to aux channels and exf). takes only a few seconds.
> but i don't know how it works in cubase.



I use Logic as well, and have been doing this for years. Especially when I only had a 32gig Ram limit on my old machine. I don't use VEP either. 

I used to make a few templates by sample developer as well, especially while going through patches for the first time. This way, I'd be going through patches I like or dislike for the first time.. Learn them a bit, while at the same time setting up a mini section as a template. Then import as necessary.


----------



## Kejero (Oct 24, 2015)

tack said:


> With a separate Kontakt instance per instrument?


Yeah. Gotta give credit to Alex Pfeffer, he convinced me on that one!


----------



## tack (Oct 24, 2015)

Kejero said:


> Yeah. Gotta give credit to Alex Pfeffer, he convinced me on that one!


You know, that may really be the way to go. If the average piece has 50 instrument tracks enabled (assuming, as in my case, a given track has all the articulations for that instrument), that's 2GB of overhead from Kontakt instances. It's not nothing, for sure, but compared to the hybrid approach (shared Kontakt instances for the common instruments, dedicated instances for lesser used stuff), it may be worth paying it for the consistency and simplified routing.


----------



## Kejero (Oct 26, 2015)

Yeah, all of that, and you also get full (plugin) automation for each track this way, which has come in handy plenty of times.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 26, 2015)

Absolutely. Keep one instrument per Kontakt instance with Logic Pro.


----------



## reddognoyz (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> Absolutely. Keep one instrument per Kontakt instance with Logic Pro.



What Jay said. If you are using DP, use VEP and put everything in one vframe, or as few vframes as possible. Exactly opposite of Logic.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 26, 2015)

reddognoyz said:


> What Jay said. If you are using DP, use VEP and put everything in one vframe, or as few vframes as possible. Exactly opposite of Logic.



Stu, I am not sure that even with VE Pro and DP my approach isn't better, not as dramatically so as with Logic Pro.


----------



## reddognoyz (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> Stu, I am not sure that even with VE Pro and DP my approach isn't better, not as dramatically so as with Logic Pro.



I've done considerable testing, but you totally hooked me up with the right setup for Logic, I would love to be proved wrong with DP. consider the gauntlet tossed...


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 26, 2015)

reddognoyz said:


> I've done considerable testing, but you totally hooked me up with the right setup for Logic, I would love to be proved wrong with DP. consider the gauntlet tossed...



No gauntlet, I just want everyone to be as happy with their workflow as possible and I think a blank score page emulation is the most elegant approach, as long as there is not a significant CPU or RAM penalty.


----------



## reddognoyz (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> No gauntlet, I just want everyone to be as happy with their workflow as possible and I think a blank score page emulation is the most elegant approach, as long as there is not a significant CPU or RAM penalty.




I work from an ever changing template. Adding new sounds, adjusting reverbs and levels I sometimes start from scratch, but usually regret it. Nothing is more inspiration killing than stopping to find that thing you need for the next part.l


----------



## Darthmorphling (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> Absolutely. Keep one instrument per Kontakt instance with Logic Pro.



When you say one instrument per instance, are you meaning all of the violin patches of one library? Or simply one patch per instance?

I'm going to be setting up my Cubase template and would like to do it right. Currently my Reaper template is organized by instrument families per instance.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 26, 2015)

Darthmorphling said:


> When you say one instrument per instance, are you meaning all of the violin patches of one library? Or simply one patch per instance?
> 
> I'm going to be setting up my Cubase template and would like to do it right. Currently my Reaper template is organized by instrument families per instance.



I instance of e.g. Violin 1 with all its articulations. SO if it is a keywitched patch it will be one patch. With non-KS it may be a vunch set up multi-timbraslly.

Again, treat it like a line on a score page.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> I instance of e.g. Violin 1 with all its articulations. SO if it is a keywitched patch it will be one patch. With non-KS it may be a vunch set up multi-timbraslly.
> 
> Again, treat it like a line on a score page.



I understand that in Logic this is necessary, but what would be the benefit in other DAWs? Each instance eats up ram. Just interested as I am open to trying it.


----------



## tack (Oct 26, 2015)

Darthmorphling said:


> I understand that in Logic this is necessary, but what would be the benefit in other DAWs? Each instance eats up ram. Just interested as I am open to trying it.


I'm in the process of redoing my template this way in Reaper and I have to say, it's significantly better. Yes, each instance eats up extra RAM, but it's worth it for the simplified routing and flexibility.

I think maybe I'll try to do a screencast comparing my old (half completed) template with the conventional shared Kontakt instance approach and this new approach of a separate instance per instrument.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 26, 2015)

Darthmorphling said:


> I understand that in Logic this is necessary, but what would be the benefit in other DAWs? Each instance eats up ram. Just interested as I am open to trying it.



The benefit is that it is most like how trained composers were trained to think. In an orchestra there is not one violinist who only plays legato and another who only plays marcato. Nor is there anyone who plays violin and viola simultaneously. It eats up a small amount of RAM.

Also, it makes for more direct routing and automating.

But maybe it isn't for everybody.


----------



## tack (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> The benefit is that it is most like how trained composers were trained to think. In an orchestra there is not one violinist who only plays legato and another who only plays marcato. Nor is there anyone who plays violin and viola simultaneously.


We -- at least I  -- have been talking about separate Kontakt instances per instrument, not separate tracks per instrument. I agree with you, I prefer to have my template look as close to a score pad as possible. But this can still be accomplished with few Kontakt instances, each which share multiple patches and you simply (or sometimes not so simply) setup the routing to still maintain one track per instrument.

Up to now my template has been configured to reduce Kontakt instances in order to reduce memory usage. But with a certain size of template, this began working against me.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Oct 26, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> The benefit is that it is most like how trained composers were trained to think. In an orchestra there is not one violinist who only plays legato and another who only plays marcato. Nor is there anyone who plays violin and viola simultaneously. It eats up a small amount of RAM.
> 
> Also, it makes for more direct routing and automating.
> 
> But maybe it isn't for everybody.



Ok I got it. I actually set it up close to that way. I started to organize my midi tracks to resemble an orchestra ever since I started studying them. I am a visual person and it just makes sense that way. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing any performance benefits by not doing it.

Thanks,

Jay



tack said:


> We -- at least I  -- have been talking about separate Kontakt instances per instrument, not separate tracks per instrument. I agree with you, I prefer to have my template look as close to a score pad as possible. But this can still be accomplished with few Kontakt instances, each which share multiple patches and you simply (or sometimes not so simply) setup the routing to still maintain one track per instrument.
> 
> Up to now my template has been configured to reduce Kontakt instances in order to reduce memory usage. But with a certain size of template, this began working against me.



Pretty much how I will be setting it up. How do you organize your tracks if you are using multiple libraries? For instance Sable and Albion.


----------



## ryanstrong (Oct 26, 2015)

This is obviously a very subjective conversation, but I think my biggest take away was I was glad I tried multiple ways instead of looking at what someone else did and saying "oh that's what I have to do". Again for me I've just been finding the mega-template in a weird way constricting. I don't feel very "of the moment" with it.

I think for a large project like a feature that I'm getting ready to work on I will start with a bare template... feel open and creative, discover the DNA then once the palette is established I will probably use the suite project file as the template that still has room to grow.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 26, 2015)

Indeed Ryan. I am hard wired by my training to be most comfortable a certain way with full orchestral stuff, but when i am doing something like the special material for the "Love And Mercy" BluRay I did a few months ago, those templates go out the window.


----------



## Brendon Williams (Oct 26, 2015)

I agree that both approaches have their merits. However, I always work with with a bare/empty template and add instruments as needed because every piece I write these days requires a pretty different setup and instrumentation.


----------



## tack (Oct 26, 2015)

Darthmorphling said:


> Pretty much how I will be setting it up. How do you organize your tracks if you are using multiple libraries? For instance Sable and Albion.


My original template had everything grouped by library. So I had a Strings group, under which I'd have a folder for Mural, another for Albion, another for CS2, etc. I never quite liked it, because it treated the library as a first class object, and the instrument as second class. I'd have the "score pad" view from the perspective of any given library, say Mural, but when I blended libraries I'd lose that at a higher level view. As Ryan said, it's how I saw other people do it so who am I to buck the trend. 

The reasoning behind this at the time was that some libraries may require separate treatment. Maybe CS2 was recorded a certain way that all the patches had a 6Khz hiss that I wanted to notch out. Maybe they needed a different kind of reverb. I could apply these filters to the parent folder.

In practice, I never needed this. When I _did _need to EQ, it was on an individual instrument and never on the parent track for the whole library, because rarely was there ever any issue that applied to the entire library. Reverbs were always specific sends to separate tracks anyway, never on the parent track. And from a mixing perspective, nor has it ever happened that I wanted to grab a fader and tweak all of Mural, or all of CS2, etc.. (If the need ever arises, I could just setup a VCA group.)

So as I rebuild my template, I'm looking at a much flatter approach, ordered by instrument. If I do any subfolders, they will be by instrument (a V1 folder with tracks for Mural, Sable, CS2, etc.). But I'm not sure I'll feel the need to do that.


----------



## Aeonata (Oct 26, 2015)

I have a pretty basic template with just the articulations and patches loaded I use very frequently. For example, 1 allround legato patch, stac, spic, trems and sustains for each part of the string section; shorts, marcatos and legatos for all members of the brass section, same for woodwinds. Further, my template includes basic percussion like timpani, BD, Snare, Cymbals, some mallets, piano of course, and some basic 'ahhs' and 'uuhhs' for choir.
Recently I also added some generic low booms etc that I found useful for most of my compositions.

I also have a few empty Kontakt/VEP instances which are all connected to empty midi tracks, so in case I need to add somthing to my template I at least don't have to do any routings. Mixing is a seperate step in my workflow (I bounce everything to audio before mixing - gives me much more control...) so I don't have to worry about that in my writing-setup.


----------



## ryanstrong (Oct 26, 2015)

tack said:


> ...it treated the library as a first class object, and the instrument as second class.


Interesting thought!


----------



## Chris Porter (Oct 28, 2015)

I use a template, but it isn't loaded with any instruments. I have it set up with:

-16 MIDI tracks contained within a MIDI folder
-16 audio tracks contained within an AUDIO folder
-A number of buses, labeled as "strings", "bass", "woodwinds", etc 
-One instance of Kontakt 5 with all of the MIDI tracks pre-routed to the correct channels 
-One instance of Slate VMR preloaded on every audio track and bus with VCC loaded
-Another instance of VMR on every audio track and bus but left blank (this is for later adding EQ and compression etc.)
-u-he Satin loaded on every audio track

I also have a variation of this template that is also loaded with an instance of the Best Service Engine, since I often use Eduardo Tarilonte's libraries.

This type of template saves me a lot of time, since everything that's loaded is something that I'll use on every single project. While the instruments will change quite a bit from composition to composition, I'll always need at least 16 MIDI tracks and Kontakt, and I'll always need all of the mixing plugins that I have preloaded on my audio tracks and buses.


----------



## Kejero (Oct 29, 2015)

EastWest Lurker said:


> I instance of e.g. Violin 1 with all its articulations. SO if it is a keywitched patch it will be one patch. With non-KS it may be a vunch set up multi-timbraslly.



That's how I started out, but I've started going away from keyswitches. Especially when writing for virtual instruments (where there won't be a score sheet needed for live performance), just having all articulations on seperate tracks is a huge advantage, since it allows for easy layering. Basically, KS patches or not, for most of my work, I find one patch per Kontakt instance the most convenient.

That opinion may change if I ever do need to transcribe whole orchestra sections for live performances. Here's hoping I can just pass that job on to an assistent when the time comes :D


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

tack said:


> My original template had everything grouped by library. So I had a Strings group, under which I'd have a folder for Mural, another for Albion, another for CS2, etc. I never quite liked it, because it treated the library as a first class object, and the instrument as second class. I'd have the "score pad" view from the perspective of any given library, say Mural, but when I blended libraries I'd lose that at a higher level view. As Ryan said, it's how I saw other people do it so who am I to buck the trend.
> 
> The reasoning behind this at the time was that some libraries may require separate treatment. Maybe CS2 was recorded a certain way that all the patches had a 6Khz hiss that I wanted to notch out. Maybe they needed a different kind of reverb. I could apply these filters to the parent folder.
> 
> ...



This is exactly what I am going through right now. My old template in LPX was set up by instrument category. Now I am on C8 and building the master template so decided to try what Tack and others have done and set it up by library. First thing I was doing is setting all the folders and not sure if I really will like this. I already had to split that up with a dedicated Drums/Perc top level folder which brakes the 'by library' template so it has become a hybrid of the two.

If I go back to having it completely by sections the track colors can separate the libraries. I guess only time will tell which I prefer but there really is no right or wrong way.


----------



## Waywyn (Nov 3, 2015)

In my opinion it totally depends on what type you are! I can totally understand the process of Daniel, thinking about what he wants next ... but as for me, I know what I already want but get distracted by the whole process of opening a new instrument, finding it and loading it into my session. On the other side it is also pretty annoying when you have a huge template and eventually still dealing with RAM or CPU issues!

My solution was simply to really make some kind of list of what I would really want or use or what I have favorited during the last weeks/months and then set up kind of an ALL template but with just having the most important basic channels/tracks enabled. By doing this my template stays not that consuming but theoretically I could set up a template with around 5000 tracks. To stay organized, simply work with folders. I once thought that I would lose control and get lost during countless tracks, but you get used to it if you manage to tidy it up right from the beginning!


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

I went back and re-read the responses. The middle is about where I'll be too. I'll have the bits I will typically use loaded by library or by type set up with routing and effects, but the rest will be a bit of a blank slate and I'll just add tracks as needed. 

I used channel presets in LPX all the time for this and will do the same with Cubase along with track archives. This means I can just load or even drag & drop the tracks I want from the Media Bay that's opened on an another screen. With thousands of synth sounds and stuff I use it would be impossible to have a template loaded with everything.


----------



## Waywyn (Nov 3, 2015)

Dragonwind said:


> I went back and re-read the responses. The middle is about where I'll be too. I'll have the bits I will typically use loaded by library or by type set up with routing and effects, but the rest will be a bit of a blank slate and I'll just add tracks as needed.
> 
> I used channel presets in LPX all the time for this and will do the same with Cubase along with track archives. This means I can just load or even drag & drop the tracks I want from the Media Bay that's opened on an another screen. With thousands of synth sounds and stuff I use it would be impossible to have a template loaded with everything.



I am not if you are aware, as I have written above, of that new feature in Cubase to enable/disable tracks.
YES, you would be able to have thousands of synths sounds available with everything loaded, but just deactivated as long as you don't need them. If you need them it would be just one shortcut and you don't even need to drag or do any more effort!


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

Waywyn said:


> I am not if you are aware, as I have written above, of that new feature in Cubase to enable/disable tracks.
> YES, you would be able to have thousands of synths sounds available with everything loaded, but just deactivated as long as you don't need them. If you need them it would be just one shortcut and you don't even need to drag or do any more effort!



Yes but deactivating still loads the instrument (RAM) so that really doesn't help much. Plus I really mean thousands of tracks...tens of thousands...I have way more synth patches than I could ever use and have not found doing a hunt for a certain sound to be much of a problem and as I go my library of favorites or custom sounds will grow.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 3, 2015)

Dragonwind said:


> Yes but deactivating still loads the instrument (RAM)



Is that true of Cubase? That deactivating a virtual instrument doesn't reclaim resources? Digital Performer lets you load a virtual instrument and then deactivate it (in DP you uncheck the "Enable" toggle). This restores most of the memory and other resources, though not 100% because you still have the extra tracks and so on.

I would be sort of surprised if there's no way to do the same thing in Cubase.


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

JohnG said:


> Is that true of Cubase? That deactivating a virtual instrument doesn't reclaim resources? Digital Performer lets you load a virtual instrument and then deactivate it (in DP you uncheck the "Enable" toggle). This restores most of the memory and other resources, though not 100% because you still have the extra tracks and so on.
> 
> I would be sort of surprised if there's no way to do the same thing in Cubase.



It is true. If you have a track recorded and bounce in place you can unload the RAM as well as the CPU (like freezing) but just loading an Instrument Track with something like a Kontakt VI and deactivating it won't unload the RAM, just the CPU.


----------



## Waywyn (Nov 3, 2015)

Dragonwind said:


> It is true. If you have a track recorded and bounce in place you can unload the RAM as well as the CPU (like freezing) but just loading an Instrument Track with something like a Kontakt VI and deactivating it won't unload the RAM, just the CPU.



Sorry, but there seems to be some confusion about disabling an instrument track, freezing and bouncing something to audio. The feature "disable/enable track" (right click on instrument track) does unload ALL RAM and ALL used CPU (except maybe some little footprint data) of that track! If you enable the track it loads back the instrument and activates the plugins!

The only bug (which I hope to get fixed soon) is that after enabling the instrument track you have to manually reconnecting back to ALL MIDI in (or whatever MIDI input you have set up)!


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

Waywyn said:


> Sorry, but there seems to be some confusion about disabling an instrument track, freezing and bouncing something to audio. The feature "disable/enable track" (right click on instrument track) does unload ALL RAM and ALL used CPU (except maybe some little footprint data) of that track! If you enable the track it loads back the instrument and activates the plugins!
> 
> The only bug (which I hope to get fixed soon) is that after enabling the instrument track you have to manually reconnecting back to ALL MIDI in (or whatever MIDI input you have set up)!



I have to OPT-click (I believe it is OPT) but that is not my experience and I don't see the option to disable when right clicking. The RAM load remains. I'll investigate again tonight but even Steinberg said indies not unload RAM.


----------



## Waywyn (Nov 3, 2015)

just to set this right:

- we are talking Cubase 8
- create instrument track, load something
- put a heavy CPU plug on the channel such as the free SGA 1566
- right click so see the menu, click "disable instrument" (3rd from bottom)
- instrument track is disabled, all RAM of this instance and CPU from the channel will be unloaded!!
- right click again to activate instrument again and all RAM and CPU will be reloaded!


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

Waywyn said:


> just to set this right:
> 
> - we are talking Cubase 8
> - create instrument track, load something
> ...



I'll try this. Yes C8. I'll post pics if it doesn't work.


----------



## Waywyn (Nov 3, 2015)

Dragonwind said:


> I'll try this. Yes C8. I'll post pics if it doesn't work.



Okay, if it doesn't work it must be a bug or something because I am working with quite a few months now with this feature and I constantly unload/load stuff to get the best out of 64GB


----------



## lucor (Nov 3, 2015)

Waywyn said:


> The only bug (which I hope to get fixed soon) is that after enabling the instrument track you have to manually reconnecting back to ALL MIDI in (or whatever MIDI input you have set up)!



That bug was actually fixed for me with the latest Cubase update. Are you on 8.0.30 yet? The only thing that's still not working are expression maps, even though they said they fixed that, too.


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

Waywyn said:


> Okay, if it doesn't work it must be a bug or something because I am working with quite a few months now with this feature and I constantly unload/load stuff to get the best out of 64GB


Okay it works. I was using the other method of OPT+Left Click to disable the track but the menu (and I was blind and didn't see it) certainly did work. And for what it's worth it also retained my Midi Input selection. I apologize for the confusion!

I still won't be doing a 10000 track template as it would take me weeks to set it up and still be useless for creativity. I work pretty fast and have my favorites for my style. Anyways thanks for setting me straight!

On a side note I just got the Cubase logickeyboard and having all the shortcuts right there and color coded it pretty cool.

Chris


----------



## IFM (Nov 3, 2015)

Okay to get back on the template topic...

If you are setting up by Section (Strings, Brass, etc.) what is your approach for libraries like Albion or Symphobia?
Do you spread their instruments out into the various sections or do you tend to just put them in their own folder?


----------



## Farkle (Nov 3, 2015)

Dragonwind said:


> Okay to get back on the template topic...
> 
> If you are setting up by Section (Strings, Brass, etc.) what is your approach for libraries like Albion or Symphobia?
> Do you spread their instruments out into the various sections or do you tend to just put them in their own folder?



I do the former. So, I have Albion (Legacy, not one), and in my strings folder, I have 6 subfolders. "Vlns 1", "Vlns 2", "Vlas", "Vcs", "Cbs", and "ensembles". Ensembles are at the top, and I put all my ensemble patches in there (including, LASS ensemble patches and Albion String ensembles).

My Winds ensembles have all of Hollywoodwinds, and Alb winds. Etc., etc.,

I find it really helpful to know that when I want to edit strings, I go to my strings folder. I can find my library that I'm using quickly, and my DAW still kinda looks like an orchestral score.

Mike


----------



## Kejero (Nov 4, 2015)

lucor said:


> That bug was actually fixed for me with the latest Cubase update. Are you on 8.0.30 yet?



Really? I guess maybe it's time to update then! That's the one little thing that's been bugging me (ha), but other than that working with a template like Alex is doing, is a dream


----------



## BlueStar (Jan 4, 2016)

Kejero: Your working style works good as well for preparing it for a live orchestra. It's sometimes even easier to have different tracks for different articulations, than having them all on one track.


----------

