# How important is ProTools for a film composer?



## milesito (Aug 27, 2014)

Hi, I am working on my first feature, and the sound editor has asked for the files in Protools and in a protools timeline"...

How important is this? I'm' in Logic Pro X, can't I just bounce out .wav files from the beginning or will I look "non-pro" if I mention I don't have Pro-tools? I also fear if I buy pro-tools, I won't have time to learn it for this particular project...

any thoughts on this and what delivery method would work best as an alternative?

thanks!


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Aug 27, 2014)

Hi milesito,

It sounds like they are asking for a ProTools session for delivery.

If that's the case, you don't really have a choice but to get a copy of PT.

However, the good news is that Logic can export in OMF file format, which can be imported into ProTools. So, the scope of your learning PT will probably consist of importing these OMF files and lining them up on your timeline.

PS - I have not used PT for several versions, so hopefully my information is not out of date. I know there are others on here who have a Logic/PT configuration. Maybe they will chime in too.

Good luck on your project,
Marc


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 27, 2014)

I'm not sure if its technically allowed, you might want to check on this first, but, if you're only going to use pro tools 1 time you aren't ready to buy pro tools right at this moment, you might think about just getting the free trial and making this guy the pro tools session. That way you can also try it out. I think it last for 30 days. 

Secondly, its very easy to set up a pro tools session and sync your your audio to picture and make it nice and neat. 

And thirdly, there are many people out there who wouldn't mind setting up a simple pro tools session for you if you have the audio files, especially if you have broadcast save metadata embedded. 

There are many benefits to working in pro tools though and you might want to think about getting it. I compose in Cubase and mix in pro tools and the latter is industry standard. 

Pro Tools is amazing for mixing and I love the process of being complete with the composition part and moving everything to the mixing stage. Its very final for me.


----------



## RiffWraith (Aug 27, 2014)

Sound editors should not automatically assume that composers have PT. Other editors, yes. Composers, no. Especially when you consider that if you were to make a list of "standards" for composing, PT would be all the way at the bottom of that list.

It's one thing when a sound editor says, "do you have PT? If so, please send me a PT session." But another when they jut ask for one, without first inquiring as to what you have. 

You can do the OMF, but see if you cant send a sample OMF to a friend, - or maybe someone on this forum - to check out first, and make sure it works. OMFs do work, but they can be funky sometimes.

If I were you, I would email the SE back, and say the following:

"Hi, SE. Sorry, but I compose using Logic, and do not have PT. I can send you the raw wave files which will all have the same start point, so all you need to do is import them into your PT session, and everything will run in sync. I can also send you an OMF if you prefer."

This way, *you* are telling *him* the way *you* work - albeit politely and professionally.

Cheers.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Aug 27, 2014)

I think that if there's nothing complicated, an OMF should work fine. 

If you absolutely need the PT file but don't have anyone to do it, I'm sure you could find a studio (or composer) with PT that could do it for a minimal fee. 

Don't forget that PT non HD can only do stereo. If you need 5.1 then you'll definitely need to get someone to do it or send OMFs.


----------



## milesito (Aug 27, 2014)

Guys, great feedback/perspective and actionable steps. I will follow it and see how it goes...

I am trying to be nice and flexible, but there comes a point ....it feels hard to say "no" for the first gig...

i appreciate the help.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 27, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Wed Aug 27 said:


> Sound editors should not automatically assume that composers have PT. Other editors, yes. Composers, no. Especially when you consider that if you were to make a list of "standards" for composing, PT would be all the way at the bottom of that list.
> 
> It's one thing when a sound editor says, "do you have PT? If so, please send me a PT session." But another when they jut ask for one, without first inquiring as to what you have.
> 
> ...



listen to this guy. 

ifyou work mixing films then you are aware on how to work with a raw file. label the file as the reel and the time code. 
Bwav will have the time code from logic so they can spot the file to the Time code or they can spot it themselves. 

oh, and .. 


DO NOT DO OMF!!!!!! 

again 

DO NOT DO OMF!!!!!! 


agina 

DO NOT DO OMF!!!!!! 

or AFF!!!!! 

those are "suppose" to work but they have way to many issues with systems , issues on each end etc... that really... just a stereo way with time stamp and the TC on the file name is usually the norm on lower/medium and even hi end films and by far the easiest.


----------



## jaeroe (Aug 27, 2014)

gsilbers @ Wed Aug 27 said:


> just a stereo way with time stamp and the TC on the file name is usually the norm on lower/medium and even hi end films and by far the easiest.



sorry - i can't agree with you on this. ProTools is industry standard for audio. not for composing, but for recording, editing, mixing and dubbing, yes and absolutely.

on big and medium budget films i've never seen anything but ProTools used for delivery. it is industry standard and you're simply expected to deliver in that format. on big budget projects there is usually a music editor, so it's not really the composer's job to worry about. but, when the composer is delivering it is seen as your responsibility and in your best interest to make things as easy as possible for the dub stage. there is rarely enough time or money going around in film these days, so sound is not going to like having a bunch of extra work to do for another department (and they'll likely see it as something they weren't paid to do).

on lower budget projects, the times that i've seen people deliver with Wav, etc the dub stage hates it, unless it is not much material and only stereo. on a low budget project there is no music editor, so who gets to import all the files? and if you're delivering stems? you will not ingratiate yourself to anyone by showing up with a bunch of files to import during the dub. 

if you're working for chump change or the film isn't really going anywhere or they're mixing is their cousin bob's mom's basement then you can get away with it more. but, if the film has some legs and there is a normal amount of music, you really want to investigate ways of delivering PT sessions.

i would at least discuss well before the start of the mix to get that to the mixer well ahead of time. they'll likely put a lacky on import duty and you'll want to double check to make sure they actually imported it correctly - and that will be fun politically. what facility are you going to use to double check and who's going to pay for it? if you've got a decent relationship with the place where they're dubbing, then fine. but, otherwise, they're probably going to want to bill the production for it which the producers will love.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 28, 2014)

I have a ProTools system which I frankly never use. The plan was at one point to mix my work in ProTools - because I really like the system. However, it just never happened. I did it on one small project, but realized that I might as well save the time + hassle and do the final mixing in Logic. While Logic isn't half as adept in audio editing, I rarely have to do anything but volume/EQ/dynamics adjustments, so I don't really need all the amazing stuff that PT can do.

And I have never been asked to deliver in PT format, or do anything regarding delivery that I might as well not do from Logic. However I will not rule out that I might need it at some point, and considering mine is a ProTools 8/9 system with the "old" Accel boards, I would hardly make any money from selling it, so I am keeping it as a backup 8)


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 28, 2014)

It has been years since i as specifically asked for a PT session. If cue 1M2 starts at 01:02;03:04 e..g and all my audio tracks for 1M2 start at that time, any PT based engineer can easily add them in.


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Aug 28, 2014)

I also own Protools, but do not use it. In fact it has never been taken it out of the box.

I work by sending OMFs. I create a file with stems and have not had any issues.

It is real good to always communicate with the audio mixers on projects. I take them to lunch, get to know them. Back when OMFs first became an option I worked with a audio mixer and we experimented with settings until everything worked. Things have gone smoothly ever since. Ever once in a while I call that mixer up, remind him how grateful I am and thank him. I do like him as a person, but it sure has payed off staying close to him.

IIRC protools has an issue importing stereo tracks in OMF files. SO I believe my DAW splits stereo tracks into mono. When creating stems, I render tracks split mono and then I believe even the tracks get panned left and right correctly.

Just tossing my 2 cents in...


----------



## JohnG (Aug 28, 2014)

Is ProTools the industry standard (today at least)? Yes.

Do you absolutely need it? No.

Should you buy it for a single project? I wouldn't.

t do use protools, but it's a huge investment and I feel burned by Avid over the jump to the latest software, which abandons all their old hardware, and thus I can't recommend it for someone who's mostly a "regular" concert or TV composer (by contrast with songwriter or sound design or something else that would take greater advantage of PT's audio editing).

However, I also agree that it is the industry standard, certainly for larger-budget productions.

If you don't have it, label cues carefully, as has been recommended here. For example, the third music cue in reel 4, spotted at 4:05:12:03 should be labeled:
4M03_Sad_Moment_4_05_12_03 or something like that.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 28, 2014)

Does anyone actually still use reels? I haven't seen that here for quite a few years.

Usually I deliver stems spanning the entire movie, with all cues placed in sync. So basically I just bounce my entire mix session, divided accordingly in the stems asked for.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Aug 28, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Does anyone actually still use reels? I haven't seen that here for quite a few years.
> 
> Usually I deliver stems spanning the entire movie, with all cues placed in sync. So basically I just bounce my entire mix session, divided accordingly in the stems asked for.



Wouldn't that make it more difficult for post to do things like move cues around if needed? They would probably end up cutting it up so I think having entire session stems isn't a great idea.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 28, 2014)

jaeroe @ Wed Aug 27 said:


> gsilbers @ Wed Aug 27 said:
> 
> 
> > just a stereo way with time stamp and the TC on the file name is usually the norm on lower/medium and even hi end films and by far the easiest.
> ...




yes industry standard... but not for delivering music cues. far from it. 
ive worked ten years with pro tools, mixng editing tv and movies. composers that deliver music was mostly audio files. yes, some have in pro tools. but any audio engineer who does film or tv work can manage audio or PT files. sure they have prefs but if you tell them you are going to do raw wav with time stamp then thats it, they manage. you also go there and make sure its synced up correcly. 
delivering pro tools files is not a real spec. just a preference.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 28, 2014)

Gerhard Westphalen @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Simon Ravn @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Does anyone actually still use reels? I haven't seen that here for quite a few years.
> ...



"Difficult"? All they have to do is do two cuts per cue - hardly anything that'll keep them occupied for more than about 10 minutes for an entire movie. 8) Probably faster than manually placing (even with timestamp) each file for each cue on the timeline.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Aug 28, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Gerhard Westphalen @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Simon Ravn @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> ...



With a PT session they wouldn't need to cut anything. 10 minutes at the dubbing stage can cost thousands of dollars. I wouldn't want to be the one responsible for holding up a project. 
Also, when they'd cut the files they'd probably then have to give it a decent name rather than "[Film title]_Hi_Strings_Stem-01" -02, -03...


----------



## JohnG (Aug 28, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ 28th August 2014 said:


> Does anyone actually still use reels? I haven't seen that here for quite a few years.



I've found it hit or miss, Simon. I just ghosted on a bigger-budget movie and I was actually a bit surprised that they did break it into reels, but they did.

I prefer it, personally, because then if they muck with something in reel 2, it doesn't change the start time of all the cues in the rest of the film. Just the housekeeping with that can get tiresome.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 28, 2014)

Double post.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Aug 28, 2014)

Gerhard Westphalen @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Simon Ravn @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Gerhard Westphalen @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> ...



Funny that nobody ever told me they didn't want it this way and that it was too time consuming. Besides, you are not at a dubbing stage when the audio engineers receive the music. At least I have never seen anyone laying down the music track this late - that is done during the normal mixing sessions before that.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 28, 2014)

Gerhard Westphalen @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Simon Ravn @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Gerhard Westphalen @ Thu Aug 28 said:
> ...



usually the music stem, sfx etc would be done before the mixing. its usually part of the standard fee when mixing. but if there is a revision in the middle of the mixing proess then yes, crazy to send a whole reel again for one cue fix. 

giving a whole one file for each reel is not the best imo but it works to keep any sync issues at bay. i would prefer PT session though or individual cues with time stamp. 
normally you import all cues and drag intot he session and spot. very fast and easy. 
if there is no time stamp and i have to go by the time code on the file name, then hmmm.. id be like.. darn it ...still manageble. 
transfer time for each long reel would be longer as well, so thats another downside. 
so either one of the 3 ways is ok to deliver. there is no one set way.
delivering pro tools files does give the impression you'd been around... but at the same time... only the mixing engineer assistant will know and he doesnt really care.


----------



## RiffWraith (Aug 28, 2014)

This has turned into a somewhat interesting discussion. Which is not a bad thing, of course  Some more info to consider:

PT is in fact the defacto standard - for audio. Not for composing. Some guys do use PT for composing - Brian Tyler is one - but PT is generally not a composer's seq of choice.

milesito is - I am assuming based on his post - going to be delivering a sample-based score. To this end, he (and anyone else in his shoes) needs to get on the same page with the person responsible for the audio (usually the sup. sound ed., and/or the re-recording mixer). Anyone delivering a sample-based score should have a convo with this person as soon as they are hired on the film, to talk about deliverables (how, what, when).

If you are composer working on any med-large budget film, and the score is going to be recorded by an orchestra, you needn't worry about any of this. The entire sound editorial staff uses PT, but you use Cubase, and have no access to PT. Doesn't matter. You aren't delivering anything to anyone. The scoring stage will record into PT (in some instances, they may go to tape first), and that PT session - along with all of the audio files - will be delivered to the music ed., and his/her asst. The music ed. will now do any editing and/or conforming - as need be. He/she now has the music for the entire film in PT sessions. Usually one session per A/B reel, while each session has several cues.. 1M1, 1M2, etc. These sessions are now brought to the dub stage (re-recording stage), and will play in sync with the picture (due to the aforementioned editing and conforming).

So, the composer doesn't deliver anything. If there are samples, synths, etc., those will be delivered to the music ed., and if the composer does not have PT, the music ed. will take the audio files given by the composer, and conform them as needed. Nobody is going to say, "dude - I absolutely MUST have a PT session!".

Now, if there is no music ed., that might be a different story. But most - if not all - experienced composers working on a feature film with an orchestral score will demand there be a music ed.

Cheers.


----------



## José Herring (Aug 28, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Simon Ravn @ 28th August 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > Does anyone actually still use reels? I haven't seen that here for quite a few years.
> ...



Same here.

On the indy side, I sometimes get reels sometimes not. I mostly demand reels just because it's easier to work with.

But, I was surprised when I ghosted on a major feature that they still did things really old school. Reels with not only TC burn in but the feet and inches counter thing which I hadn't seen since I was doing student films with people cutting on flat beds.

Tradition dies hard for the studios.

As for PT. It does make things easier for delivery. But, not 30 grand easier. Nothing that sitting down 30 minutes with the sound mixer and making sure that all your cues are in the right place. Also, you can do what Simon does which is made even easier with reels and a 2 pop at the beginning and end just to make sure.

But, if you're working on large scale features and with mix engineers and music editors and all that PT is almost mandatory. Those guys use nothing but.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 28, 2014)

btw... 

in terms of pro tools...


if you can get your hands on used copy of pro tools HD 9 which should run about $400 to 600 then maybe go for it for these types of scenarios. 

im not sure if the newer PT version which is open to any hardware will still have time code. but if it does and its priced low then its worth having it either way. 

figuring out how to import and spot to pro tools is quiete easy, whci is one of the reasons is very trusted/used on the film comunity side. 

a session delivery should only be one track or one per reel. so no real hardware DSP is required.


----------



## re-peat (Aug 28, 2014)

milesito @ Wed Aug 27 said:


> (...) any thoughts on what delivery method would work best as an alternative? (...)


I always export as AAF, from Logic. Never had any problems with it, I mean: none of the ProTools-people who come after me in the production chain, have ever complained.

I have to say though that I prepare these AAF's quite carefully: 
(1) All stems for a given cue start and stop on the exact same frames (even if that means that some stems might contain 2 minutes and 20 seconds of silence and then just one second of sound).
(2) All stems are, obviously, locked to SMPTE.
(3) The tempo of my entire document is 120bpm, no tempo-changes anywhere (which is easy to do after all the tracks have been rendered to audio and locked to SMPTE).
(4) My document contains no plugins, no automation, no panning, ... nothing. And all the faders are set to 0.
(5) All audio is 24bits48kHz WAV (keep an eye out for this because the default setting is 16bit when exporting as AAF, at least, it is in Logic 9). Exporting to AAF also sees to it that these WAV's will be automatically converted to split-stereo files.

_


----------



## pkm (Aug 28, 2014)

I've only worked on a handful of "major" motion pictures, but they have all been split into reels. For one, it keeps new picture versions restricted to a 15-20 minute segment (i.e. a picture change in Reel 2 doesn't affect timings in reels 3, 4, 5, 6, etc., and nothing following the revised reel requires conforming).

I still see "Feet and frames" on every film, and have noticed that many picture editors who have been in the business a while refer to this number before the SMPTE timecode. They often think in feet rather than seconds.

Reels help keep the film organized by section, it's easier to remember where a cue exists in the film by the cue ID alone, you can have smaller video files in your sessions, and it allows for separate picture versions per reel. If only reel 3 needs picture revisions, only a new reel 3 needs to be delivered. They aren't put back together until the dub. It also splits the dub into sections, so if you're still writing/revising/printing/recording at the last minute, you can easily know what reels are being mixed on what days and what is more of a priority to deliver. It gives the rerecording engineers a stopping point for each day and allows for better organization of time.

Even in TV, you usually get delivered a single file, but cues are organized into "reels" for each act for better organization of cues.

Regarding Pro Tools, it's the "standard" for music editors, so if you are taking that role in a smaller budget project, it's good to have. I wouldn't say it's necessary, but why not try to be as helpful as you can be? Prepping a PT session for a dub doesn't have a difficult learning curve. If you're proficient in any DAW, it won't take you more than 10 minutes to learn the skills you need for that purpose.

I mostly deliver timestamped, properly-labeled WAV files, but on occasion I am asked to deliver a PT session and am happy to do so. It gives me that extra certainty that everything is in the right place, gives me a chance to double check the timestamps are in the correct place, and saves potential costly time on the stage to fix a mistake from someone who is less familiar with the music than I am.


----------



## JohnG (Aug 28, 2014)

pkm @ 28th August 2014 said:


> Regarding Pro Tools, it's the "standard" for music editors, so if you are taking that role in a smaller budget project, it's good to have. I wouldn't say it's necessary, but why not try to be as helpful as you can be?



I hear you, but it's not worth investing $10-$30,000 to be "helpful"l if you're working on an independent film. I realise you would then have it for future projects, but really, I don't think it's necessary. I've worked for other guys who didn't have it and they are doing fine.

The bigger question is whether you need PT to "look big," and my personal, not scientifically verified, anecdotal perspective is that's actually not as true today as it once was.

Put differently, if I didn't already have it, I wouldn't buy it.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Aug 28, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> I hear you, but it's not worth investing $10-$30,000 to be "helpful"l if you're working on an independent film.


Hey John, I'm not sure where that price tag came from... maybe when they required the proprietary hardware?

I just did a quick check on Sweetwater and it looks like you can grab a full version of PT 11 for $699. Not cheap, but not thousands either.

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/PT11Soft-e


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 28, 2014)

Pro Tools Express is included with a couple of inexpensive M-Audio interfaces. It's limited to 16 stereo audio tracks, but I think its files are compatible with real PT systems.


----------



## pkm (Aug 28, 2014)

You don't need HD to deliver a session with audio stems. The actual price is 50x less than you are suggesting.


----------



## JohnG (Aug 28, 2014)

Fair points, but you have to read the fine print to be sure.

You might be right that it's less than formerly, but check carefully to see what you need to do a time-stamp and accommodate enough stems for a film. 

It used to be that to do stems for a movie you needed a pretty big system; maybe that's changed, but it wasn't just the software that you needed. You had to buy hardware too.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 28, 2014)

It's definitely changed, John. I have PT HD 10, and it can do all that stuff without extra hardware. Surround, etc. etc. etc.


----------



## milesito (Aug 28, 2014)

Thanks..what a great discussion.I'm thinking about passing on Pro Tools 11, but right now it is down to $499 in retail right now,plus a 15% discount brings it to $424.15. I wonder at what point it is actually worth it


----------



## pkm (Aug 28, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 28 said:


> Fair points, but you have to read the fine print to be sure.
> 
> You might be right that it's less than formerly, but check carefully to see what you need to do a time-stamp and accommodate enough stems for a film.
> 
> It used to be that to do stems for a movie you needed a pretty big system; maybe that's changed, but it wasn't just the software that you needed. You had to buy hardware too.



Yeah, Pro Tools 9 was when everything changed and the "LE" version became (mostly) on par with the other DAWs featurewise. You could finally use non-proprietary hardware, you could use timecode, etc. There were also workarounds in earlier versions to properly sync to timecode, but PT9 was the first to do it out of the box.


----------



## newbycomposer (Sep 8, 2014)

Wow, as someone just really diving into all this, this is a really interesting little debate. I have a question though, I thought the norm for composers was NOT to use protools, Doesn't han zimmer use cubase? (I feel like that in of itself answers the whole "do you need it" debate but whatever). I HATE working in protools, can't stand it, its a horribly put together program, compared to say cubase (what ive been using, abet not very well) which comes easy but doesn't sacrifice detail or power.


----------



## spiralbill (Sep 8, 2014)

newbycomposer @ Mon Sep 08 said:


> Wow, as someone just really diving into all this, this is a really interesting little debate. I have a question though, I thought the norm for composers was NOT to use protools, Doesn't han zimmer use cubase? (I feel like that in of itself answers the whole "do you need it" debate but whatever). I HATE working in protools, can't stand it, its a horribly put together program, compared to say cubase (what ive been using, abet not very well) which comes easy but doesn't sacrifice detail or power.



Yes, Mr. Hz is on cubase, but I'm pretty sure that almost everybody at RCP uses a seperate protools machine to print their stems on. Yes, composing in protools can be very confusing. But they are using is as sort of more like a tape machine. They can also just send that whole protools session over to the editors so everything is locked to the timeline the way you had it. 

I also know that there are people like Blake Neely who uses a 3rd DAW just to do some sound manipulation and other cool stuff. In this case, he uses logic as his main, PT on a seperate machine formstems printing, ans Ableton for loops mangling.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Sep 9, 2014)

I think using Ableton for those sorts of things is fairly common with the RCP and ex-RCP people. Harry Gregson-Williams uses it as well.


----------



## forjam (May 24, 2017)

spiralbill said:


> Yes, Mr. Hz is on cubase, but I'm pretty sure that almost everybody at RCP uses a seperate protools machine to print their stems on. Yes, composing in protools can be very confusing. But they are using is as sort of more like a tape machine. They can also just send that whole protools session over to the editors so everything is locked to the timeline the way you had it.
> 
> I also know that there are people like Blake Neely who uses a 3rd DAW just to do some sound manipulation and other cool stuff. In this case, he uses logic as his main, PT on a seperate machine formstems printing, ans Ableton for loops mangling.


This is absolutely correct. The composers use Cubase as a DAW for scoring and monitor through and print surround stems on a synced Pro Tools rig. The Pro Tools rig also hosts the vid file further keeping everything in sync. It is the surround stems that get sticky when discussing Pro Tools for the stage. PTHD is required for surround stems and with 8 to 12 or more 5.1 stems, you do the track count. It requires a few passes to print these stems, but everything is in sync and ready for delivery. I think mentioning stages by name could help with this discussion. For example, Sonic Magic wants scores delivered as PT sessions. I personally score in Cubase and monitor/ print in PTHD.


----------

