# Are there any specific things I’m missing out on without a template?



## thevisi0nary (Oct 31, 2018)

My daw of choice is reaper, which has a track template function and I recall specific instrument groups or tracks as needed (strings, brass, guitar, chimes, etc). I’m wondering how my orchestral workflow could benefit from having a dedicated template compared to how I am working now. I am aware workflows are very personally situational, but I would like to know any specific things I could be missing out on by not having a dedicated template. The only thing that comes to mind is multi fx routing being already set up.


----------



## gregh (Oct 31, 2018)

I dont use templates at all but this is a free Reaper template well designed for orchestral. You install it as a portable install so it does not interfere with your existing setup. Might be worth a try

http://otr.storyteller.im/


----------



## ptram (Nov 1, 2018)

I've been trying to create templates for all the programs I am using. Someone suggested to create a single template in Vienna Ensemble, despite how complicate it is to manage it in Logic (the DAW I use).

After various attempts, I changed my strategy. What I need is not necessarily a template, but (a) a way to immediately recall a sound, and (b) a way to exchange sequences between different sounds, without having to reconfigure all.

I decided that a template is not what I need in my way of working. To achieve my goals, I need a schema.

A schema is a hidden structure placing things in a predetermined position in a general plan. When you need one of these things, you recall it, and it will appear at the right place. The things you don't need remain hidden, and you don't have to take care of them. But everything is always in the right place.

My way of implementing a schema is creating an universal map of sounds, channels, articulations. The same numbers will recall the same type of thing, indipendently from the library. I know where a thing (a sound, an articulation) is or should be.

I will have the same type of preset collecting all the needed articulations. When I need a staccato, it will be recalled by the same command or numbers in either VSL or Spitfire.

When I need a muted tenor trombone in Dorico or Sibelius, it will be in a specific instance and channel of Vienna Ensemble. No chance to point to the wrong articulation in the wrong sound in the wrong channel.

I will not load a full template before starting to work. When I need something, I will place it in a predetermined place. What I need, will immediately be in the right place. What I don't need, will quietly wait for its turn.

I know where I put my car's key, where I store my sci-fi movies, or where frozen foods are supposed to be. I don't need frozen cabbages all the time (a template), but I know where to find them when I need them (a schema).

Paolo


----------



## colony nofi (Nov 1, 2018)

This is a very interesting idea / approach. I'm constantly frustrated by the current paradigms for media composition. The single cue per session is an entirely inefficient way of working, and once sessions start to take 10 to 20 seconds to load, its frustrating to move between. Yet for orchestration / recording, its almost 100% needed to be back in individual sessions - or go thru some very complicated hoops.
But try writing a single film reel in one session in logic or cubase. Its a nightmare. Need to change an entry point / tempo in an early cue? Good luck with that! 
The whole thing needs a complete rethink. Not by just us as composers, but the companies making the software.
VEP is awesome for some things. But as composers we end up spending TONNES of times on tech / setup - and if you get it wrong / want to change the way you work - you better have a week or three up your sleeve to go back and rework.

So - A schema. I'm gathering you are talking Reaper. I've done a large contemporary score which uses reaper live - and it totally got me intrigued. 

Anything that allows more flow in composition... in selecting instruments. In moving things between cues. In speed. Ah......


----------



## Dewdman42 (Nov 1, 2018)

I like the “schema” concept and this is very applicable to logic also. I have to put some thought into it. Logic has definite limitations in terms of huge templates so if this is perhaps a better way to have a smaller template and huge vep server content decoupled and ready to quickly audition and use as needed, could be good workflow


----------



## ptram (Nov 2, 2018)

colony nofi said:


> So - A schema. I'm gathering you are talking Reaper.


Actually, no, I don't use Reaper. The DAW I use is Logic. But the idea of "schema" should be abstract from the tool: the same organization should work in the same way everywhere (in Reaper, Logic, Dorico, maybe a real orchestra or a synthetic one).

Paolo


----------



## scottbuckley (Nov 7, 2018)

ptram said:


> A schema is a hidden structure placing things in a predetermined position in a general plan. When you need one of these things, you recall it, and it will appear at the right place. The things you don't need remain hidden, and you don't have to take care of them. But everything is always in the right place.



Such a great way to think about it. I use templates, but in many ways they are just the bones of what I need - not everything that I *could* need. In that essence it's a sort of schema, I suppose .

In regards to the original question - it's just what you said @thevisi0nary --- not having to reinvent the wheel every time I want to tool around. Particularly if there is a base set of patches / busses I know won't change much, it just leaves more time for me to make my coffee / pour a glass of wine whilst it loads.


----------

