# Junkie XL's Video Series



## Gerhard Westphalen (May 22, 2015)

I'm so excited for this! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMt-oeozbPA


----------



## Dryden.Chambers (May 22, 2015)

Hilarious Ari Gold impression. : )
What a nice birthday present next week.

Look forward to this Tom/RC. TX


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (May 22, 2015)

Really excited too! I really have no idea what to expect!

Very generous (and smart) of him to do this.

Really hoping they're helpful!


----------



## Andrew Goodwin (May 25, 2015)

Yes yes!


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (May 25, 2015)

The first 3 episodes are up! Its like Christmas morning!!

I'm excited to see how he's done away with printing to Pro Tools.


----------



## ryanstrong (May 26, 2015)

First videos are great, I'm surprised though listening to the Mad Max video he didn't record the output from his DAW? Would have loved to of heard what he was hearing.


----------



## Consona (May 26, 2015)

Cannot wait for next episodes. And really looking forward to see some mixing related stuff.

Thx JXL!


----------



## Vin (May 26, 2015)

Great videos! Great to see that Tom is a fan of CS 2 as well


----------



## Consona (May 26, 2015)

Vin @ Tue May 26 said:


> Great to see that Tom is a fan of CS 2 as well


Yea, but he has like every mainstream sample library though. :lol: (And CS 2 is exactly what's missing in my collection, grrr. :lol


----------



## Tatu (May 26, 2015)

Great videos and seems like a genuinely good guy (must be, since he's using CS2).


----------



## Øivind (May 26, 2015)

Great videos, looking forward to the next ones


----------



## Dryden.Chambers (May 26, 2015)

Does anyone know Tom ?, and might ask if would release or do his own sample libraries or team up with Spitfire for ie

ordering my Tibetan salt lamps today : )


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (May 26, 2015)

Dryden.Chambers @ Tue May 26 said:


> Does anyone know Tom ?, and might ask if would release or do his own sample libraries or team up with Spitfire for ie
> 
> ordering my Tibetan salt lamps today : )



He did work on HZ01 so he knows the guys at Spitfire


----------



## 5Lives (May 26, 2015)

These are like the best videos I've seen! So glad he goes into depth and detail - not for the super beginners for once!


----------



## Daniel James (May 26, 2015)

Awesome videos! 

Perfect timing for me too as I am trying to get my head around setting up a template in Cubase 8, so seeing his is helping 

Can't wait to see more!

-DJ


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (May 27, 2015)

Wow! 

I can't believe I never realized important the control room is until I saw Junkie do exactly what I need accomplish!

I am in surround and so I haven't been able to invest into a surround monitor controller. 

But it looks like this will actually replace that piece of hardware. So I can essentially have a volume controller without compromising my gain staging of my master output. 

I tried figuring out how to set up this one feature, but couldn't decipher it from the manual.

Does anyone have any experience setting up a master volume knob that doesn't not affect your gain staging?

Does anyone else have any other suggestions for using Control Room with surround?

I was under the impression that you needed Steinberg proprietary hardware in order to use Control Room, but I think I'm wrong now.

I would love any info on this.

thanks!


----------



## Cat (May 27, 2015)

Great videos, great guy, great music!!

I was surprised to notice that JXL does not use the Expression Maps in Cubase 8 at all. I find this feature very important for scoring with virtual instruments (articulations, etc).

About the gain structure and mixer routing architecture. I always thought the way he has it setup is ideal for fast stems rendering. But it would imply having to load A LOT of Reverb instances which would kill the CPU. Sure the UAD DSP route will solve this but it has the side-effect of adding latency. If you chain two or three of those UAD plugins within the same channel then the added latency doubles or triples, respectively. This added latency was probably the reason why JXL kept the Constrain Delay Compensation button on all the time which would eliminate any added latency but...bypass the UAD plugins. So I guess one would have to compose and do the midi programming with that switch on then for mixing, turn it off. I always thought that would be cumbersome but I guess it is not a big deal after all.


----------



## vicontrolu (May 27, 2015)

Its huge. Like Guy Michelmore´s template. I wonder if we can start talking about a composer syndrome here


----------



## Consona (May 27, 2015)

vicontrolu @ Wed May 27 said:


> a composer syndrome


What's that?


----------



## Lawson. (May 27, 2015)

Wow, very interesting! All those custom samples must be so fun to play with.

His orchestral section was a lot smaller than I was expecting, though. He only used legato, staccato, and spiccato in the strings! :o


----------



## lucor (Jun 2, 2015)

New video is up.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFHIBo3d4Rw


----------



## gsilbers (Jun 2, 2015)

interesting way of laying the drums. cinesamples has this way of layering by pitch note instead of velocity. not sure if I find it more convenient.


----------



## ysnyvz (Jun 2, 2015)

Thanks for sharing. Great videos 



> interesting way of laying the drums. cinesamples has this way of layering by pitch note instead of velocity. not sure if I find it more convenient.



It can work for simple percussions (1 or 2 articulations), but I wouldn't recommend it for complex percussion instruments (tabla, darbuka, daf etc.). It would be impossible to perform something like this:
https://soundcloud.com/yasinyavuz/duff-solo


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 2, 2015)

yea, that seems like a quick and dirty way to sample drums. but then again, he's not a developer. plus...that is a pretty cool way to combine tracks. i think i'll try this. thanks for posting!


----------



## proxima (Jun 2, 2015)

gsilbers @ Tue Jun 02 said:


> interesting way of laying the drums. cinesamples has this way of layering by pitch note instead of velocity. not sure if I find it more convenient.


It certainly means you end up with tons and tons of tracks, if you don't mind that. A chunk of the video was spent finding the highest valid note for each patch. I'd rather just edit velocities myself, though I suppose you can't guarantee you'll hit different samples by varying the velocity a bit - but that's what round robin is for.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 2, 2015)

I think his style of doing that is pretty good for layering if you follow his method of that as well. RR's may accidentally give you phasing if it hits the same note. Plus, it's always playing a different hit which may not work.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 2, 2015)

givemenoughrope @ Tue Jun 02 said:


> I think his style of doing that is pretty good for layering if you follow his method of that as well. RR's may accidentally give you phasing if it hits the same note. Plus, it's always playing a different hit which may not work.



He was layering on different drums rather than on 1 so I don't think phasing would be an issue with RR's as long as you're using different patches for each like he did.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 2, 2015)

Right. I meant as opposed to round robins. Obviously no phasing going to happen here.


----------



## Daniel James (Jun 3, 2015)

What Tom is saying with regards to percussion layering is gospel in my opinion. A great video.

However I think I totally disagree with his approach to laying out percussion across the keyboard instead of utilizing RR....particually with the velocity editing features he has in cubase 8. Firstly the amount of time you would spend making sure you have no repeating notes would just be a pain, if you had an RR script that never played the same sample twice you are done. Secondly he justifys his system saying that it maintains the ratio of velocity between hits....Which I thought was odd because cubase has perhaps the most powerful ratio maintaining velocity editing features built in, just select all then drag the little box at the top of the velocity window....in Cubase you can even create ramps up and down while still maintaining velocity ratio....not to mention the option on the right of the velocity window that sort of acts as a velocity compressor/expander which either increases or decreases the difference between loudest and quietest notes.

The other useful thing about the way developers lay out percussion using one or two keys is that you can put more drums in one patch....or at least in his template, he could put all the surdos in one patch. 

Of course if it works for him (and it clearly does) then its no big deal. Just speaking from my POV I think the way developers currently program percussion makes more sense overall.

-DJ


----------



## vicontrolu (Jun 3, 2015)

So all of these were original recordings? Man, i watched the movie on friday and kept listening to Damage, epic toms & dohls, etc..which makes me think..what did these recordings offer that couldnt be accomplished with what we already have available?


----------



## stonzthro (Jun 3, 2015)

I certainly would not want all the serdos on one patch. Wouldn't that narrow the panning options to Kontakt only? Can you set different keys to different outputs? I know you can do that with different mic sets.


----------



## jackvani (Jun 3, 2015)

Great videos!
But what kind of PC has he, that can load all the samples? 
Incredible!


----------



## gsilbers (Jun 3, 2015)

vicontrolu @ Wed Jun 03 said:


> So all of these were original recordings? Man, i watched the movie on friday and kept listening to Damage, epic toms & dohls, etc..which makes me think..what did these recordings offer that couldnt be accomplished with what we already have available?



the commercial libraries do have their sound. 8dio sounds roomy. damage has also a type of sound. same as with a violin recording. different ways of recording the same violin will yield different sound, but also different violins as well. same deal with drums. it might sound similar but it does bring a sound edge to other film scores.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 3, 2015)

jackvani @ Wed Jun 03 said:


> Great videos!
> But what kind of PC has he, that can load all the samples?
> Incredible!



He uses 6 VisionDAW slaves. I think they each have 128GB of ram. I'm not sure what the specs of his main Cubase and PT computers are but I'm sure he'll cover it in later episodes.


----------



## Iostream (Jun 3, 2015)

Daniel James @ Wed Jun 03 said:


> What Tom is saying with regards to percussion layering is gospel in my opinion. A great video.
> 
> However I think I totally disagree with his approach to laying out percussion across the keyboard instead of utilizing RR....particually with the velocity editing features he has in cubase 8. Firstly the amount of time you would spend making sure you have no repeating notes would just be a pain, if you had an RR script that never played the same sample twice you are done. Secondly he justifys his system saying that it maintains the ratio of velocity between hits....Which I thought was odd because cubase has perhaps the most powerful ratio maintaining velocity editing features built in, just select all then drag the little box at the top of the velocity window....in Cubase you can even create ramps up and down while still maintaining velocity ratio....not to mention the option on the right of the velocity window that sort of acts as a velocity compressor/expander which either increases or decreases the difference between loudest and quietest notes.
> 
> ...



Agreed. He can do what he wants with his workflow and samples, but I have grown fond of how Cubase works with existing sample libraries, and I don't see how his method gives you any better results. Just more tracks.


----------



## synthpunk (Jun 3, 2015)

What is the random quantization he mentions in Cubase btw ?


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jun 3, 2015)

Very cool videos..nice to see how he is doing it. 

The drum programming video was interesting. I use the standard techniques and the logical editor for randomization but this works too! 

I can see some merits in this interesting approach. Whatever works!

But, I have only one big problem and that is the sound. I mentioned this in another thread - there seem to be multiple threads about this. 

Why would you do these awesome video series and then record the sound in mono via a mic in the room?

I could not tell the subtle differences in the drum sounds. I mean, with all the amazing equipment sitting right there and coming from a composer like Tom, it just robs the entire series of a good audio experience. 

Tom, if you are reading this please do find a way to work this out. It is a shame otherwise because it will really make a HUGE difference. 

You are talking about 3000 tracks in Cubase, amazing sample recordings, 6 server racks, writing the music in Quad and even mentioning those big Dynaudio AIR series speakers - but then the end result is in mono from a room mic which is being assaulted with the loud sounds. 

I am very surprised that nobody seems to have a problem with this :?


----------



## proxima (Jun 3, 2015)

Tanuj Tiku @ Wed Jun 03 said:


> Why would you do these awesome video series and then record the sound in mono via a mic in the room?


I certainly noticed it too and wasn't a big fan. Perhaps he's concerned about not providing higher-quality audio that people might re-use? That doesn't seem like a good reason, because if that were a significant problem sample libraries wouldn't have walkthrough videos. But I really can't think of a valid reason.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 3, 2015)

Can anyone here speak to his use of surround with VE Pro? I'm rebuilding my template, much of it from scratch and after that with surrounds. But it may well be essentially quad with a sub. not sure where to start or how VE Pro via Cubase will accommodate that. He touches upon it in an earlier video but I don't remember much detail. Any thoughts appreciated...


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Jun 3, 2015)

Unfortunately these videos were recorded in early April, so there will still potentially be a number of videos to be released before being able to apply the feedback.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Jun 4, 2015)

givemenoughrope @ Wed Jun 03 said:


> Can anyone here speak to his use of surround with VE Pro? I'm rebuilding my template, much of it from scratch and after that with surrounds. But it may well be essentially quad with a sub. not sure where to start or how VE Pro via Cubase will accommodate that. He touches upon it in an earlier video but I don't remember much detail. Any thoughts appreciated...



Hi there!

I have a very similar setup as his. Obviously not as big, but a 6 slave vepro quad template and I'm really fascinated with how he has everything set up. 

I'm sure there are a number of people more qualified to answer your question, but basically he is splitting up his returns from Vienna into 2 stereo pairs. When I saw this a few months ago, it inspired me to experiment with this for myself. Seeing how much more manageable it was and how much less of a guessing game in terms of how much to route to the center channel per library and still trying to stay out of the way of the dialogue. that's when I re-built my template in QUAD. 

So its very clean the way he has it laid out. I presume, one instance of VEPRO per slave, and then within that one instance, he has a TON of outputs activated in your VST rack in cubase. Then those outputs essentially become your VST returns. 

So it seems as if he is activating 2 stereo outputs per instrument, so let's say 8Dio Clarinet FRONT would be output 1-2, 8Dio Clarinet Back is 3-4. Then Spitfire Low Winds FRONT would be 5-6 and Spitfire Low Winds BACK would be 7-8. And so on. 

This allows you to keep your rack nice and uncluttered with minimal instances, this encourages you to route your returns the best way that makes sense. 

I haven't converted all mine this way, I have a slave still dedicated to Quad instruments in VEPRO so that output list looks the same only it's 1-4, 5-8, etc and that means that I would send those potentially to a surround reverb, vs. to 2 stereo reverbs, one for front and one for back.

Does that kinda answer your question?

****
Now I have a question... 

In Cubase, can you assign a key command to the configuration presets in the list? 

Mr. Xl uses the Only show tracks with DATA UNDER CURSOR a lot, but I prefer Only show tracks with DATA BETWEEN LOCATORS! 

Is there anyway to program a key command for these? Or does it have to be done in the intimidating Logical Editor?

Thanks


----------



## charlieclouser (Jun 4, 2015)

Before I saw the JXL videos I was experimenting with building out a template in VEPro and Cubase (blasphemy since I am a 20-year Logic user...) and one issue that I came across might be something to watch out for when setting up a quad or surround template:

In Cubase, if you've got surround reverbs (or quad, or quad+sub, or whatever) you can't control the balance of how signals entering that reverb are distributed between that reverb's inputs. So if you've got a quad VST Return with a send to a GroupFX channel that has a quad reverb inserted, that VST Return will hit all four of the reverb's inputs with no way to "push" the send to the front or back pairs. This is a little clumsy.

I had Costa Kotselas over here just to make sure I wasn't totally being stupid, and he couldn't find a way to control the input balance on a quad verb either, much to his surprise - and he's a 20+ year Cubase veteran and spent many years as Harry Gregson-Williams' tech guy. The only solution we could find was to use a stereo verb for the front and another stereo verb for the rear - but this means twice as many GroupFX channels, twice as many sends, etc. It's just as clumsy as it's always been in Logic, where due to the limitations of Logic's surround implementation you basically wind up using two stereo pairs and two mono channels for each 5.1 stem output. Kind of a bummer, as one of the reasons I'm considering switching from Logic to Cubase (besides more elegant VEPro handling) is better surround / quad implementation - but this fx send issue kind of knocks out half of what I was hoping for.

You can certainly put your reverbs inside VEPro and then you've got a bit more control over how a quad Kontakt instrument that appears as two stereo pairs will hit your reverbs, and of course you can just use front+back stereo verbs there, as we were forced to do in Cubase, but, again, the number of sends and returns starts to climb and climb....

If anybody is even more of a jock than Costa, and has figured out a solution to controlling the input balance to a quad or surround reverb plugin on a GroupFX channel when it's being fed via a send from a quad or surround VST Return inside Cubase, I'd love to hear how you're doing it.


----------



## vicontrolu (Jun 5, 2015)

Are you saying this doesnt work in quad/surround? I dont have experience with multichannel sorry.


----------



## vicontrolu (Jun 5, 2015)

gsilbers @ Wed Jun 03 said:


> vicontrolu @ Wed Jun 03 said:
> 
> 
> > So all of these were original recordings? Man, i watched the movie on friday and kept listening to Damage, epic toms & dohls, etc..which makes me think..what did these recordings offer that couldnt be accomplished with what we already have available?
> ...




Yeah sound will be a tad different but, if i couldnt tell a difference when watching the film (basically it was always playing with tons of huge SFXs)...does this sound edge really has an impact in the overall experience? I honestly dont think so


----------



## dgburns (Jun 5, 2015)

charlieclouser @ Fri Jun 05 said:


> Before I saw the JXL videos I was experimenting with building out a template in VEPro and Cubase (blasphemy since I am a 20-year Logic user...) and one issue that I came across might be something to watch out for when setting up a quad or surround template:
> 
> In Cubase, if you've got surround reverbs (or quad, or quad+sub, or whatever) you can't control the balance of how signals entering that reverb are distributed between that reverb's inputs. So if you've got a quad VST Return with a send to a GroupFX channel that has a quad reverb inserted, that VST Return will hit all four of the reverb's inputs with no way to "push" the send to the front or back pairs. This is a little clumsy.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure any of this is a solution,but seeing as I'm in a similar situation as you,I thought I'd share some things I thought about.I'm sure many of this you did as well...

I created an output list that started with a 5.1 output ,and then created child outputs for all the possible sub-paths,which would include quad etc all the way down to stereo pairs for front and back.(this is a la Protools subpaths for me,so very familiar).This does allow a stereo track to be directly sent to a subset of the 5.1 destination.So it could get you there if you needed a hard panned send only to the rears for example,or to the lfe for a mono track,etc etc etc
I thought about plugin planners such as waves 5.1 panner,or maybe the power panner from vsl ,not sure if it is multi channel.Cubase does not allow plugin such as mono>stereo,so if you have a mono track that you want to pan in the quad field ,and then send to a verb,for example,you need to bus that mono track to a quad aux(group track I imagine) and then send that track to the fx .Or,as Guy R explained to me a few months back,you can apply a quad fx on a mono track by placing the mono audio on a quad audio track and then putting up whatever plugin you want on that channel,but the sound does in fact go evenly to all channels prior to the fx.Again a multi channel panner plugin would be most welcome here.
Spanner is available for Protools,but I'm not sure I see any vst panner plugs that would do the trick.Wonder why that is?so strange.
To be fair,I'm not so pissed about all this as I find the multi channel capability a lot more flexible then LPX.But you might be creating subs just to pan stuff before sending to fx.I try as much as possible to use child paths wherever possible first though.I also subscribe to the method of printing my stems within the daw,and it's usually stereo these days,but even if I needed to go multichannel,I would create 5.1 stems busses and create the child paths,in case the destination was not full 5.1 .

still investigating all this btw,don't take as gospel,just some thoughts (sorry if this should be another thread ,admins)


----------



## samphony (Jun 5, 2015)

Is this maybe something that is doable with nuendo?


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 5, 2015)

ChristopherDoucet @ Thu Jun 04 said:


> Does that kinda answer your question?



Yes! kinda. It makes sense for orchestral-type front to back (close, far) reverb. 

But what about say panning something around the spectrum? Can you assign a surround VSTi or reverb either in VE pro or Cubase to output the fronts to one stereo channel and the rears to another?

And what about the LFE channel? I guess that is just for booms and swells anyway?

So, in the end I'm assuming that these quad busses (dual stereo busses) are rendered to a surround file only with a silent center channel...? And if the LFE is a separate stem then it the other 5 channels silent as well...?

A lot of questions. Sorry. 



ChristopherDoucet @ Thu Jun 04 said:


> ****
> Now I have a question...
> 
> In Cubase, can you assign a key command to the configuration presets in the list?
> ...



Hmm...if I'm following... I'm not sure you can hide events, only tracks and folders? I'll investigate further though.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Jun 5, 2015)

there is a key command for showing tracks with data between locators.

I use metafader lemur template from artsunmuted and it has all those commands. You can do your own with lemur or touchosc, they are time savers!


----------



## gsilbers (Jun 5, 2015)

charlieclouser @ Thu Jun 04 said:


> Before I saw the JXL videos I was experimenting with building out a template in VEPro and Cubase (blasphemy since I am a 20-year Logic user...) and one issue that I came across might be something to watch out for when setting up a quad or surround template:
> 
> In Cubase, if you've got surround reverbs (or quad, or quad+sub, or whatever) you can't control the balance of how signals entering that reverb are distributed between that reverb's inputs. So if you've got a quad VST Return with a send to a GroupFX channel that has a quad reverb inserted, that VST Return will hit all four of the reverb's inputs with no way to "push" the send to the front or back pairs. This is a little clumsy.
> 
> ...




oh no! not you too! ive been thinking about changing to Cubase as well. 
logic's 16 AU channel limit and VEP is a hassle. 
also all these tablet people are using for short cuts. neato. 
and also folder handling/500+tracks.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 5, 2015)

Pablo, where exactLet?

What is the benefit of doing this?


----------



## Chris B (Jun 5, 2015)

Thank you for sharing this— it was very helpful to me.


----------



## charlieclouser (Jun 5, 2015)

vicontrolu @ Fri Jun 05 said:


> Are you saying this doesnt work in quad/surround? I dont have experience with multichannel sorry.



Well, I do have that control visible, and it shows a surround panner when the destination FX is a surround reverb (I'm just using a 5.1 Reverence instance to test) but changing the settings on the send's surround panner does not seem to affect how the signals are distributed between the inputs of the Reverence instance. I don't know what that surround panner IS affecting, if it's not used to rebalance how that send hits the destination reverb, but...

I'm admittedly a novice at Cubase, so it's probably pilot error - or maybe it's just a weirdness with Reverence, but.... it ain't working as I'd expect.

Ideally I'd want to have a source that is anywhere from mono to 5.1 and use the send's surround panner to have that source hit whatever combination of inputs on a surround reverb that is the destination for the send - but stupid me can't make it happen.


----------



## vicontrolu (Jun 6, 2015)

If the surround panner is there, it should definitely work.

I d test by disabling the reverb, setting the send on the track to pre fader and lower the volume down completely. This way you are using the rev aux track as master track so cahnging the surround panner in the send (the red one in the pic) should be moving the sound the same way as if you were moving the standar surround panner on a regular track routed to the master out. 

Of course you need to make sure the outpu on your rev track is properly routed to the master track.


----------



## PJMorgan (Jun 9, 2015)

Junkie XL Showing some riffage as used in Mad Max by the Doof warrior guitarist, he ain't half bad either 



=o 

This is more up my ally _-) 

I just love all things Electric Guitar. Some really great gear used here, I'm actually pretty close to getting a Gibson Les Paul Studio, couldn't make my mind up between that & an SG but I think I prefer the tone of the LP a wee bit more than the SG.

I like the fact that he's keeping it old school & not using amp sims, I was using mostly amp sims myself up until I got my first valve amp a couple of years ago. it just feels so much better playing through the real thing, unfortunately I'm still using amp sims for recording at least until I get a re-amping box so I can record the output of my EVH 5150 III back into Logic.

I'm really enjoying this series of videos & can't wait for the next one!


----------



## synthpunk (Jun 29, 2015)

Episode 7, Fab Filter


----------



## synthpunk (Jun 30, 2015)

PT 8 Touch Screen


----------



## synthpunk (Jul 14, 2015)

Pt 10 is up. Very nice of Tom to take us through the notebook of his new score.


----------



## ryanstrong (Jul 23, 2015)

aesthete said:


> Pt 10 is up. Very nice of Tom to take us through the notebook of his new score.



I just have no idea why they didn't record the output of his DAW. You can't really tell what he's talking about when he references to listen to the texture or the low end. 

Do you guys think it was a mistake? Or on purpose?


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jul 24, 2015)

From an Audiofanzine interview:


*"How many episodes are there?*

We have roughly 20 episodes. And after those 20, we're going to gather a lot of feedback from the people who have watched them, and we're going to see how we can make it better, and how we can do it different, and what would you like to see in the next 20 episodes. And then we'll release a whole bunch of new ones, and we'll start releasing them again every week.

*That's why there are only 10 out now? *

Yes, we're still going at a pace of once a week, and we're actually going to take a break. I think today is the last one for six weeks, because so many people go on holiday, in the weeks to come, and it doesn't really make sense to release them, and you lose traction. So we'll pick everything back up when colleges start again, which is like late August, or the first week of September."


----------



## synthpunk (Jul 24, 2015)

I really do not see the need to complain. I think it's more about the knowledge than the audio quality right ?



ryanstrong said:


> I just have no idea why they didn't record the output of his DAW. You can't really tell what he's talking about when he references to listen to the texture or the low end.
> 
> Do you guys think it was a mistake? Or on purpose?


----------



## ryanstrong (Jul 24, 2015)

aesthete said:


> I really do not see the need to complain. I think it's more about the knowledge than the audio quality right ?


Not complaining just don't understand? Does it not bother anyone else?


----------



## mc_deli (Jul 24, 2015)

I enjoyed theses videos a lot though I must confess I fast forwarded a lot as it is quite slow going.

What struck me are some of the Cubase features that I would like to have in Logic:
- Customisable global tracks (e.g. adding audio tracks for dialogue, temp etc. to the global tracks pane. AFAIK Logic users are limited to the given global tracks)
- Customisable mixer views (the only way to do this in Logic is in the environment and it is not intuitive. Logic should apply the "patch" logic to mixer views)
- Control room (I would conceive this as smart control for the mixer, again using the patch logic - this would mean you could use an ext midi controller as a monitor controller/console centre section)
- Random quantise (I really liked the ability to random quantise by an amount of ticks - AFAIK that isn't possible in Logic)


----------



## Living Fossil (Jul 24, 2015)

mc_deli said:


> - Random quantise (I really liked the ability to random quantise by an amount of ticks - AFAIK that isn't possible in Logic)



In logic, you can set the strength of the quantization.
And then there is the transform menu which lets you randomize the position.
So, it's maybe one command more, but it's possible.


----------



## mc_deli (Jul 24, 2015)

Living Fossil said:


> In logic, you can set the strength of the quantization.
> And then there is the transform menu which lets you randomize the position.
> So, it's maybe one command more, but it's possible.


I don't see randomise position on the MIDI Transform drop down - I am probably missing something?


----------



## Living Fossil (Jul 24, 2015)

@mc deli: in Logic 9 (and all the previous versions since Notator) there was a transform preset called "Humanize". I'm sure it's still there in Logic X (i work with 9, but i'm sure the manual may help).
Take this humanize setting as starting point. you can e.g. just randomize the position and than restore the setting with a different name.


----------



## samphony (Jul 25, 2015)

mc_deli said:


> I don't see randomise position on the MIDI Transform drop down - I am probably missing something?


It's called humanize.


----------



## mc_deli (Jul 25, 2015)

samphony said:


> It's called humanize.


Midi Transform > Humanize - Result! 
Shame about the lack of mixer presets though:(

Anyway, back to the plot


----------



## synthpunk (Sep 22, 2015)

Looks like this series has now changed to something called Now Score This, featuring Tom's new score for Black Mass.


----------



## Bunford (Sep 23, 2015)

This is a great direction to take it in! Could be quite groundbreaking to have this kind of interaction between a legit Hollywood composer and the composing community.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Oct 16, 2015)

I just re-watched video one, where he goes through his template and I was curious about the "MIDI FILE TRACK", it's right at the beginning when he starts going through the tracks in his template.

What would that be used for? Does anyone know?

Thanks,


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Nov 2, 2015)

Has anyone heard if there are any updates as to when the next 10 will be released? I'm blown away by how helpful they were!


----------



## kunst91 (Nov 2, 2015)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Has anyone heard if there are any updates as to when the next 10 will be released? I'm blown away by how helpful they were!



He's doing some videos with NI covering his use of Reaktor, which I'm very excited about!


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Nov 2, 2015)

kunst91 said:


> He's doing some videos with NI covering his use of Reaktor, which I'm very excited about!


Oh I thought that was just a one off live seminar that he was doing. I didn't realize they would be filming it! Very cool. REAKTOR is wild and that would be amazing to see what he does with it.


----------



## kunst91 (Nov 2, 2015)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Oh I thought that was just a one off live seminar that he was doing. I didn't realize they would be filming it! Very cool. REAKTOR is wild and that would be amazing to see what he does with it.



You could be right. I was under the impression that it would be filmed--he referred to "studio time" in the post--but I could be wrong!


----------

