DM3200 Work Flow Configurations

[Transonic]

Hello everyone. I'm a new poster to this forum, but have been "lurking" for a few months now. I'm a long time guitarist and am new to the craft of digital audio/music production. Thanks to the posts by folks like captdan, Jamsire, DrumStruc, TascMan, and others I've been able to get the DM-3200 up as the primary tracking interface in the studio. I have the HUI /Remote Layer working (thanks to captdan's detailed instructions). I'v'e not yet used the DM for mixing and mastering but that is the plan. The goal for myself and the studio at this point is to develop a work flow for music production on demand- I've been doing so for about a year with mixed success using the Eleven Rack with PT8 LE before getting the use of the DM in a really nice studio setup (long story). I usually start with a click track or drum track and lay down a basic arrangement with the guitar. I'll then add a midi bass line, keys, melody, and pad. No vocals yet, but now that I'm better set up for it that is in the plan. I use "input Bypass" in the DM and "low latency monitoring in PT to limit the latency issues with this approach- Once I've got the tracking done, I want to figure out the pro/'s con's of mixing and mastering using the DM-3200 vs. "In the Box"

I am interested in sharing work flow ideas for music production and DM-3200 set up for each stage. This is what I have gathered from lurking on the forum:

Tracking/Recording Setup

MTC Generate in PT
MTC External in DM
Guitar -> Eleven Rack -> Digital IN on the DM -> input Bypass -> IF-FW/DMMKII (Slot1) -> PT
Axiom Pro Midi -> USB -> Computer -> PTM/L -> input bypass -> IF-FW/DMMKII -> PT
Monitor Setup: Stereo Out -> IF-SM/DM (Slot 2) -> JBL Studio Monitors
Recording booth headphone mix: Stereo Out -> ADAT -> HEAR back rig​

Mixing/Mastering Setup (haven't tried this yet but this is what I've gathered from the forum)

MTC External in PT
MTC Internal in DM
PT Tracks -> IF-FW/DMMKII -> DM Input ->DM effects /Auto -> Stereo Buss -> IF-FW/DMMKII -> PT
​

I would like to record all pans, fades, effects, done on the DM and mix it down to a stereo track that gets back to PT so that I can bounce it when done.

Thanks in advance!

​

 

[Tonepad]

I don't really see a huge benefit in trying to get your DM3200 be your automated mixer. That was an important option back in the non-DAW days of MMR8s and even DA88s. Even most of the top Mixers today almost all automate in the box, and any article you might read brings up the ease of "IN THE BOX" recall. However they do bring the mix back thru their Neves and SSLs etc. Now as much as I like the sound of my DM4800, I don't see much of a benefit of routing in and out of it in this way. However I do use the DM as a DAW mix control surface all the time. My DAW is PT so the fact that HUI is not completely supported in the DM is a bit of a negative, though volume moves and sends and pans are all there...for the rest of my needs I use a Euphonix Artist Control and a Artist Mix for more faders and plugin encoders. Specifically the DM is assigned to Aux sends using the flip function to bring it to the faders...The Artist Control does plugs and the Mix does volume. Though the EUCON spec is ethernet the DM is seen by PT HUI and works a charm in this mashup. I do use plenty of analog front end...I have two 500 module racks and various other racks of Pres/Comps, oh and I too use the Digi 11 rack. The DM being the Swiss Army knife of audio doesn't even break a sweat with any of this. Oh and I should mention I run 2 PT rigs...A MacPro running via TDIF from an Avid HD box and a DIY PC running via Firewire to the DM. The only thing I can't do is switch the DM USB/HUI from the Mac to the PC but the Artists will since they live on the EUCON network.

 

[Transonic]

Hey TonePad,

Thanks for the quick reply! I would like to understand this part of it better:

"Specifically the DM is assigned to Aux sends using the flip function to bring it to the faders...The Artist Control does plugs and the Mix does volume."
​

So during a mixing session are you sending the tracks out of the DM through Aux Sends to the Artist Control (via what interface?) for the plug-ins in your mix? I use the plug ins in PT, but would like to try the compressor, EQ, etc... in the DM. Are they any good? Apologies for being a little dense here...

 

[Gravity Jim]

I beg to differ. Learning the DM's automation (which is a cinch, BTW) leads to a hybrid mixing style that makes best use of my tools.

For example, let's say that I have three tracks in my DAW for the bass guitar... One unprocessed, one through a distortion plug, and the last eq'd for "clank." I will buss them to a single fader on my DM3200, and in the course of the piece I may tweak the balance between the three tracks to get more punch or more top-end on a given line... But I'll do final mix in the DM.... I have a single fader for the bass, and get the excellent summing sound of the DM. I mostly use ITB compressors, but I'm more likely to use the DM's EQ before anything else.

Everybody has their own approach, but I wouldn't work any other way. It feels logical to me... Stuff that effects the sound of the track mostly happens ITB, final levels, panning and balance happen in the DM.

So don't discount the power if the DM's automation... it can become an essential tool.

 

[Tonepad]

OP to use the DM as a controller in PT:
1. hook up your DM to your PC or Mac using a USB cable
2. go to peripherals and setup up 2 banks of DM control in the HUI section.
3. on the DM select the remote button at the bottom...this defaults to volume control
4. IF you want to control PAN or AUX sends after that select one of those buttons and then the flip button which brings those encoders to the faders.
5. I'd familiarize myself with writing volume automation to PT at first and then graduate to the other functions as you get more comfy. I was just laying out an advanced scenario to help you see where you can go. Which of course also includes what you said you wanted to do and Gravity Jim said he does.
6. Dig into the manual for any idea you might have...the basics are there even if only in sketch form...the rest are usually here and on the internet as user tips. IMHO you might never learn all it can do, I certainly don't... going on 10+ years with it now.

The only reason I advised on focusing ITB is because that's the way most records and pretty much all TV/Film Post sound is done. I work in TV post ( Sound Supervisor of NCIS LA) but also record music as described in my workflow above. The DM will let you do just about anything you can imagine, they are amazing machines.

 

[Gravity Jim]

If we all did things "the way everybody does it," none of us would have DMs. My point is the DM series has excellent sound and powerful automation... Why not learn it? It might be perfect for you, as it is for me.

And I don't want to play "who's the real pro," but I've been producing video and audio since the days when "B" roll was real and you had to cut tape with a razor blade. I use MOTU DP and a digital console just as I have for 20 years, I make a living creating music for advertising and video games, and I don't care how anybody does it in Hollywood.

 

[captdan]

Not to rehash the infamous IN/OUT-Box Debate, but I'm with Jim on this one. Although I use PT's automation occasionally (and do commercial mastering in the box), I wouldn't be happy without DM's automation, or for that matter, the many benefits of DM_OTB methodology.

That said, Tonepad isn't inaccurate pointing to the wide-spread use of ITB in film post and record production. But I would suggest that, in a great many of those cases, robust, dedicated controllers working with batteries of HDs and powerful PC/Macs are being employed. Also, with that much bandwidth and storage needs, speed efficiency and standardized procedures trump methods that may be more opportune for DIY producers. It's about workflow and what gets the best product out the door in the quickest way possible.

Finally, for those who stay ITB with their DM's, Jamsire's cracked the 'holy code' of the User Defined Layer and the vast MIDI power buried in the DM consoles. In fact, even OTB adherents like me benefit from that capability. So bottom line, it doesn't matter which way you choose because there are are several great ways to get there.

CaptDan

 

[Transonic]

All- thanks for the thoughtful feedback. Good civil discourse on a subject that has many different takes. You guys are what make this forum what it is- I gave up on forums back in the "usenet" days until now.

I have about a year's worth of mixing practice ITB at this point, so I think I will work through some mixes in the next few weeks learning the OTB automation and FX as in Tonepad's second reply. If it doesn't work well for me I can always go back to ITB. I'll need to set up a mix session naming convention in the DM that matches my PT sessions. More complexity, but it sounds like there is ROI. I especially like Gravity Jim's idea of a hybrid approach with the instrument tracks sound ITB and the final pan and level in the DM. I'll post my OTB flow in more detail in a couple of days once I've tried a few things.

 

[Tonepad]

If we all did things "the way everybody does it," none of us would have DMs. My point is the DM series has excellent sound and powerful automation... Why not learn it? It might be perfect for you, as it is for me.

And I don't want to play "who's the real pro," but I've been producing video and audio since the days when "B" roll was real and you had to cut tape with a razor blade. I use MOTU DP and a digital console just as I have for 20 years, I make a living creating music for advertising and video games, and I don't care how anybody does it in Hollywood.

Jim, no one's taking a shot at you, I did refer with respect to your workflow...I dont "love" working in Hollywood but as I always say I am paid to. I would also refer the user base here to read the great interviews in mags like "Sound on Sound" and even the free and awesome "Tape Op" to see the multiple ways that people approach modern audio production in all forms...alas mostly using the "evil" Pro Tools DAW. I always find it interesting and often I get new ideas about doing things.