Musings on "Merge" in Studio One

[b1j]

I've been stealthily finding a few minutes to work on my ambitious recording project (four guitars and a bass), and I came across a rather disappointing feature in Studio One.

When I record a track in layers and comp the best performance from all the takes, I create an event that's really several events, one for each take (or layer) I chose for the final. In the past I'd Merge the events into one, just to signal that I have the final performance, now ready for mixing. I always liked the look of one event on each track.

Yesterday I discovered that once I Merge several events into one, there's no UnMerge after you save the file. I was surprised to find that it also means I can no longer access the bend markers in a Merged track. When I want to synch another track to it, I have to eyeball where the transients are in the merged track. It's usually not too hard, and there's something to be said for less than hard-perfect alignment with multiple voices. But it does slow things down. With my midling skill as a player, I need to synch voices together. Depending on the song or the place in the song, I tend to leave a tiny touch of imperfection to the synch.

Use the grid and quantize, you say? My piece is seven minutes of rubato –– no grid, no quantizing. Each section's tempo is held up by one part that moves throughout it, and there are several variations both between and within sections. Not constant, but it moves in waves. I like the effect for this particular piece (cantabile), but for most of what I do with pop/Americana, a grid is fine. I suppose that's why I had never noticed the Merge's destructive effect on bend markers.

So it turns out Merge is a bounce. Now that I think of it, Merging takes away the ability to fine-tune and balance the loudness among the individual layers, too. So I guess I've weaned myself off the Merge feature I used to think was cool.

[phcorrigan]

My automated backup systems (local and cloud) save previous versions of files, so I can go back if I need to. You might consider something similar, and make sure you do a backup before you do an edit that cannot be reversed.

My understanding is that a merge doesn't affect the original stem files (I could be wrong, however), so you might be able to copy them to a new song.

[b1j]

On further tinkering, I noticed that you can bring back the bend markers (and presumably other editing tools) in Edit mode, but it’s only for that one track at a time — not very handy when you need to line up markers between tracks. But for volume balancing within the events of the tracks, it’s helpful.

[Rudy4]

When experimenting with a unfamiliar aspect of a new DAW edit you might consider copying your entire project to a new project folder with a new name.

You can then work on your project, knowing if anything goes south you still have your entire untouched project to go back to.

Software programmers can't possibly think of all the ways we as users can get into trouble.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by b1j

I've been stealthily finding a few minutes to work on my ambitious recording project (four guitars and a bass), and I came across a rather disappointing feature in Studio One.

When I record a track in layers and comp the best performance from all the takes, I create an event that's really several events, one for each take (or layer) I chose for the final. In the past I'd Merge the events into one, just to signal that I have the final performance, now ready for mixing. I always liked the look of one event on each track.

Yesterday I discovered that once I Merge several events into one, there's no UnMerge after you save the file. I was surprised to find that it also means I can no longer access the bend markers in a Merged track. When I want to synch another track to it, I have to eyeball where the transients are in the merged track. It's usually not too hard, and there's something to be said for less than hard-perfect alignment with multiple voices. But it does slow things down. With my midling skill as a player, I need to synch voices together. Depending on the song or the place in the song, I tend to leave a tiny touch of imperfection to the synch.

Use the grid and quantize, you say? My piece is seven minutes of rubato –– no grid, no quantizing. Each section's tempo is held up by one part that moves throughout it, and there are several variations both between and within sections. Not constant, but it moves in waves. I like the effect for this particular piece (cantabile), but for most of what I do with pop/Americana, a grid is fine. I suppose that's why I had never noticed the Merge's destructive effect on bend markers.

So it turns out Merge is a bounce. Now that I think of it, Merging takes away the ability to fine-tune and balance the loudness among the individual layers, too. So I guess I've weaned myself off the Merge feature I used to think was cool.

Humm In all honesty I don't use S 1 all that much, since my Pro Tools system offers the advantage of real time DSP while recording And Pro Tolls uses different terminology for what (I think) you are describing ??

BUT according to this video in fact Merge is nondestructive. where as Bounce is . Now this seems to be describing Merge in terms of within one layer (track lane) horizontally so I don't how that may or may not apply to comping from multiple layers vertically or swiping from multiple takes if that is what t you are talking about ??

[b1j]

Dissolve Audio Part!

Thanks for schooling me on new vocabulary. Much appreciated.

[zuzu]

Originally Posted by Rudy4

When experimenting with a unfamiliar aspect of a new DAW edit you might consider copying your entire project to a new project folder with a new name.

You can then work on your project, knowing if anything goes south you still have your entire untouched project to go back to.

Software programmers can't possibly think of all the ways we as users can get into trouble.

This is a good idea, though have rarely done it. 4-5 years ago, when learning Studio One, I began the habit of trying new-to-me procedures on demos, not takes, and likely saved myself a headache or two. Each upgrade of Studio One I have acquired has something new to try, whether it's stated in the user info or not, though they are pretty good about how much info you get simply clicking on an icon.

[b1j]

I’m going to try a time stretch (or tempo change?) on a single measure that is beyond my playing skill to render well. Too many notes. For that, I will take the safe road and duplicate the track first. If it works, I’ll blend the measure back into the main track.

Speed-up, really. Think: George Martin, In My Life piano solo.

[Bob Womack]

I do a lot of projects where there are important BIG tentative steps required that I might not want to continue with - I might want to go back to a previous version of. I got in the habit of saving versions with a name that indicates the big process they are previous to, such as, "before the bounce v5," etc., via "Save As." Remember that all the audio still lives in the audio file folder and all you are saving with a new version is the "pointer file," the project file. Copying the entire project folder is MUCH more complicated and takes up more space.

In my DAW, Nuendo, it is fairly easy to make copies of the tracks that will be affected by, take for instance, a bounce. I copy them, mute them, and stuff them into a named folder so that they are out of sight and mind unless I need to go back to them. The entire contents of those tracks, in regions and events, are preserved in sync, ready to be returned to use by simply muting the new bounced tracks.

Remember, the project file is a just a set of pointers to the audio files in the audio folder. If you issue version updates and plan your track management intentionally, always looking over your shoulder to the need for the project to be revisited, it will serve you well.

By the way, my project management is based upon a stint as the audio post production guy for a daily TV show. There, I could have a producer call me up minutes before air and want a song or story to be modified. A messy project made that into a nightmare of trying to figure out what had been done and how to fix it. I decided that no-one would regret being forced to modify one of my projects. I would always work looking over my shoulder to that next guy who might get minutes to change something and didn't have time to figure out an overly complicated project. Be your own "next guy."

Bob

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by b1j

I’m going to try a time stretch (or tempo change?) on a single measure that is beyond my playing skill to render well. Too many notes. For that, I will take the safe road and duplicate the track first. If it works, I’ll blend the measure back into the main track.

Speed-up, really. Think: George Martin, In My Life piano solo.

Always fun to experiment and push ones boundaries
But in very general terms, it's sometime viable to remember that the old saying " Less is More" was not just pulled out of thin air for no good reason.

Early on especially when I was first beginning to do multi- instrument recordings and especially after getting away from the mixing for a day or two or more
Upon listening a new ---I would realize that in my excitement of adding all kinds of nifty multifaceted parts what I had actually done was make it overly complicated and messy ------just a thought.

[b1j]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Always fun to experiment and push ones boundaries
But in very general terms, it's sometime viable to remember that the old saying " Less is More" was not just pulled out of thin air for no good reason.

Early on especially when I was first beginning to do multi- instrument recordings and especially after getting away from the mixing for a day or two or more
Upon listening a new ---I would realize that in my excitement of adding all kinds of nifty multifaceted parts what I had actually done was make it overly complicated and messy ------just a thought.

For sure, but then there is that phrase in that measure. I need to get it into the piece somehow. I didn’t write it, but I trust the one who did: LvB. So on I go with this little audio deception. it’s not unlike “burning in” when printing a black and white photograph, for example.

[Chipotle]

My recent commission project had multiple versions of the song as deliverables, various combinations of either piano or guitar/percussion accompaniment tracks, several different choral arrangements, and two soloists... on top of the original demo vocals I'd already done.

I used Reaper's "track manager" feature to show/hide relevant tracks for a particular version, then save the project to a different name like Bob mentions. That way I had all the tracks available, just a different "view" of only the tracks I needed.

I do similar things if I want to do some serious mangling or other operations to a track that might be hard to just "undo": duplicate the track, mute & hide the original, then work on the copy.

I imagine other DAWs have similar features to let you manage your tracks that way and hide ones that aren't being used at the moment.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

My recent commission project had multiple versions of the song as deliverables, various combinations of either piano or guitar/percussion accompaniment tracks, several different choral arrangements, and two soloists... on top of the original demo vocals I'd already done.

I used Reaper's "track manager" feature to show/hide relevant tracks for a particular version, then save the project to a different name like Bob mentions. That way I had all the tracks available, just a different "view" of only the tracks I needed.

I do similar things if I want to do some serious mangling or other operations to a track that might be hard to just "undo": duplicate the track, mute & hide the original, then work on the copy.

I imagine other DAWs have similar features to let you manage your tracks that way and hide ones that aren't being used at the moment.

Do you use Folder Tracks in Reaper. For me in Pro Tools they have completely replaced Sub Buss Aux tracks and the show/ hide tracks feature. Organizationally (and possibly because I am not dealing with all that many tracks) -- I like that the custom named (parent) Folder track stays visable while all the associated (child) tracks can be hidden

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Do you use Folder Tracks in Reaper. For me in Pro Tools they have completely replaced Sub Buss Aux tracks and the show/ hide tracks feature. Organizationally (and possibly because I am not dealing with all that many tracks) -- I like that the custom named (parent) Folder track stays visable while all the associated (child) tracks can be hidden

Yes, I use folder tracks as busses. Definitely helpful to be able to hide all the child tracks so you only have to see/manage the top-level bus.

But sometimes you want to work on a track that is already a child, or an edit of an existing track. For example, sometimes after I've comped a track, I want to do some editing that's easier if the comp is bounced/rendered down to a fresh track. That's where I'd do the render, then mute & hide the original so it's still there but not in the way.

And of course on this last huge project, some versions of the song didn't need the piano at all, or the soloists, or the percussion. So using the track manager to show/hide only what was needed for that particular version, regardless of how they were bussed, was handy.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

Yes, I use folder tracks as busses. Definitely helpful to be able to hide all the child tracks so you only have to see/manage the top-level bus.

But sometimes you want to work on a track that is already a child, or an edit of an existing track. For example, sometimes after I've comped a track, I want to do some editing that's easier if the comp is bounced/rendered down to a fresh track. That's where I'd do the render, then mute & hide the original so it's still there but not in the way.

And of course on this last huge project, some versions of the song didn't need the piano at all, or the soloists, or the percussion. So using the track manager to show/hide only what was needed for that particular version, regardless of how they were bussed, was handy.

Ah yes interesting and I get how you are using the show hide in your last situation

Again I don't use Reaper so I am not up on all the work flow specifics and nomenclature

But for example in PT if I want to work on either a specific associated track in a folder, a comp track, or any track (and for some reason I want to preserve the original track as opposed to just do real time editing on the track itself , for which I can also simply hit progressive undos if need be ) I can simply duplicate that track and mute and hide the original and then edit the dup track without bouncing or rendering the original .. But admittedly I am not dealing with large numbers of tracks where purserving processing power might be a factor and require rendering or commiting as it is called in Pro Tools