AutoPunch or Comp/ or a combination of both?

[AcousticDreams]

The last month has been a dedicated learning all of Logic Pro's extra features. Features that will be paramount, since I am recording myself.
I started watching all kinds of Youtube Videos. Yep, like being back in school (but I do not have the focus I had in my youth, so I play hooky all the time. I can only take about two hours of learning a day before my brain goes numb. ha ha.)

Still not everything is explained to fullest on those videos. There are always unexplained areas. Or they don't tell you exactly why you would use one part of the function over the other. Lucky I have you guys to further expand upon my learning. Recently Doug Young introduced me to Smart Tempo. Oh my...this is a tool I really needed. So helpful for finding out what are the tempo's throughout the various areas my songs.

This morning I was introduced to AutoPunch. I knew about punching in and out from the old days. We did that on 24 tracks and even my old Teac 3340 4 track. But I thought to myself...well, I can't punch in by myself while recording. Little did I know what AutoPunch functions were. You can set a range so it automatically punches in and out for you! Much like the Cycle feature. The DAW never ceases to amaze.

While I know that each DAW has slightly different operating procedures, I would assume that Comping and AutoPunch type features are relatively the same from DAW to DAW?

I would love to hear your preferences for how you use AutoPunch. Do you use AutoPunch in combination with comping features? Or do you just use one or the other? What settings you do you use in the AutoPunch mode & most importantly why? Replace, or multiple takes with AutoPunch.

I have not experimented as of yet. And plan to start experimenting tonight or in the next couple of days. However, it is always good to know others approaches before starting.

In Logic Pro not only are there seemingly hundreds of these hidden operations...but it seems that for each operation there are two to three ways of executing each one. And it always seems to come down to=one way is easier to operate. Less steps. Short cuts.

[Chipotle]

In a DAW, comping and auto-punch are not exclusive features. Punching in does not delete the previous takes; it just gives you a convenient way to re-record a small section. You can still go back later and choose from all the takes you made when you auto-punched and comp from there.

My workflow can include one or both, depending on the project. I'll often do a number of takes all the way through, but if most of the piece is in good shape and I just have a section or two that need cleaning up, there's no need to record an entire additional take. If I have a clear start/stop point, I may just manually start a new take at just that section, but it can be easier to use auto-punch if I am overlapping the middle of a part. (And, in Reaper, it can be a little easier to comp afterwards if all the take in & out points are the same.)

[jim1960]

Adding to what Chipotle said, I always start and end a punch-in with an extra bar or two on both ends. I've found it's difficult to get the segment to sit and feel correct if I'm not already in the groove when I play the needed part.

[Doug Young]

I don't usually do a lot of "punching in" with what I record, but when I do, I just set the loop cycle markers in Logic to a few bars before and after the point I'm trying to replace and then create as many takes as I want and then comp them. As Jim said, it's easier to make the punched in part seamless, and you get to check out multiple takes during editing to pick the one you want. (I know, I should be able to do the punch in perfectly the 1st time, but if I was, I wouldn't be needing to fix a spot in the first place!)

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by AcousticDreams

What settings you do you use in the AutoPunch mode & most importantly why? Replace, or multiple takes with AutoPunch.

Just re-read and noticed this. Second question first. I always do takes, and Jim and Doug echo that. Back when tape was limited and expensive, maybe the only thing you could do was overwrite the previous take. With unlimited digital tracks, there's no value to overwriting, especially when you can even comp within a punched section if you want. And maybe, in the end, you decide the 2nd take out of the 5 really is the one you want after all.

Other question. Reaper has two modes for auto-punch, one where you can just to a time selection, one where you can do selected items. I typically just do a time selection, but the other mode is good if you want to punch in multiple sections in one take (e.g. split a passage into 4 pieces, then punch in on the 2nd and 4th). I suppose that mode could also be handy if you jump around a lot and want to punch in exactly the same place again later, and don't want to have to re-mark a time selection. I think the simple time selection is usually the easiest and most useful.

Don't forget that the monitoring mode makes a difference too. Do you want to hear the "live" guitar (along with the recorded guitar) in the monitor up to the punch point, or just hear the recorded guitar? I typically want to hear both, but occasionally switch when that doesn't seem to be working.

[Bob Womack]

First off, I keep my DAW in Tape Machine Mode. Whatever track is in Record Ready mode behaves this way: When the timeline is stopped, we monitor input. When the timeline is moving but not recording we hear whatever clip is on the track. When you punch into record you hear input. Once you punch out you hear the existing clip again. It is just like an analog tape machine's logic.

There are a couple of functions where I punch in when I am recording myself: replacement and double-tracking. When I am replacing a part I don't typically want to hear the previous take. Like the others here I prefer to punch before the actual beat I am going to use by a couple of bars. My DAW is full-featured on autopunching with an insert mode but I've been doing this long enough that I just get myself ready, manually punch into record with preroll, and go when it is time. I create a group of tracks and use one to record onto. If I'm not satisfied with a take I either keep it by muting and slipping it down to another track if it is nearly right or toss it if it isn't. I could go with stacked takes but I am usually working to a goal and when I get it, I'm done. When I am double-tracking I want to hear the master take as I play to see how well I am syncing with it.

All this comes from the session techniques I use for other people's sessions, which are quite different. Often, the clients don't want to wait for you to fiddle with setting in and out points and switching modes... they want to go. My earliest sessions were on analog decks without autopunch and I learned to manage an overdub session manually. As technology advanced, it could make clients wait longer. I learned to pick and choose the technology to use to keep from making the clients wait. Say I am working with a singer. Depositing multiple layers of takes on one track doesn't work for me. I may be recording twenty takes and someone will say, "Let me hear the one three takes back." If the takes are stacked on one track or in one lane, you have to unstack to hear them. If you just pull each of the takes onto their own track and mute them, you can still see them in the timeline. If an artist wants to comp in real time, you can easily do it. As they are discussing it in the studio I can be executing their requests so that by the time they finish saying, "Let me hear from here to here on the take four takes back and then jump to from here to here on the track three back," I say, "Here's the playback," and hit play. I use cue points to cue up to the right place before an overdub to the same place each time but I punch in manually. Funny. I'm as busy as a one-armed paper hanger but it pleases the clients and gives the session a rhythm that is pleasant for an artist who is already a little nervous from being in the tank.

Bob

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

I create a group of tracks and use one to record onto. If I'm not satisfied with a take I either keep it by muting and slipping it down to another track if it is nearly right or toss it if it isn't. I could go with stacked takes but I am usually working to a goal and when I get it, I'm done.

Often, the clients don't want to wait for you to fiddle with setting in and out points and switching modes... they want to go.

I learned to pick and choose the technology to use to keep from making the clients wait. Say I am working with a singer. Depositing multiple layers of takes on one track doesn't work for me. I may be recording twenty takes and someone will say, "Let me hear the one three takes back." If the takes are stacked on one track or in one lane, you have to unstack to hear them. If you just pull each of the takes onto their own track and mute them, you can still see them in the timeline. If an artist wants to comp in real time, you can easily do it. As they are discussing it in the studio I can be executing their requests so that by the time they finish saying, "Let me hear from here to here on the take four takes back and then jump to from here to here on the track three back," I say, "Here's the playback," and hit play. I use cue points to cue up to the right place before an overdub to the same place each time but I punch in manually.
Bob

I am so glad you brought this up. If I understand you correctly, this is a method I have not seen mentioned in videos. I was wondering why this method was not used?

As we all know, it is so hard to describe a method via the written word. Let's double check to see If I correctly understand what you are saying?:

*You create several empty tracks that are ready to go( easy to do with the little ++ button in Logic Pro. It copies the settings of the track) You do this instead of using the tracks method, where multiple tracks are created on one track? Correct? Further you do this because it saves time as you do not have to unstack the tracks.

If this is what you meant, then each time you make a pass, do you stop and listen to that take? Or do you just keep going down the empty tracks each time and record a new take(muting the previous attempt).

I am one who especially likes direct routes. Less confusion. Less chance for making mistakes generally. This is why separate track each pass is something that appealed to me from the start. On the other hand...it does seem like it would take a moment longer each time you make a pass because you would have move to the next track and mute the previous....which would only take a second. But separate tracks just seem like an easier way to see exactly what is going on each time. Like you said...when you get it right, then your done and you can quickly erase the non chosen tracks. You might say that it is cleaner in the DAW as far as with stacks they are hidden until you Unstack. Not that it does any harm...but it is one more thing that when you come back to the DAW...everything is exactly what you are seeing.

Have I interpreted you correctly, or did I get this all wrong?

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by AcousticDreams

I am one who especially likes direct routes. Less confusion. Less chance for making mistakes generally. This is why separate track each pass is something that appealed to me from the start. On the other hand...it does seem like it would take a moment longer each time you make a pass because you would have move to the next track and mute the previous....which would only take a second. But separate tracks just seem like an easier way to see exactly what is going on each time.

Once again, it's just preference, but at least in Reaper you can easily see all the takes at once, even if they're on the same track. No stacking/unstacking necessary, unless you want to. You could also decide to only see the active take, but flip through the different takes with a key shortcut. So at least for me, Bob's workflow would be possible without having to move takes to a separate track each time.

It's likely that other DAWs can do the same thing, depending on how you have it configured. We've all just come up with a way that makes sense to us, so I doubt there will be consensus on the "best" way to manage punch-in takes.

[Brent Hahn]

These days I usually keep an open "dummy" Pro Tools track parked right under the one I'm fixing. If hearing the mistake won't mess me up, I just let it play while I record the fix on the dummy track. Then I just select the fixed area on the dummy track, grab it and slide it up. If I need to not hear the clam, in Pro Tools I do a quick Select/X/V/Command-M (mute) and then proceed. But most of the time I don't find it necessary.

This is all in a DIY scenario, of course, which is probably the only concern for most people here. For tracking others, Bob's got the range of methods covered nicely.

[KevWind]

I mostly do comp over punch in (although I am considering trying the auto punch feature in PT to fix parts I don't like

For Comp I used to do the way Bob described---- have say 4 vocal tracks ready to go--- just stop the transport after first take mute it --record arm the next track and hit rec/play etc.

But now I use the loop record feature for multiple "playlists" (takes ) in one track and it just automatically loops back to the start - mutes the previous take, and starts recording the next take. Then if it a lead guitar part I just comp it OR if it is a vocal I may comp if needed-- but then I often find I can also use portions of the other takes for Background vocals ---In which case just copy them to a new track

But to address one thing Bob said (if I am understanding him ) I don't know about Nuendo But is not the case in PT at least --- if you have say, 10 vocal takes (what PT calls "playlists" ) stacked in one vocal track ,, You don't have unstack them to audition different takes

In PT each take (playlist) are each on their own lane, they are all visible in the timeline , they are auto numbered, and auto muted ,,and each take lane has a solo button on it-- so if you want to hear "the one 3 takes back" you don't have to "unstack them" Instead you simply "solo" that take ,, and that's what you hear .
..And IMO is actually as fast or faster and easier,, than having to mute and unmute the different tracks themselves for comping And if I remember Logic is even slicker and quicker because all you have to do is highlight the section of any take you want audition and it automatically plays that selection and you don't have to solo it..

Now in PT I don't think you can then go in and "punch in" on a playlist that is not the main comp track (top actual track ) like Bob was describing.. For that you would have to copy that take to a new track ---- But for auditioning from, and comping from, multiple playlists takes, it is very fast and easy

[Brent Hahn]

The multiple-tracks scenario for comping is better for me if I'm working with my control surface, since it's very quick to mute all the tracks you don't want. Sans the control surface, it used to be playlists but now I just do it eye-doctor style. Which is better, A or B?

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by AcousticDreams

I am so glad you brought this up. If I understand you correctly, this is a method I have not seen mentioned in videos. I was wondering why this method was not used?

As we all know, it is so hard to describe a method via the written word. Let's double check to see If I correctly understand what you are saying?:

*You create several empty tracks that are ready to go( easy to do with the little ++ button in Logic Pro. It copies the settings of the track) You do this instead of using the tracks method, where multiple tracks are created on one track? Correct? Further you do this because it saves time as you do not have to unstack the tracks.

Yes, I copy off a bunch of tracks that are identical.

If this is what you meant, then each time you make a pass, do you stop and listen to that take? Or do you just keep going down the empty tracks each time and record a new take(muting the previous attempt).

If it is my own work, I usually don't listen back until I think I've nailed it. I will typically know as I go whether I've nailed it.

I am one who especially likes direct routes. Less confusion. Less chance for making mistakes generally. This is why separate track each pass is something that appealed to me from the start. On the other hand...it does seem like it would take a moment longer each time you make a pass because you would have move to the next track and mute the previous....which would only take a second. But separate tracks just seem like an easier way to see exactly what is going on each time. Like you said...when you get it right, then your done and you can quickly erase the non chosen tracks. You might say that it is cleaner in the DAW as far as with stacks they are hidden until you Unstack. Not that it does any harm...but it is one more thing that when you come back to the DAW...everything is exactly what you are seeing.

Have I interpreted you correctly, or did I get this all wrong?

You seem pretty close. Yes, it does take a second longer to drag and mute. But it makes me feel like I am controlling the machine rather than the other way around. Just to restate: I only have one track in record ready and it is the only one I record on. If a take is promising, I mute it (I've set up key command ALT-M) and use drag in sync (CONTROL-Drag) to the clip to one of the free adjacent copy tracks to store it while I do another. If it isn't nearly perfect, I just hit DELETE and the locate marker number and I'm located back to the preroll location, ready to go for another take by hitting asterisk (RECORD). I am always working toward a goal and if I don't meet it, I typically delete and repeat. I might end up with a couple of takes that are close but don't make it. I kind of decide on the fly whether or not to delete them afterwards.

Bob

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by KevWind

But to address one thing Bob said (if I am understanding him ) I don't know about Nuendo But is not the case in PT at least --- if you have say, 10 vocal takes (what PT calls "playlists" ) stacked in one vocal track ,, You don't have unstack them to audition different takes

Nuendo stacks the takes into what are called "lanes" under the main track. You hit the "Lanes" button and they are all revealed and unmuted. Then you have to mute all and select the one you want to hear. With my technique you see the alternate takes at all times and manually mute so that it is a single action to listen to one. My use of this technique comes from working sessions with artists when they don't want to wait for you to fiddle aboot. If I am not the producer and the producer makes a comment that he likes a take, I can quickly add an alert color to that take so that after many more takes when he makes a vague request like, "That take I liked a few ago - can we hear it?" I've already got it flagged and can quickly unmute it for them to hear. You know, everyone has his own style of session management that he uses to stay sane in high-speed sessions. That's mine.

In PT each take (playlist) are each on their own lane, they are all visible in the timeline , they are auto numbered, and auto muted ,,and each take lane has a solo button on it-- so if you want to hear "the one 3 takes back" you don't have to "unstack them" Instead you simply "solo" that take ,, and that's what you hear .

Call me picky but I HATE a crowded timeline when I am running a session. That is one reason I don't like the open lanes. I throw the rhythm section under a folder so that I can close it and have all the takes for each voice in a folder so that I can close it. That keeps everything accessible but only the pertinent stuff visible. My session, my method. It helps me maintain a session rhythm for the artist in these fast-paced overdub sessions so that they know what to expect and when to expect it. For instance, I have a routine for each punch. I arrange a predictable preroll and then I always say, "Here we go," before I roll the "tape." Rhythm makes the artist comfortable.

..And IMO is actually as fast or faster and easier,, than having to mute and unmute the different tracks themselves for comping And if I remember Logic is even slicker and quicker because all you have to do is highlight the section of any take you want audition and it automatically plays that selection and you don't have to solo it..

Here's an interesting facet of my work: I'll often have to comp the takes on the fly so that a producer is satisfied that he's got something useful right then and there. Then, he'll want me to uncomp and export every single take to him and he does the actual comping, listening to EVERY SINGLE TAKE when the clock isn't running. It is fidgety, worrisome work and I'm glad I don't have to sit through it. "This one, no this one, no that one." He then sends the comp back for me to build into the mix. Management of temporary comping and yet comprehensive exporting is easier -for me- in this format. We all have pressures we work under. A technical person's job is to develop techniques to get things done quickly and efficiently. Your mileage may vary and more power too yez! Thank goodness that when I am the producer I can run it much more simply.

Now in PT I don't think you can then go in and "punch in" on a playlist that is not the main comp track (top actual track ) like Bob was describing.. For that you would have to copy that take to a new track ---- But for auditioning from, and comping from, multiple playlists takes, it is very fast and easy

Bob

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Nuendo stacks the takes into what are called "lanes" under the main track. You hit the "Lanes" button and they are all revealed and unmuted. Then you have to mute all and select the one you want to hear. With my technique you see the alternate takes at all times and manually mute so that it is a single action to listen to one. My use of this technique comes from working sessions with artists when they don't want to wait for you to fiddle aboot. If I am not the producer and the producer makes a comment that he likes a take, I can quickly add an alert color to that take so that after many more takes when he makes a vague request like, "That take I liked a few ago - can we hear it?" I've already got it flagged and can quickly unmute it for them to hear. You know, everyone has his own style of session management that he uses to stay sane in high-speed sessions. That's mine.

Call me picky but I HATE a crowded timeline when I am running a session. That is one reason I don't like the open lanes. I throw the rhythm section under a folder so that I can close it and have all the takes for each voice in a folder so that I can close it. That keeps everything accessible but only the pertinent stuff visible. My session, my method. It helps me maintain a session rhythm for the artist in these fast-paced overdub sessions so that they know what to expect and when to expect it. For instance, I have a routine for each punch. I arrange a predictable preroll and then I always say, "Here we go," before I roll the "tape." Rhythm makes the artist comfortable.
Here's an interesting facet of my work: I'll often have to comp the takes on the fly so that a producer is satisfied that he's got something useful right then and there. Then, he'll want me to uncomp and export every single take to him and he does the actual comping, listening to EVERY SINGLE TAKE when the clock isn't running. It is fidgety, worrisome work and I'm glad I don't have to sit through it. "This one, no this one, no that one." He then sends the comp back for me to build into the mix. Management of temporary comping and yet comprehensive exporting is easier -for me- in this format. We all have pressures we work under. A technical person's job is to develop techniques to get things done quickly and efficiently. Your mileage may vary and more power too yez! Thank goodness that when I am the producer I can run it much more simply.Bob

I guess I should have clarified more.
So yes PT basically has the same logistical layout with the main track at the top and the subsequent takes (playlists) in lanes below but as you are recording the only thing showing is the main track and you have to hit the Playlist icon in the main track to show them but the are all automatically muted so you don't have to mute them. Because only the main track plays back __Until you solo any other take and then it plays back there is no additional muting needed.

And as I said in PT you simply hit the solo button on what ever take you want to audition there is no "unstacking" involved

As far as multiple takes or multiple tracks it is not a matter of being "picky" or not,, there is no objective visual "crowding " difference between open lanes or open multiple tracks.
For 10 takes or tracks, you are going to have the same 10 waveforms showing either way. Just sayin'
The only difference is you can with one click hide multi takes for a less crowded visual, which you can't with multi tracks -- Unless like you said.. you take the extra time and steps to throw them in a folder.

Not trying to debate workflow and obviously there is no right or wrong there is only this way and that way AND I understand there is a significant difference between the Pro situation and the hobby situation, and that we all use the workflow we personally prefer and often for good situation specific reasons .. But I am simply saying "sometimes" in some aspects even for a Pro, a perceived difference is more a matter of personal habit, and personal perception, than an objective time or logistics savings difference ..........