Glenn Stanton

definitely - there are really three levels measured in the LUFS/LU - the "integrated" (you need to be at or below the spec at the end of the total sound recording). "short term" (which has a time window 3000ms), and "momentary" (very short measurement window) ? then you have the loudness range (usually in LU) which gives you some idea of the dynamic range. one thing i've observed in mastering forums and online tutorials, blogs etc is that many mastering engineers (i am not one, nor do i play one anywhere) will do a bunch of their magic to get the integrated value to be where it needs to be (mainly critical for broadcast because in some countries there can be monetary penalties) and to accommodate the behaviors of streaming services automatic leveling "feature", and then leverage higher short term and momentary levels to get the overall level to be perceived as "loud" without violating the integrated requirement. definitely different than simply looking at peaks and RMS. the Izotope Insights meter is very nice, the TC metering is also very nice, and the free YouLEAN meter is decent. some free ones i've played with vary in their accuracy.

select clip(s), select "process -> apply effects -> normalize" (or gain depending) and set the parameters and hit ok. each clip selected will have the normalization performed. depending on your goal, clip gain can be very useful for leveling and overall changing level as well

4. allow use of arpeggiator effects (arp, strum, etc) on select chords ?

i like to use RX on client vocals to clean up as part of prep and do some light de-essing. on my own, i will use RX and then clip gain and edits, then use Melodyne to reduce some of the sibilance, and then one or two de-essers in serial to get sss and cha and tsk which may be different sets of frequencies. each stage is generally small and may be on the VOX buss if i have some doubling, or as Tim noted, on the BVOX buss for background vocals. otherwise, it's mainly the primary vocal track.

i'm not seeing this behavior in my setup. maybe set the "ExceptionHandlingSeverity" = 7 in the initialization section of the Preferences and capture a crash dump.

perhaps this may be helpful -- if you have several monitoring devices setup (e.g. your main speakers, headphones, a BT speaker, etc) it is a good idea to set them so they have the same output levels - in my setup (currently my laptop on my work desk) i have a USB mixer (headphones), a USB Spark Mini, and a BT speaker. first I run a -12db RMS filtered (pink) noise signal from CW (with the outputs on the track, buss, and h/w all at 0 - so my peak level is ~-12db on the meters) and set all my device output levels to 83db -- this may require each Windows sound setting for a given speaker to be adjusted -- my mixer is set to 16, my BT speaker is set to 80, my Spark is set to 66 and each position on their volume dials are marked (permanent marker or nail polish drop). note: if you are using a subwoofer it's a bit more complex because you want to adjust the cross-over(s), delays, and so on to blend with the speakers - phase and transition from the speaker to the sub. then i set the output devices to output 75db (my typical mix level) and mark their dials (or for the BT one i know i press down volume 3x). if i want to go lower i can just move the volume control or pass it through my -12db master channel in CW template. then go through each audio playback software - Media Player, Dopamine, WinAMP, Groove, VLC, etc and set their volume to match 83db when playing the noise file. lastly, adjust my online media hosting players to also play at the 83db level. now i can just adjust the output devices to either 83db or 75db easily and know each player or source has been "calibrated". a decent sound level meter is useful (a long time ago i bought an old Radio Shack digital one for $30 on ebay) and place it approx where you have your head. for my normal full setup i put it on a stand but at my work desk i just hold it there. it's close enough. the whole process only takes about 20-30 minutes, but you'll be much less frustrated when switching across listening devices and players. one update: your decision on source level vs monitoring level can vary based on the system you're using K, LUFS, etc so create (or obtain) the source level file you need (e.g. -18db, -23db, and noise type) and set your full-scale monitoring as defined in the system. in my regular setup, i have a monitor controller as well as a number of presets for the sound levels documented so if i'm doing video / theater / surround vs audio stream, i can switch to proper monitoring. here's a handy reference to some of the different specs - https://www.tcelectronic.com/loudness.html ?

depending on the failure - i've found many times that the power supply and/or power regulator in those types of units are the problem. so, for like 6-7 failed drives (several brands) devices now, i remove the disk drive itself and use a USB adapter unit (which also supplies power for older drives), then copy all of into my cloud storage (2 different services for redundancy). label the disk and put it into a static-free bag. it's something similar to this: https://smile.amazon.com/Converter-External-Universal-Function-Software/dp/B00EHDTRJ6/ which i purchased about 4 years ago. only one drive was not recoverable using this method as the disk drive controller was shot, so i sent to a data recovery place which was able to directly access the drive (it was a small HDD and i didn't have any other like it or i would have swapped the controller board...) that was $150 for the service and they returned the content on a new disk drive (200Mb).

yeah this would be nice so instead of having a temp track with a bunch of sends to busses and etc to be able to insert a set of busses. what would be really really (really) nice would be the track colors (in a track template) could be preserved with the buss assigned color... what i do now is take a cwp with only the busses and rename it as cwx but that is a pain to do if i want it sync'd with my mix template.

an aux track can be used as a buss since you're using a patch point to route there. for example, if i had several vocal tracks i wanted to put into a few compressors or reverbs and wanted those to be in proximity to the tracks - aux tracks would be handy so you don't have to move around too much to tweak things, or if you want to set up some variations by grouping them via an aux track as a "vca" type control, etc. i have a couple of templates i set up like this based on some tutorials based on ProTools but i don't use them. but as Lord Tim pointed out, depends on what you need - per instrument, per group, or global effects. one thing to note: with stems you can never truly recreate the global effects in individual stems because they don't have the cross-mix of others. so usually i assign my "per stem" effects to those groupings, and then tie in a set of global effects for my mix down, but when sharing, i'll just document the global effects so they can be recreated by whomever is taking the stems and produce a "global effects stem" which may or not be useful. it's also handy to produce "dry" stems as well and document those effects in case they will recreate on their end. one other note: use the export function. the ability to setup a bunch of tasks to produce stereo, multitrack, buss, buss as stems, dry (no fx), etc and variations on mixes (no vox, no solo, no drum, etc) and re-run if needed saves a ton of time.

i truly forgot about linked clips. what's nice is you can unlink from the source and create a new linked group easily.

true - it does depend on what you need -- for the rare cases - i just use the chordz vst. most times though i'm composing in MuseScore or Hookpad. then import the MIDI into the DAW for the actual instrumentation.

then again, if i need to filter etc i just copy the MIDI over to the track that needs it ?

imho - templates are mainly about speed and efficiency - to get to the point where all the baseline work is done: file prep and load -- including naming and so on general leveling to get a sense of the material (especially if there is no reference mix) "typically" things such as routing to sub-mixes for easier overall mix actions: drums, bass, guitars, vocals, keys, orchestral, etc maybe some FX like reverbs and delays to get started this is the stuff that you generally need to get out of the way so you can focus on the actual creative aspects. any number of the big names likely have their interns/assistants to take care of the prep stage, but i'm sure it depends on the project (single song versus an album for example).

agreed -- the composing template for me just gets me into the process faster as it has my tools and basic tracks ready to go. so, between that and some other tools like MuseScore 4, Band-In-A-Box and Hookpad, i can rapidly get ideas down. and each tools forces a rethink if i'm trying out parts or whole songs in different styles. and when i really want to start fresh -- i have my "blank" template (which using the start screen means i don't have to save anything or create a folder -- different than "file->new") for something i might throw away. whereas the record template comes into play when i've got the song far enough to put into audio ? so if i'm doing something with guitar, keys, drums and bass, then the template is just really fast to get those "done" and then i can focus on interesting things like synth, vocals, and solos -- or change up the arrangement even if i did the full arrangement as i thought i might like it... but agreed, too much focus on the template early on could lead to same old same old...

it would be nice to adjust the # of samples under WASAPI Shared...

in the past couple of years since i posted this, i've re-thought my process & templates. i found my process for personal work was significantly different than my client work, and now that i'm (somewhat stuck at the moment) using a lower power laptop, i decided to make my personal process more like a client one: 1. i have separate composition and separate recording templates - this puts all the VSTi stuff into their project which preserves CPU for later. the output of the recording projects are purely audio files - same as if i get them from a client. the recording project either includes the full arrangement, or the parts to easily create it. i don't record the VSTi tracks into the project, i use the export function with "{trackname}" to create the output audio. this saves storage space on the order of gigs... the project files (i may end up with 3 or 4) are small. the audio tracks whcih are recorded live are in the normal audio folder, and i export all the tracks to audio/export/tracks folder + a stereo raw file for reference and also for recording vocals or solos. i have a separate vocals template for those projects. 2. the audio files are imported into the mix template project and all of the mix activities occur there. this has significantly reduced the load on my laptop as all non-mix stuff is no longer there. no extraneous things to inadvertently get touched, no scrolling or hiding/unhiding tracks not essential to the mix. if i need to "re-perform" a part i go back to the recording project and re-export the changed tracks, re-import and edit them as needed. actually somewhat faster than un-archiving and un-freezing (on my system anyways). 3. the stereo or multitrack (depending on the project) are exported from the mix project and then imported into the appropriate tool for "mastering" -- and then subsequently into the output files required. if the project is going to a professional mastering house, then whatever it is they need - stereo, multitrack, stems etc. so, while there are now a number of project files (grouped within a single folder), it's not a hardship and it has created a clean break in my mental approach to composing, performing, mixing, and "mastering". it has significantly reduced system load for me and avoids cluttering. as a note: the CW export function with tasks makes life so much easier to quickly setup outputs on each stage and add others, then run the tasks and take a break. the templates have the export tasks preset and i simply adjust them as needed. not recording the VSTi into the project but simply exporting saves me a lot of storage space which would be redundant waste. attached are my latest templates.Project Templates.zip

you can just do the instrument tracks if that is simpler for you. typically one per instrument. as scook notes: you'll need to unfreeze or re-record if you need to change the MIDI or the instrument settings. my suggestion was only because i find it simpler and more flexible to have an audio output track and a source MIDI track because, erm, it's just the way my brain works. ?

depends on what you are trying to achieve. you could record the audio of the instrument track but you may lose flexibility unless you're done with the MIDI parts. as a general note, i only use MIDI and audio tracks, not instrument tracks. this way i can do things with either independently - for example, i may want to "reuse" the MIDI on several synth patches on the same instrument - i'll set up an audio track to the synth output and record it, then add another audio track, change my synth patch, record that, etc until i have all my tracks done. of course if i need to go back and change the MIDI or patch setting, i'll need to re-record them, but for me that's not big deal. saves device resources instead of loading a bunch of synths for parts i think are going to be stable. for fades - also depends - if i have parts fading into each other - i'll do that as part of the mix process as opposed to the recording process. that way i have flexibility for change arrangement sections and cross fades etc. if i'm doing for the overall song -- i'll do that in the "mastering" process where i have the stereo track and can define if i'm simply fading out, or cross fading with another song etc.

usually i would put the VI into the synth rack so i can use it across several MIDI or audio tracks

live at ronnie scotts. BB King -- "I don't have those notes on my guitar." ?

i had looked at some code a few years ago and it was C++. a lot of programs which require higher performance in relation to HW abstraction layers use it still.

i do an export of the tracks into WAV files (you don't need to record them as audio first). then create a new mix template project and import those files. this way all the overhead is gone (from the VST). basically i treat it the same as if i got files from a client.

i think the UI change would be minimal but the internals of routing the MIDI effectively might be more challenging.

oh sure, that's what they all say, then suddenly there's arpeggiators, strummers, basslines, melodies... where does the madness end! ?

as a note on this: i generally don't ever use this approach. if i need parts duplicated - i just copy the MIDI since more often than not i'm tweaking it for each instrument so a single copy wouldn't work. but i can see the need for it especially if you're creating orchestral sections in detail.