reader1
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 605
- Joined: 2010/04/21 06:50:02
- Location: China mainland
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/09 08:30:43
(permalink)
papa2005
reader1,
Please do the tutorials and study the glossary of terms in the help files...Don't try to compare the terminology used with apps such as AutoCAD (which I use) with DAW apps...
In all of your posts you're obsessing over "why use this term"...Do your homework with SONAR and you'll begin to understand...
I puzzle it when I read some of chinese translation. some article translated it as "sybthersis" or "mixing"... I wonder why this softeare use term " bounce" instead of " mixing" "merge"...? in the help, I saw it described as same as "combine". that's why I ask this issue.
|
reader1
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 605
- Joined: 2010/04/21 06:50:02
- Location: China mainland
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/09 08:47:48
(permalink)
Karyn
reader1
John
whick is adding an effect, is it yet called a bounce?
You can "freeze" the entire track. This fixes all the effects on the track into a new temporary audio file. You can't change the effects with out un-freezing (thawing) the track first.
You can record the effects to a new audio track. This is BOUNCING, just like the old days. You then have two tracks, one with your orriginal sound, one with the reverb sound. You can therefore turn off the reverb on the original track and save CPU power. thanks again, Karyn, It's not difficult to understand "freeze", its as same function as did in other software. Now I basically comprehend this Bounce and its function, after sum up all of above threads.
|
reader1
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 605
- Joined: 2010/04/21 06:50:02
- Location: China mainland
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/09 09:02:04
(permalink)
Now I basically comprehend this Bounce and its functions, after sum up all of above threads.
it has no only combine multi to less, one or two preparing for the final mixing(mixdown), but has means of bounce, like bounce a rubber ball on the gound.
Thank you all, you let me know not only the word, but its history and evolution.
I think I may have more such issues.
know the past will know now.
|
CakeFan
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 212
- Joined: 2008/07/27 20:56:47
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/09 09:25:26
(permalink)
reader1
I'm curious the term of Bounce in sona. according to its usage, mix two or more tracks into one audio track in order to save memory resources.
but why not use term Mix? is there any more meaning than mix has with respect of the bounce?
With the way I use Sonar, The term Bounce = Render. I'm usually rendering a time stretch that I did with AudioSnap or Rendering a track that I fiddled around with V-Vocal. Heck, if you want to render a Step Sequencer clip to MIDI you even use "Bounce to track". I agree that "Bounce to Track" doesn't seem all that clear to me either... at least with my limited knowledge of the term "Bounce".
Win7Ult 64bit Intel Core2Quad Q6600 Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L (v2.0) 4GB (2x2G)Corsair Dominator DDR1066 (PC2 8500) GeForce 8600GT XFX 256MB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 500GB (Data & Audio) Lite-On 20x DVD Burner ThermalTake PurePower 500W
|
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5139
- Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
- Location: Ballarat, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/09 10:11:42
(permalink)
I don't necessarily agree with Don M's term 'summing'. Bouncing does not have to involve any summing at all. eg applying EQ to a track and bouncing it. I have just finished a job where I had a whole lot of smaller clips in line and they never overlapped so no summing was taking place at all. But I had to bounce this track that had many audio clips on it to create one long clip for the client. I could have (Bounced to Clips) as well but I wanted the individual clips to stay that way in case we wanted to move them around again later.
Summing may involve math but it tends to imply that you are adding several things together to make a composite track that contains them all. And of course many bounces will involve summing for sure. eg combining 6 harmony parts down to one stereo track.
I think Cakewalk have got it right when they use the term Bounce to Clips or Bounce to Tracks. We all know what Bounce means. I also think render is a good term.
Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/10 19:19:38
(permalink)
"Bouncing does not have to involve any summing at all."
"no summing was taking place at all"
Goodness me.
X + 0 = X is a a example of summing... some folks might scratch their head and say... "that wasn't summing"... but indeed it is.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/10 19:22:12
(permalink)
Is the word summing in the Sonar manual? If not we can use it any way we want. LOL
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/10 19:28:20
(permalink)
DonM
I call it summing. That is the term I teach my students. It is definitely DAW centric - but Summing is different than analog mixing (which is errantly referred to as analog summing)
Summing is math, mixing is voltage.
-D
Don, with all due respect... analog summing is just that... almost every circuit represents a transfer function. My Dad the EE used a logarithmic slide rule until he retired... and he was well versed in the use of computers as well. It's all the same stuff... that's why its so darned interesting. Do you teach the kids about Operational Amplifiers? best regards, mike edit addendum: from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_amplifier "An op-amp, defined as a general-purpose, DC-coupled, high gain, inverting feedback amplifier, is first found in US Patent 2,401,779 "Summing Amplifier" filed by Karl D. Swartzel Jr. of Bell labs in 1941."
post edited by mike_mccue - 2010/05/10 19:36:21
|
reader1
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 605
- Joined: 2010/04/21 06:50:02
- Location: China mainland
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/10 22:17:02
(permalink)
mike_mccue
DonM
I call it summing. That is the term I teach my students. It is definitely DAW centric - but Summing is different than analog mixing (which is errantly referred to as analog summing)
Summing is math, mixing is voltage.
-D
Don, with all due respect... analog summing is just that... almost every circuit represents a transfer function.
My Dad the EE used a logarithmic slide rule until he retired... and he was well versed in the use of computers as well.
It's all the same stuff... that's why its so darned interesting.
Do you teach the kids about Operational Amplifiers?
best regards,
mike
edit addendum:
from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_amplifier
"An op-amp, defined as a general-purpose, DC-coupled, high gain, inverting feedback amplifier, is first found in US Patent 2,401,779 "Summing Amplifier" filed by Karl D. Swartzel Jr. of Bell labs in 1941."
I have also a log slide. I used it when I was a student.
|
reader1
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 605
- Joined: 2010/04/21 06:50:02
- Location: China mainland
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/10 22:26:09
(permalink)
from bounce to rendering and to sum.
people from different region, different studio have different idea about this words.
now we basiclly know about its concept use in our works.
--
you can build a computer with versatile op amplifiers.
|
DonM
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4129
- Joined: 2004/04/26 12:23:12
- Location: Pittsburgh
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/11 14:52:46
(permalink)
Agreed with all of the comments regarding my summing post - I hadn't properly read the OP and the subsequent posts .... I am in a rush doing two radio shows and two location sessions this week ...and... my new focusrite isn't working!!!!!
-D
|
papa2005
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3250
- Joined: 2009/08/01 16:43:11
- Location: Southeastern, US
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/11 16:04:38
(permalink)
I sincerely hope this thread comes to an end very soon. Here's the bottom line (IMO):
The etymology of the terms used isn't important. What IS important is what they mean in the software app being used...
Why is a drum called a "drum"? Why is a guitar called a "guitar"? I don't know and I don't care! I know what each word means because I learned them many, many years ago. That's the key that the OP has completely missed...He's not doing the "learning" of his software part correctly (if at all)...
There are hundreds (or more) internet resources that explain/define the "standard" terminology used in recording studios...The SONAR Reference Guide (1,576 pages) and the Help files contain a glossary of terms used...What more does a person need?
Regards, Papa CLICK HERE for a link to support for SONAR 8.5 CLICK HERE to view a list of video tutorials... CLICK HERE for a link to Getting Started with Session Drummer 3...
|
Kalle Rantaaho
Max Output Level: -5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7005
- Joined: 2006/01/09 13:07:59
- Location: Finland
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/11 16:28:40
(permalink)
I firmly decided not to open this thread again, but I had to come to say that I'm hurting too, Papa  ! President Brezhnev and Chairman Mao were hunting tigers. They got one. Mao stayed to watch over the kill when Brezhnev went to tell the news. When Brezhnev came back with the crew and the press, Mao was sitting there alone, calmly smoking a cigarette. "Where's the tiger, mr. Chairman??" Asks Brezhnev . "What tiger?" answers the Chairman. I heard this joke 40 years ago, but I think I understood it just reading this (and the two other) thread.
SONAR PE 8.5.3, Asus P5B, 2,4 Ghz Dual Core, 4 Gb RAM, GF 7300, EMU 1820, Bluetube Pre - Kontakt4, Ozone, Addictive Drums, PSP Mixpack2, Melda Creative Pack, Melodyne Plugin etc. The benefit of being a middle aged amateur is the low number of years of frustration ahead of you.
|
razor
Max Output Level: -59.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1557
- Joined: 2004/05/10 16:53:27
- Location: Irvine, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/11 16:38:45
(permalink)
papa2005
reader1
I'm curious the term of Bounce in sona. according to its usage, mix two or more tracks into one audio track in order to save memory resources.
but why not use term Mix? is there any more meaning than mix has with respect of the bounce?
The term "Bounce" dates back the the days of analog tape studios where you might have a limited number of tracks to work with. At some point during a projects the artist or producer might decide to add more overdubs but not have enough open tracks to do so. In those instances the engineer would "Bounce" two or more already recorded parts (such as background vocals, rhythm guitars, percussion, toms, etc.,) to a single track or split to two single tracks, therefore opening up additional resources on the multitrack tape deck...
The term "Mix" is used to describe the technique of blending all of the recorded tracks into a final result (usually a stereo .wav file that will be sent to the "mastering" stage and prepared for CD burning)...
I'm sure I could have been clearer in my explanation but it's the best I can do...
+1
Stephen Davis Cakewalk by Bandlab Windows 7 Pro 64-Bit ADK DAW - (out of business 2018) Intel i7 4930K CPU Core i7 SB-E MOBO 16 GB DDR3 RAM 7 TB Storage Layla 3G SoundCard (11.5 ms Roundtrip Latency) UAD-2 DSP WaveLab 8 Pro 64-bit Sound Forge 10 Pro
|
papa2005
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3250
- Joined: 2009/08/01 16:43:11
- Location: Southeastern, US
- Status: offline
Re:Why use the term "Bounce" instead of "Mixing"?
2010/05/11 16:43:31
(permalink)
Just a +1???
Damnit! I was hoping for at least a +2 *LOL*
Regards, Papa CLICK HERE for a link to support for SONAR 8.5 CLICK HERE to view a list of video tutorials... CLICK HERE for a link to Getting Started with Session Drummer 3...
|