dante wrote:
. Is it worth it ?
I think it is. Complex projects demand an organised workbench. I spent long enough getting the physical space of the studio right, I treat the Routing Window the same. It's hard to accommodate the spontaneity of creativity if you gotta hunt for something.
dante wrote:
. Are you phobic about moving devices around to reduce right angled connector bends or crossing connections ?
Only sometimes! Some graphs have knots - you can't avoid it.
dante wrote:
. Do you use 'External Device' so you can label things with thier correct name ?
Never tried it. Sounds like something I need to check out!
dante wrote:
. Do you use an FX rack to reduce the number of devices cluttering the window ?
Rarely, but I have on occasion. Rarely stack so many effects that I need it. Usually, two inserts and an aux bus or two on one of the mixers does the trick.
dante wrote:
. Left to right processing ( eg inputs on left and outputs on right ? )
Yeah. My Scope monitor is still the 4:3 baby, so I'd like a 16:9 or 16:10 job. Right-to-left or top-to-bottom would feel wrong (I'm right handed, and write from left to right). And the location of the pads / pinouts on Scope devices kinda force you down that left-to-right road.
My own workflow? Have two Scope projects per Song. Store the Ableton Live Set, the Reason project (if I'm using it in a track), and two Scope projects, in a folder. First Scope project is for the individual tracks (named <song-name>-tracks.pro), second is for the stem mixdown and mastering (named <song-name>-master.pro).
I separate the actions to help me stay focused, and to help reduce the DSP requirements per stage.
For the first "track" project, Scope receives Midi from the Sequencer, forwards to Scope synths, and sends Audio back over ASIO to the DAW. I might add other effects in the DAW, and when I'm happy with the mix, I render the audio in each track to a track named "<track-name>-printed".
For the master project, I just send each "printed" audio track to Scope, add mastering treatments, and send it back to the DAW again as Stems.
In the track project, I mix on both my monitors and on headphones - for the master project, I use the Focusrite VRM Box getting SPDIF digital from Scope, get balances right on headphones, and cross-ref with my monitors, then other playback devices. I prefer to monitor during the mastering sessions at higher volume, my monitor placement is far from ideal, and I find the VRM Box is OK for what its intended, for my purposes...
I have a default project for each Scope project type (track and master), down under the Projects dir in my main Scope install. Has all the routings done up, ready to rock. I take a copy of those two default projects, save them with the Song name in the Song folder, and play with those for the duration of my working on the Song.
I occasionally return to the default project, to add a new effect I found useful, a new bread-and-butter synth sound or effect chain for the guitars that help develop 'my sound', or to enable or retire some outboard or other... The Mastering project's routing of processors/effects rarely changes - I just store named Mixer channels and the processor presets in the Song-specific version of the project...
I used to mix down to Stereo in Scope in the mastering project, but I'm digging the new FXpansion DCAM Dynamics VST at the mo, so, recently, its stems from Scope that get that final bit of final 'glue' treatment in the DAW. I hope to purchase some of that DAS stuff at some stage too...
I'm still a Scope newbie. So, I'm more interested in hearing of other folk's setups than I am interested in saying my way is great... Works fine for me at the mo.