Old 06-09-2014, 03:55 PM   #1
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default Render v. Freeze?

Render and Freeze seem almost identical to me. When my CPU is taxed and I Freeze a stable track, it frees up some CPU for me and works fine. When would I want to use Render instead? I think I am missing something, since I don't see a substantial difference between Render and Freeze.

P.S. Maybe Rendering is intended for preparing individual tracks for transferring to another place for mastering?
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 03:59 PM   #2
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,969
Default

Difference in workflow. Frozen tracks can be unfreezed later, giving back editing access to the original track. If you render a track to a new track, you need to organize that yourself. (For example by keeping the original track around muted, which can get messy, even if you hide the track from the track control panel.)
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 04:27 PM   #3
DVDdoug
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 1,956
Default

Quote:
P.S. Maybe Rendering is intended for preparing individual tracks for transferring to another place for mastering?
Right. You render when you're "done" with all of your mixing & procesing. Usually, you'll render to stereo WAV (or perhaps MP3, or perhaps a surround format, etc.). You can render directly to MP3, although it's good practice to also keep a high-quality lossless file.

After rendering, the file may or may not be mastered as a separate process. If you are going to send the file somewhere else for mastering, or use a different set of mastering tools, or simply master as a separate process, you'd render first, and master from that "final stereo mix".
DVDdoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 04:29 PM   #4
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Thanks to all.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:06 AM   #5
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,290
Default

But also you just plain can't edit a frozen track. If you want to apply the FX and the edits you've made already, but then want to be able to edit it more and/or add more FX, then render (or "Apply Track FX..." which is essentially the same thing) is what you want.

Personally, I think I generally prefer to render most of the time because it forces me to commit to decisions and move on, rather than keep around the option - worse, the temptation! - to continue tweaking endlessly. I guess the way I see it, everything up to the render is like the signal chain going to tape...or something...
ashcat_lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 12:16 PM   #6
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post
But also you just plain can't edit a frozen track. If you want to apply the FX and the edits you've made already, but then want to be able to edit it more and/or add more FX, then render (or "Apply Track FX..." which is essentially the same thing) is what you want.

Personally, I think I generally prefer to render most of the time because it forces me to commit to decisions and move on, rather than keep around the option - worse, the temptation! - to continue tweaking endlessly. I guess the way I see it, everything up to the render is like the signal chain going to tape...or something...

"Freeze" is a good workflow shortcut to cancel-out plugin latency if you wanted to records some parts/overdubs. It also deals with sends pretty transparently, and then restores them again on "unfreeze" once the overdubs are recorded.


I use freeze for latency reduction more than processor-freeing...



>
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 05:57 PM   #7
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
"Freeze" is a good workflow shortcut to cancel-out plugin latency if you wanted to records some parts/overdubs. It also deals with sends pretty transparently, and then restores them again on "unfreeze" once the overdubs are recorded.

I use freeze for latency reduction more than processor-freeing...
That will be useful to me during recording, though it had never occurred to me before you mentioned it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post
But also you just plain can't edit a frozen track. If you want to apply the FX and the edits you've made already, but then want to be able to edit it more and/or add more FX, then render (or "Apply Track FX..." which is essentially the same thing) is what you want.

Personally, I think I generally prefer to render most of the time because it forces me to commit to decisions and move on, rather than keep around the option - worse, the temptation! - to continue tweaking endlessly. I guess the way I see it, everything up to the render is like the signal chain going to tape...or something...
My music isn't ready to be committed to tape... not even close......

Thanks for the additional replies.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.