IK Multimedia T-racks Tape Machine Collection

[Mathematics]

If you feel that purchasing individual plugins was not the right decision, you can always contact IK directly via our web site to see if there's anything that can be done in your case. The convenience and savings of buying individually is good for some, but sometimes the bundle purchase would have been better. If you only have 1% to go, the individual price of that processor or those processors with the JamPoints discount might work out for you, or there are sales etc that may fit your needs.

This. +1

[Peter - IK Multimedia]

If you feel that purchasing individual plugins was not the right decision, you can always contact IK directly via our web site to see if there's anything that can be done in your case. The convenience and savings of buying individually is good for some, but sometimes the bundle purchase would have been better. If you only have 1% to go, the individual price of that processor or those processors with the JamPoints discount might work out for you, or there are sales etc that may fit your needs.

This. +1

I may not be able to disclose future promotions but do also shoot me what you have remaining and your IK username if you wouldn't mind. I might have at least *some* more detailed insight. It happens from time to time

[plexuss]

I (or Ryan_IK) will relay suggestions to the team. Thank you. Note that there will likely be some optimization but some of the suggestions would affect the actual tone imparted quite a lot so that (and this is my opinion, I'll still relay the suggestions) is counter intuitive to the mixing process. At least how I learned it and my workflow/methodology. I want to hear what it sounds like mixed, not "almost what it will sound like". But I do see the point if you don't want to print tracks or have other limitations that don't allow for resource-intensive plugins.

Exactly. With the CPU load as it is, the only way to use them is to disable them while working and then enable them for the bounce. So you can't actually hear what they sound like while you are working.

At least if there was an on-line and off-line quality setting we'd be able to hear some semblance of what they are doing rather than none there-by making them work the way you are suggesting.

Glad we are on the same page. Can you apply some pressure to the product team to provide this? It's essential to the usability of them otherwise we work in the dark.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Exactly. With the CPU load as it is, the only way to use them is to disable them while working and then enable them for the bounce. So you can't actually hear what they sound like while you are working.

At least if there was an on-line and off-line quality setting we'd be able to hear some semblance of what they are doing rather than none there-by making them work the way you are suggesting.

Here's my workflow advice for something like this:

1. Separate your composition, mixing, and mastering workflows. When you're ready to do your final mix, render all your instrument tracks and create stems to free up the CPU and resist the urge to tweak the filter cutoff just a tiny bit more or whatever. Render any key effects that might be part of the sound (thinking synth on-board FXs that really make the patch). Create a new project and import your stems.

2. Now that you've got a bunch of rendered audio files in a new project, you're not really taxing the CPU and starting fresh. If you want to use the IK tapes...add them here. The sound of a tape machine would go into the console and out for mixing, so this replicates that workflow. Now render/bounce/freeze the effect once you're happy. Commit. You shouldn't need to tweak the tape after the fact, just print it.

3. Do your mix. Plenty of CPU, and the tape sound is already part of the mix.

4. Upon completion, bounce down your final mix to a 2-track file. Create a new project/mastering session/whatever.

5. Now you've got plenty of CPU to process 2 channels of audio at the mastering step. Add the Tape again, probably don't need to render it now that you're just dealing with a stereo channel. Add whatever else you need in your chain. Plenty of CPU for oversampling.

Trying to do all this stuff at once is going to tax any CPU even with modest projects, but if you can get in the habit of breaking out the steps, CPU becomes a bit less of a factor.

[reggie1979]

That's pretty kosher. Using tape stuff while recording is basically unnecessary. Things like "tape" and "VCC" and "mixhub" and that stuff should be put on a mixing session. Then, you can up the anti with buffer and you don't give a rats about latency.

But hey, to each their own. We want it NOW AND we want it PERFECT. It's not wrong.

[plexuss]

I abhor workarounds especially to my workflow to accommodate laziness or stupidity in the product design process. For a plugin such as the IK Tapes, where they knew they would be very CPU intensive, there should have been a playback/render quality option. It's easy to implement and makes all the difference for users.

Thanks for suggestions but I wont be changing my workflow to accommodate IK Tape plugins. The software should be a tool to make my job easier, not anything else.

I will use them with these severe usability limitations and complain about them when appropriate. Hopefully IK will address this issue and make life easier for us as well as increase their revenue. On the other hand, they are humans, so I won't hold my breath...

Maybe one day they will end up in my plugin selling scrap heap... depends.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I abhor workarounds especially to my workflow to accommodate laziness or stupidity in the product design process. For a plugin such as the IK Tapes, where they knew they would be very CPU intensive, there should have been a playback/render quality option. It's easy to implement and makes all the difference for users.

Thanks for suggestions but I wont be changing my workflow to accommodate IK Tape plugins. The software should be a tool to make my job easier, not anything else.

I will use them with these severe usability limitations and complain about them when appropriate. Hopefully IK will address this issue and make life easier for us as well as increase their revenue. On the other hand, they are humans, so I won't hold my breath...

Maybe one day they will end up in my plugin selling scrap heap... depends.

Honestly, I got tired of running out of CPU during mixes or dealing with glitches, and that lead me to split up my workflow. Had nothing to do with Tape, but more of a function of trying to use lots of VSTis and FX at the same time and hitting bottlenecks. Splitting up the workflow to mimic more of a "production phase, then stems to be mixed, then 2 track to be mastered" flow has completely improved my workflow at each step because I'm not worrying about CPU at all these days. Yeah, there's some extra steps in between, but having all my computing power available for a mix (and not say, running a bunch of U-he VSTi's in addition) has been an improvement. Adding Tape Machines into that type of workflow is really a no brainer: keep doing what I'm doing, add tape machine, print, move on.

[Peter - IK Multimedia]

I (or Ryan_IK) will relay suggestions to the team. Thank you. Note that there will likely be some optimization but some of the suggestions would affect the actual tone imparted quite a lot so that (and this is my opinion, I'll still relay the suggestions) is counter intuitive to the mixing process. At least how I learned it and my workflow/methodology. I want to hear what it sounds like mixed, not "almost what it will sound like". But I do see the point if you don't want to print tracks or have other limitations that don't allow for resource-intensive plugins.

Exactly. With the CPU load as it is, the only way to use them is to disable them while working and then enable them for the bounce. So you can't actually hear what they sound like while you are working.

At least if there was an on-line and off-line quality setting we'd be able to hear some semblance of what they are doing rather than none there-by making them work the way you are suggesting.

Glad we are on the same page. Can you apply some pressure to the product team to provide this? It's essential to the usability of them otherwise we work in the dark.

I see what you did there and I did chuckle but in all seriousness I'd appreciate it if you didn't spin my comments to infer the opposite of what I stated. Again, I personally don't see how listening to degraded versions of any plugin while mixing helps your end result. These do require more resources, though there will likely be optimization, in my opinion these optimizations shouldn't be at the expense of the sound quality. I don't think freezing tracks is a truly terrible workaround for systems that don't have enough resources to handle the amount of instances required by the person mixing.

[plexuss]

I (or Ryan_IK) will relay suggestions to the team. Thank you. Note that there will likely be some optimization but some of the suggestions would affect the actual tone imparted quite a lot so that (and this is my opinion, I'll still relay the suggestions) is counter intuitive to the mixing process. At least how I learned it and my workflow/methodology. I want to hear what it sounds like mixed, not "almost what it will sound like". But I do see the point if you don't want to print tracks or have other limitations that don't allow for resource-intensive plugins.

Exactly. With the CPU load as it is, the only way to use them is to disable them while working and then enable them for the bounce. So you can't actually hear what they sound like while you are working.

At least if there was an on-line and off-line quality setting we'd be able to hear some semblance of what they are doing rather than none there-by making them work the way you are suggesting.

Glad we are on the same page. Can you apply some pressure to the product team to provide this? It's essential to the usability of them otherwise we work in the dark.

I see what you did there and I did chuckle but in all seriousness I'd appreciate it if you didn't spin my comments to infer the opposite of what I stated.

It's not spin. It's logic. Your proposition was exactly the point I was making. And an important point: Offering a lower processing rate for real-time playback is not going to make a huge difference in sound quality, it will probably be un detectable by more people. So a reduction in sound quality is not viable rationale. Good try though!

But that's fine. IK doesn't care about this, I get it. It is what it is. Remember, some people have already express disinterest in buying due to CPU usage. So there already is proof of lost sales due to this. I am glad you are ok with that.

Buyer beware: IK Tapes require a lot of CPU. There is no work around and there will likely be no work around. You get what you see in the demo. Have fun.

[plexuss]

I abhor workarounds especially to my workflow to accommodate laziness or stupidity in the product design process. For a plugin such as the IK Tapes, where they knew they would be very CPU intensive, there should have been a playback/render quality option. It's easy to implement and makes all the difference for users.

Thanks for suggestions but I wont be changing my workflow to accommodate IK Tape plugins. The software should be a tool to make my job easier, not anything else.

I will use them with these severe usability limitations and complain about them when appropriate. Hopefully IK will address this issue and make life easier for us as well as increase their revenue. On the other hand, they are humans, so I won't hold my breath...

Maybe one day they will end up in my plugin selling scrap heap... depends.

Honestly, I got tired of running out of CPU during mixes or dealing with glitches, and that lead me to split up my workflow. Had nothing to do with Tape, but more of a function of trying to use lots of VSTis and FX at the same time and hitting bottlenecks. Splitting up the workflow to mimic more of a "production phase, then stems to be mixed, then 2 track to be mastered" flow has completely improved my workflow at each step because I'm not worrying about CPU at all these days. Yeah, there's some extra steps in between, but having all my computing power available for a mix (and not say, running a bunch of U-he VSTi's in addition) has been an improvement. Adding Tape Machines into that type of workflow is really a no brainer: keep doing what I'm doing, add tape machine, print, move on.

That's what I do anyway. Mix is a separate project from master. It's logical, easier to manage and just makes sense. It still doesn't help with using IK Tape because typically multiple instances are used in the mix project. But IK doesn't care so that's fine. It is what it is.

[Mathematics]

Just a friendly reminder about Vienna Ensemble Pro. One project...external plugin processing - to multiple computers if you need more than one computer! Yes, it's truly an extravagant, and potentially cumbersome, workflow but very, "Pimp my Mix"-like.

[plexuss]

Just a friendly reminder about Vienna Ensemble Pro. One project...external plugin processing - to multiple computers if you need more than one computer! Yes, it's truly an extravagant, and potentially cumbersome, workflow but very, "Pimp my Mix"-like.

Back in the good old days, Logic used to do that: there was a "Node" app you could run on other machines on the same network. Logic could hook into those and distribute the rendering process to them. They dropped it in 9 or 10.

[Mathematics]

Wow...I've always been a PC user. I need to get out more. Lol.

[Andrew John]

There is more than resizing added for those that have T-RackS 5, T-RackS 5 MAX, or T-RackS Deluxe. Please see the "What's New" section here for more information: https://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/tr5cs/

Thank you.

Wait, what ?
You're saying that even though i've paid for my Tape Machines bundle that I have to buy another bundle to be able to use it properly?

Please tell me this isn't correct Peter?

You can still use the plugins properly. For the features noted at the link I posted, you would need to have of the products mentioned there.

Only, I can't see the tiny controls properly...
This is a complete con Peter, how can you justify it?

Hi Peter. May i also suggest that the hiss in the demo be a little less repetitive, that there be a little bit more time before it comes round. It makes demoing these plugins extremely difficult.
Thank you.

[don1thedon]

Hi Peter. May i also suggest that the hiss in the demo be a little less repetitive, that there be a little bit more time before it comes round. It makes demoing these plugins extremely difficult.
Thank you.

Hi, Just checking that you know that you can run this without the hiss in demo by running Custom Shop in the background (acts as a temp authorisation)
https://www.ikmultimedia.com/faq/index.php?id=798