copying track or mix to track?

[arenson]

What is the difference between copying (duplicating?) a track, which i forgot how to do, and mix to track.

I wanted to double the sound, and when I did so with mix to track, the sound was reicher, but the tracks were not identical.

The original track was recorded at 44.1/16 ( I should have used a higher setting, but as I like the recording, I am keeping it.

the mix-to-track track actually sounds worse...perhaps because I used 88.2 and 24, which I probably shouldn't do unless the original was the same.

But for what it is worth, wwhat are the advantages to each method, and when i have the final two duplicated tracks, overall volume is louder so I have to
make the faders adjusted.


Fuinally, when setting the faders for MIX TO FILE (end step) or just listening, there are two faders, right? I have two identical--more or less-sereo tracks and a single fade for them. Plus the master.

Is there an advantage to the single fader being lowered and the master kept at full position? Or the reverse? This is to avoid peaks that clip. But
I GUESS the former is better?

Thank you.

[Scoot]

Dup a track or segment - cursor arrow drag and select and area.
Click the plus to 'see' another track below, click at exactly the same point as above and paste.


The master fader high or low is based on the entire composition.
Add more instruments and tracks and soon the master will clip so it will have to come down a bit. Start high bring it down as needed.
Try to keep everything up high unless you're after a quiet section or mood piece.....I think you may know what I'm on about......hopefully.

[arenson]

Yeah, think so.


Once i get the aux send stuff in the other thread down (I can see the light!!! Thanks for bearing with me), I should be ready.

My routine should be simple. lay down tracks with effects in pass through mode, then actually add them.

Then save. My save would I assume be a MIX to file.


Most of the rest I won't need so much. But who knows?

thanks