And they will also be influenced by the detractors of the method, who often level the accusation of “cookie cutting”. Personally I don’t care what label people want to put on it. The only thing that matters is the quality of the noise coming out of the speakers.
FYI Andrew I don’t use templates, but I do use a shedload of preset chains, samples and even preset levels - I guess the principle amounts to the same thing more or less.
Edit: By ‘preset’ I mean that they are my own saved data, not stock presets.
Aha yep, that is another great approach, and essentially the same thing in a lot of ways.
About the only difference is that the template approach keeps all the routing intact, which can be expedient when you use parallel processes such and auxiliary channels.
Rob Morgan (of AMC) takes it to the extreme. He has even built specialised macros for multiple step editing/cleanup functions that need to be done on each mix, as well as a routing system of multiple output busses that allows him to render multiple versions of a mix (Mastered, Unmastered, Main Instrument Stems etc) in one step.
My brain doesn’t work that way, but I can certainly hear evidence of its advantages in the quality of the mixes he turns out.
My main theory is that the big boys are the big boys because they didn’t give up!
I know many engineers on here and other forums that definitely have the ear and talent to make it as a big boy.
But have they taken that path in their life?
Did they (like many of the big boys) begin by helping out for free in studios and learning the craft in the early hours.
Do they have other priorities like family, mortgage, debts , job etc.
If so they can’t possibly commit 100% to challenge the big boys.
And like you say, it takes a lot of good luck too!