[2.1.29] Same value for multiple Outputs of an Automation Track

Hi Team,

when using automation tracks for mixer channels and VST parameter settings, I noticed an anomalous behavior that occurs under a certain condition.

The condition I noticed is when two or more outputs, assigned for a certain automation track in the mapping, are set, at a certain point in the timeline, simultaneously to the same value: this situation determines that only one of the outputs (for example, the Volume parameter of the first slider of the SENDS of a certain mixer channel) is set to the desired value, while the other mapped outputs will be left unchanged.

I have prepared a small project to demonstrate this:

SameValuesForAutomationTrack.zip (17.1 KB)

In the project there are two automation tracks, Track 1 and Track 2, that automate the sliders related to the SENDS of two channels of the mixer Stack 1 and Stack 2.

The tracks Track 1 and Track 2 contain the same automations (obviously for Stack 1 and Stack 2 respectively), in the same positions of the timeline, but with the values ​​at position 003.1.1 that are identical for Track 1 and slightly “offset” (by one unit) for Track 2.

When opening the project, note that with the timeline position at the origin 001.1.1, the values ​​set for the sliders of the SENDS of the channels Stack 1 and Stack 2 are identical.

Moving in the timeline beyond position 003.1.1, the positions of the SENDS sliders obtained for Stack 1, automated by Track 1, are correct only for the first slider, while they remain unchanged with respect to the origin for the other two sliders.

On the contrary, note that the positions of the SENDS sliders obtained for Stack 2, automated by Track 2, are consistent with what was programmed in the automation track.

I repeat that what was noted for an automation of a mixer element, is identically proposed for what can be automations of VST parameters.

I hope I was able to explain the issue encountered clearly and effectively, I await your feedback.

Thanks in advance! :slight_smile:

Hi Team,

any news about the issue described in this post of mine? :thinking:

Is it a complicated bug to deal with or simply this post has not been taken into consideration yet? :blush:

Hi @Giuseppe_Loffredo,

I am sorry. No news yet. But it’s now on my desk and I will have a look to it.

See you,
Michael.

1 Like

… it’s fixed now. Please grab the next Pre-Release, try it again and let us know if it’s working.

Thank you for your patience and your report,
Michael.

1 Like

Great news, I’m eagerly awaiting the new release. :wink:

And thank you for your support! :blush:

Hi @Spork,

after running several tests covering different scenarios, I think I can say that the bug is solved with the fix applied in version 2.1.31. :slightly_smiling_face:

As always, thanks for the great support work you do! :blush:

… excellent. Thank you for your feedback.

… and thank you! And the community!

Have a nice day,
Michael.

1 Like