Audio gap using Song End Action

Hi, in the scenario of a live performance of a medley and designing each medley song into a song of VST Live, I would like to know if it is possible to avoid the gap that is generated in the playback of audio tracks when switching from a song to the next one (setting of Song end action → What: Start Next Song / When: Last Event End)


Unfortunately no. Seamless switching, and even crossfading to the next Song are on the list, but that’s tough, because in fact, each VST Live Song is a complete project in itself. But we’ll try.
For now, you will have to compose the medley into one Song.

1 Like

Consider that the possibility of “combining” several songs in a single medley would open up the possibility of easily modifying this medley (adding, removing or moving songs from it).

In the hope that this feature can be implemented as soon as possible, thank you for the quick and accurate response.

1 Like

Maybe it’s possible to dynamically load project? Let’s say two or more songs have just audio tracks. There is nothing to load except two or more audio tracks. The gap is the same as if there is ton of VST instruments in songs.

Of course we can build whole concert in one song, but it won’t be correct according to the concept. Songs are songs, not a list of songs. But concerts can be gapless for hour and more.

So every VST plugin have his own load time and it probably can be known. So if computer is equipped with good amount of memory, program could preload next song’s plugins ahead. This could be switchable in Preferences → Load ahead or smth. like that. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Sorry, but you are dreaming :slight_smile:


Yes, I know. For a better future :slight_smile: And I’m not alone in this.

But wasn’t there a discussion that all plugins are preloaded for each song? If so, why there is a gap in sound? I tested in empty project where are two songs with one part in each and have little wav file in it. There is no plugins at all. Only two audio files. So why there is gap?

I’m trying to test in large project, but this doesn’t work:
The next song starts at its beginning, not the Start Marker. I placed End Marker in first song on beat in the middle of song and Start Marker on beat in second song. This Actions window is for first song.

Therefore I cut songs so I have the End and Start on the beats. I set up song actions correctly. Each Song has long (3 min) phonogram, huge amount of plugins (Steinberg, Native Instruments) on the phonogram and backing vocals.

And I have the same gap as if there are no plugins. The same length of gap. I’m sure this is not about plugin load time. And this inspection cannot be named a dream :wink:

Used VST Live

@ArthurNeeman I really Dont’t want to argue with you, but do you really know multitrack backing player that takes 0msec change between songs? We used Cymatics, TC…… come on, took longer to the system recognise which button did we press than takes a song change to VSTLive…:sweat_smile:

I am using most recent and using all like next song, start next song, end before 1sec, start from marker, etc…. mixed and they work perfectly.

Works here. Perhaps you set “Start at Start Marker” for the previous Song, but not the one to be started at Start Marker?

As for switching times between Songs: as said, there is no gapless switching yet. Switching is done when the Song End is reached and the UI gets time assigned, then it does the same as if you would switch manually and eventually starts the next Song. If this is slow, it could be anything, for instance preload has not been applied yet so if you run audio from a network or very slow magnetic storage it may take a while. Other than that, there should be no significant gap (how much are we talking anyway?) with just a bit of audio, there must be something else.

I have fast SSD, splitted in two (C: system, D: data).
I did preload, no changes.

Of course if one song ends with fade-out and next starts with different instruments, the gap isn’t audible. But if we are talking about transitions at all, then we cannot have two songs with flawless transition as if it was in Jean Michel Jarre concerts.

Okay, I’m ready to wait for this :wink:

Ok, but then the gap should not be long. No seamless transitions, but should be quite short nevertheless w/o many plugins.

Not with tracks, but with Layers and Stacks it already works. Those continue to play until their ending conditions are met (no notes held or sound threshold met, sustain time etc).

That’s the strangest thing, why I’m stuck on this thread. The gap between songs are the same whether it’s empty project with only two audio pieces or full project with some 20 serious plugins that really can make a delay before start next song. But they don’t, because everything is preloaded. I’m sure they don’t, because the gap is the same in both situations. I guess it’s quarter of a second or less.

I can send you the project. I can record a video if it could help.

I sent the video and the project file to your e-mail.

Plays almost gapless here. Sure it’s quite noticable with two similar events. But 1/4 second is quite ok given there is no explicit support for gapless yet. Transport needs to be restarted, data need to be preloaded, there is always a slight “jump back” when starting in order not to miss first beats etc.

I used the cymatic utrack 24 and this can work nearly without any gaps. With that I mean that if you have a metronome running as an audio track, there is no noticable change from one to another song. I cannot achieve this with VSTlive.

Cool. We were using just the smaller one…

As said we are working on it, including x-fade Songs.


It sounds like more than a Christmas promise! :slight_smile:
Thank you for your time!

For the moment you could use a global instrument/sampler to fill the gap maybe?

I don’t want to argue too, but do you really think the civilization (especially we - composers, musicians etc) should stuck on 1990-ies? It’s 21st century! Elon Musk is shooting rockets and also have some milliseconds between commands to execute right in time so have rockets and sattelites in position so everything is predictable especially in electronics. One step for processor have known length in time. Could we start discussion in this area? Or maybe don’t argue with programmer! :wink:

Sorry admins, if this is going to off-topic, feel free to delete my comments. I’m tired of inaccuracy in fields I have some presence. I feel like Monk of Poirot :slight_smile:

You have no idea, sorry :slight_smile:
Playback for instance is not possible without preloading. When audio wants to output, there is no time to locate data on whatever storage medium, and this must have been happening in the background so to not interfere with audio processing. And much more of that type. Data delivery is slow even if you apply a quantum computer. That is just one of the many obstacles which cannot be overcome however fast the CPU.

1 Like