When selecting ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ on the Automation panel, it automatically creates an event for every conceivable event under the sun - seemingly thousands of things I’m never likely to get anywhere near.
So, is it possible to get the system to create initial events just for the current VOLUME levels of every track? - That is always the starting point for me.
As it stands now, if I use ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ I have to spend a day going though all automatable event types on every track to remove all of the stuff I don’t need. Alternatively, I can ‘touch’ every fader to get a starting value, which is okay, but it would be much nicer, quicker and more accurate to be able to create just initial volume events in one foul (sic) swoop.
Using it is a double edged sword though. As a post user AI tend to use it when I need to, but then that feature negates the show used automation feature as all automation is then “used”. Not great. I’d prefer that any initial parameter event wouldn’t trigger view used features. Not sure if that would be possible though.
So I try as suggested above to create them in my templates so I have all the ones I always automate and use preset to a default setting. If I need to change that default for a full track I will just use write to start and end to change the default level of any specific parameter. Not exactly the same but it works for me.
I’m not sure how I could do as suggested using templates. I don’t do Post and generally don’t use predefined templates as I never know what is coming - I just start with a new empty project and go from there.
As a test, I’ve just created a new project containing one track and selected ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’. This created 25 automation lines, most of which I would never use. This means that a project containing 100 tracks would have 2,500 mostly redundant automation lines in it - a real mess when using ‘Show All Used Automation’.
I suggest that the ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ option could be greatly improved by making it more flexible. Rather than the current ‘all or nothing’ option, there could be an ‘All’ mode (the status quo) and a ‘Selective’ mode allowing the required types to be chosen. This would then just need something like a boolean array to be scanned to see which event types are actually required. ‘Teaching your grandmother to suck eggs’ comes to mind here :)). So, in my case I could select ‘Volume’, and maybe ‘Pan’, and have the initial parameters reflect only the fader and pan positions of my initial rough mix. Much neater than having to have all of the redundant stuff in there.
I’m aware of that Fredo, but at that initial stage I have no idea where the fader will end up in the mix. I want the ‘initial’ parameter values to reflect the first ‘rough’ mix. And thereafter the current state of the mix after each ‘save’. I also want ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ to create events for all tracks in the project, but without all the unused parameters and without having to do each track manually as you suggest.
Why do you want to complicate things?
I really don’t get what the problem is.
Here’s how to do it:
-Always work with Automation Write “On” for any track in your project.
-Lock “To start” and “To end” in the automation panel.
===>> You will be able to mix & adjust any parameter (and only the used parameters) to your linkings.
That is exactly what you are asking for: “Free” mixing and only creating parameters for the things you have touched. (I.e. the ruff mix)
Without the hassle (and complication) of writing “selected” initial parameters (Read: the parameters you have used, or want to use, think you are going to use) based on your ruff mix.
Wow! I’m suggesting an improvement to the ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ option which would simplify things for many users, not complicate them, but thanks Fredo for your usual sage advice.
There is absolutely no way that I would want to start writing automation from the start of a project while recording/tracking or generally experimenting! Why would I want to complicate things in that way? It makes no sense. Why clutter things up with a whole load of automation that will be redundant by the time I get to the first mix?
Only after achieving the first ‘rough’ mix would I want to initialise the automation, and then progress from there.
The clear and uncomplicated answer to the question in my first post would appear to be ‘No’, so I’ll make a feature-request out of it.
With “To front” and “to end” locked, you wouldn’t be writing any automation, the whole system would be behaving as you were mixing without any automation.
My suggestion does exactly what you want to achieve, without any modification of the system.
Without you having to change your worlflow.
But if you think about it Fredo is correct. As long as you’ve got “to front” / “to end” activated the faders (etc) will behave as if no automation was written. You’d be able to freely adjust faders to set y our rough balance and once that’s done just punch out and now you have your volume automation set once throughout the timeline. It shouldn’t be “a load of automation”, just one automation point per parameter touched.
Just some food for thought…;
I have seen plenty of composers though that have fairly large templates they use for music composition / production specifically. I’d say that it might be an option still if you know you reach for some items almost every time you work. Say you have some VSTi that you load up 80% of the time for example then having a template with those in it would save you from loading them and creating parameters for them (?) that amount of time.
Another thing I suppose you could explore is to create a master template, save it as a regular project file, and see if you importing tracks from there makes sense. That way you could start clean but instead of “create new track” you’d use track import instead, navigate to the ‘template’ and import from there. I can’t remember now but I’d imagine automation parameters would carry over.
And lastly I suppose another alternative for composers is to group instruments in a good way for example using folders, and then using visibility functions as well as disabling tracks in order to only see what’s needed as well as not having to tax the system (?) with tracks you rarely use.
Thanks, Mattias and Fredo, for your responses. I think it might work - I’ve been misunderstanding what ‘To Start’ and ‘To End’ actually do and how to use them. I’m going to try them on the current mix.
Despite my frustrations, I very much appreciate your help.
I’ll be 74 in September, so you never know, you might not have to put up with me for much longer
That is no excuse. We are here to help eachother. And music is supposed to keep us young. At least young at heart and in our brain. I know I sometimes come on strong. I myself am 58, so I have (almost) the same excuse as you. It’s not because we sometimes disagree, that we can’t get along.
Regarding ‘To Start’ and ‘To End’: If both of them are activated, writing automation using the cursor or a fader places a node at the start of the track when writing is stopped and removes Mr. In-between (which is perfect).
However, if only ‘To Start’ is active and writing is stopped, then a line is drawn from the point that writing stopped to the start of a track, but no node is placed at the start. Is there a reason for this? I’m clearly no expert but given that the VCA system seems to require initial parameters to be placed at the start of every track (as I understand it, although I don’t currently use VCA’s due to the years of problems that were encountered) could this be a cause of some VCA issues?
I think that you just need any automation point anywhere to avoid some problems with VCAs. Not necessarily at the start. I think some of use have probably said to put it at the start just because that seemed to make sense.
Regarding ‘To Start’ and ‘To End’: If both of them are activated, writing automation using the cursor or a fader places a single node at the start of the track when writing is stopped (which is perfect).
However, if only ‘To Start’ is active. when writing is stopped, a line is drawn from the point that writing stopped to the start of a track, but no node is placed at the start.