[Bug or ?] EQ automation problem

Please help me understand if I am doing something wrong or if this is known as a bug. Thanks in advance!

The first frame or so of the sound event skips the automation:

  1. Insert an audio event on a mono or stereo track. Best if the audio event contains high frequencies content.
  2. Trim the beginning of the audio event so that it does not have any fade-in content.
  3. Make a 1 frame fade-in.
  4. Set the locators to audio event length (Ctrl/Cmd + P).
  5. Automate the Equalizers Section of the Channel Strip OR Automate an inserted EQ (StudioEQ) with the following parameters: loop automate with a high cut at 2000Hz. Punch.
  6. Listen to the automation by setting the cursor ahead of the sound event. The first frame or so of the sound event skips the automation.

The effect is not consistent. Sometimes it renders the automation as it should, other times it skips the first or so frames of the automation. This is not OK as you cannot have any control of the undesired effect.

Changing the EQ/Filter Transition from Soft to Quick in the Mixer menu (top right corner) helps with the Channel Strip EQ but not 100%. Rarely, it still renders the effect. And this setting does nothing for the automation of the plugin (insert) EQ. BTW, why in the world is this setting hidden in the mixer’s menu and not found in the EQ section of the channel strip?

If you move the automation points two or more frames before the beginning of the sound event, the undesired effect is even less consistent: 50% of the time it renders OK, 50% of the time misses the automation.

Lowering the buffer size of the ASIO sound card seems to lower the chance the undesired effect occurs but does not eliminate it.

Rendering in place of the sound event, with the EQ automation on, renders it with the undesired effect.

This problem occurs on OSX 10.9 and also on Windows 10.
I have tried it on three diffrent DAWs (two OSX and one Windows).

I have Nuendo 7 (latest update), Steinberg UR824 sound card.


Am I the only one who has this behavior on EQ automation? Or am I doing something wrong in my way of working with automation and EQ?

Any opinion will help greatly. Thx!

No it’s not just you.

You have to have the eq on the fast setting.
But it isn’t perfect. If I understood the explanation I heard it has to do with both how the automation data is written and also it does relate to the buffer size.

Hi, ErikG,

Thank you for your response!

Yes, I understand that it might not be a perfect system, but the problem is not strictly related to the buffer size and the way the automation data is written. Fast setting helps with the channel strip, but not with insert EQ. Even when you export the mixdown, the problem persists. And the automation data dots are placed at the edges of the sound event, outside of the sound event, as it should, with loop. So why the missing of the first frame?

May I ask, when the client wants a jump-cut on every scene change, how can you make a consistent cut, when the automation of the EQ misses the first frame of a sound, even if the automation data dots are two-three frames before the sound event starts?

I know that there could be no simple solution to it, but I have to find a way for my mixing workflow to work so that what I want to auto-EQ, sounds as I desired.

I could post a video with the problem, if it helps.


No Need To convince me i know its true.

The workaround is to not do it that way.
Cut the sound at the pic cut. Place on different tracks and have different settings on each.
And as a mixer it’s the way I want it anyway. I personally dislike “inline” drastic mix changes they are harder to catch.

True, ErikG; I might be missing something else.

Let’s say I have three scenes with different ambiences (sound events) for each. Are you suggesting that I make a track for each different ambience?
Because if a program will have many ambiences on a scene and/or many scenes in a reel, this would make a hell of a project session.
And I counted only the ambiences.

I usually work with ambiences cut in checkerboard on scene change, so I can have an efficient track count.
But if I work this way, I have to automate EQ each ambience so that it has its own EQ.
Thus I start having the problem I was complaining in the first post.

It’s also true that I can apply a processed EQ on the sound event itself, but that would defeat the usefulness of the automation.

So is there any way I could solve this problem, by workflow or by other means I am still missing in Nuendo?

Thank you for all your patience. :slight_smile:

I agree with Erik, although I think it does depend somewhat on what type of content you’re working on and how many people are working on it.

With a fair amount of content I work on the actual ‘aesthetic’ of sound doesn’t change over scenes, meaning it’s all fairly dry production audio driving it all for sports, lifestyle, reality and doc style stuff. So if I’m doing it all myself I know what I’m looking at once I’m finally mixing it and it’s not an issue having content “in-line”.

But for a lot of other content it really does make sense not only to split it up and checkerboard between scenes but also along cuts. There can be big enough differences between the production audio between cuts both in what’s recorded and what you eventually want aesthetically, so it warrants splitting it up more frequently.

I’d say hopefully the “loss” in increased track count and maybe spending more time dialog editing is made up for by easier and maybe more “flexible” mixing later.