Correct? Big buffers: less accurate mixdown (automation, VST

Ran out of space in the title, sorry.

I believe in this Steinberg KB article , this part

… increasing latency … might reduce the resolution of automation though. VST 2 plug-ins calculate one automation value per parameter for each ASIO block (which equals buffer size in samples) …

suggests that larger buffer sizes can result in more *in-*accurate audio mixdown when there is automation of VST-2 plug-ins.

So, if there are automated VST-2 plug-ins in a large complex project requiring large buffers to work with to avoid clicks and pops, how does one get the most accurate automation at mixdown (or Render in Place, or Freeze)?

I wonder if track by track mixdown/RIP/Freeze would get around that?


Sometimes if I have very time-critical automation, I will set my buffers to minimum (32) when I export the audio. Even if the project cannot possibly play live at this buffer setting, it will still export without a problem.

Thanks for that, J-S-Q!

That is such crucial information, but I haven’t seen that written anywhere. I will definitely Flag your response!

What I’ve found is that the automation in Cubase occurs earlier than it should. The bigger the buffer, the earlier your automation will happen. On a 32 buffer setting, it’s very very close to being perfect. On a very high buffer, it might play something like 1/128th note early.

Not only is it early, but the exact amount by which it is early will fluctuate very slightly throughout the song so you can’t just compensate by shifting all the automation by a particular amount.

Still, for probably 95% of automation tasks, it’s not a problem but good to be aware of it for those occasions where timing is critical.

Great info, J-S-Q.

Thanks again! :slight_smile: