You can do a search here in the Nuendo section about it, or maybe in Nuendo 8 section. I can’t remember off the top of my head but they were fundamentally a different approach. I think Fredo mentioned that Cubase users didn’t like the Nuendo implementation in Cubase so they did something different.
Sunshy,
Last I checked, and that was a while ago, using automation nodes on all tracks that would be connected to a VCA solved the issues that were still there. That obviously doesn’t work for everyone but the things I bumped into were fixed by Steinberg and anything else I saw others write about was addressed with that node at the beginning of the timeline. So I built my last set of templates with nodes already placed.
I’m not yet on v10 so I can’t speak for how it looks now.
Like I said, if I remember correctly then placing automation nodes on tracks that VCAs control makes the VCAs work properly. That makes them usable with that workaround.
If I get sufficiently bored this weekend I’ll download v10 and take a look.
Hmm, it’s hardly a work around though. I guess if you are to add a node every time you run into this instance. But Templating nodes won’t work as if you set an audio fader level and then go to right automation it will go into ‘Read’ and take the node 0db value for the rest of the track
It depends on what type of work you do and how you work.
If you’re in post for example and are mixing just a plain old TV show to -24LFKS then it could very well be that you set dialog event level to close to -24LKFS and then ride faders to adjust for the dynamics of it. That can be done in various ways but I tend to use touch-trim when I do it even in Pro Tools which doesn’t have this issue. I do it because it’s easier to just quickly go back and, well, ‘trim’ something. So in this case I’m not bothered at all by the initial node. It makes zero difference.
If I’m riding music levels I’ll probably go into latch for the first pass and so again it simply doesn’t matter that there’s a node there because I’ll inevitably pull levels down before the first music hits anyway.
Or to state it all a different way: There’s virtually no use-case for a lot of TV/broadcast/internet work where I don’t end up writing automation from the beginning somewhere, and as soon as that’s done there’s an automation node there. So if it’s there before initial writing or not makes zero difference.
I suppose if you’re mixing music you might want it all clean and just move faders around without writing automation. I typically end up writing it anyway even if it’s static because I want to be sure it recalls properly and avoid human error (i.e. I accidentally move a fader).
So for me templates worked in this regard.
What are the use-cases for you where you can’t work with a template with an initial value of “unity gain” nodes at the top of the project?
It’s too complicated to explain right now, it’s just annoying. My templates are incredibly planned and structured but this area so to say is where I like to have things “loose” and then often end up writing automation later to obtain the required precision. Or for instance, I’ve set up everything so that the channels controlled by VCAs are feeding into a group channel that is free and so I can push gain into that group which maybe has a compressor on it - my VCA is raising volume on the tracks which hit a compressor harder. Usually I’m starting all this work just positioning fader levels freely without automation though, and then wanting to adjust overall with the VCA, and then automate.
but I guess I have to think about how to avoid all this now.
So in your case I’d probably look into putting together a macro that can activate desired automation settings when adjusting things freely. You could for example have one key that puts you in preview mode and suspends volume automation read at the same time and then also sets the punch in parameters to “to beginning” and “to end”, or whatever they’re called. So that would override an initial node while you’re adjusting faders on any given track.
Alternatively I would imagine it would be possible to create a macro that would quickly write automation on selected tracks to “protect” them while retaining fader position.
I’m not arguing that any of this is the way it should be of course, I’m just trying to see if there’s any way you could workaround it so you could be more productive.
Okay that explains your use for lots of VCAs especially in a large template. I get it.
Gain staging as a creative tool is not something many people do in the box. I’ve been doing it for years and it’s a huge part of how I mix but I have some proprietary DSP hardware and software that makes it make even more sense in my case. Don’t often come across someone like you who is doing it in a more traditional system. I think it’s smart.
If you’re considering doing this in Nuendo you really should vet its reliability. Set up a ridiculously complicated nested VCA scenario that you might find yourself in one day and then save it, open it, mess with it, save it, open it and so forth until you satisfy yourself that what you do won’t bite you in the butt down the road. Because if the VCAs get squirrely at some point when automated, you’re going to be pulling your hair out trying to figure out what ruined your mix.
There is nothing written in these forums that indicates that automated VCAs are bulletproof at this point, and in addition I’m fairly certain Cubase projects and Nuendo projects are not VCA compatible.
