Grouped Relative Gain Adjustments Changed

So, I believe it was with the release of 8.2 - grouping automation points and dragging them up or down now creates 2 new points on either border of the selection that DO NOT move with the relative adjustment. THIS IS DRIVING ME CRAZY. I can’t possibly imagine why anyone would want this, Im hoping this is simply a matter of a preference that got reset or changed with the update that I can change back. But please…a little help. I do relative gain adjustments all day long and this has crippled my work flow,

I apologize if this issue has already been addressed here.

Thanks in advance.

PS - the double clicking on the timeline bar switching to loop mode is also STILL driving me crazy. These things were not improvements.

I agree, its a step backwards in some ways, but maybe it makes sense in that it doesn’t change any levels outside of the selected range.

There is a workaround: instead of going to the top of the selected region to bring up the little adjust level arrow tool, grab one of the selected automation points instead. Then, just after you start dragging, hold down the command key to make the automation points stay at their time positions as you drag them. This does the same thing as dragging up and down from the top of the selection, but it doesn’t create the new automation points at the edges of the selected region.

No, I’m sorry but it doesn’t make any sense because it isn’t in fact changing the levels of the outer 2 points that I’ve grabbed. I mean it is, but with no ramp up to/from the next points. That kind of specific change should be the alt-key modified version not the default.

I appreciate the work around suggestion. One more thing to worry about in terms of whether the points move in time if I didn’t hit the command properly - it’s a step backwards from what it was and a really annoying one for my workflow, but your work around will definitely improve things. Thanks! Glad I posted about it so I could get your input!

“it isn’t in fact changing the levels of the outer 2 points that I’ve grabbed.”

It does for me. Highlight a range of points with the “Object Selection” (regular arrow) tool. Then grab an automation point somewhere within the selection. Once you start dragging up or down, hold down Command. It does ramp the automation to the prior and next points outside of the selection range. I’m not sure how you would not hit Command properly. If you don’t you would see the points move in time and then you could adjust your finger on the keyboard until you are hitting it right and the points will snap back into place.

While I think it makes some logical sense that the default behavior would be to only move the points that you have selected and not adjust volume levels outside of the selection range, I agree with you that in actual practice the behaviors should be swapped. Both ways should also work with the adjust level arrow at the top of the selection range in conjunction with Command. Having to grab an automation point to get the ramping behavior is an unnecessary step, and I think it was a mistake on the programmer’s part.

This is a game changer (in a bad way) for me.

Please steinberg, stop screwing around with functionality. Can you please return this to it’s previous behaviour?

What has also been broken is the ability to RELATIVELY pull down the front or wend of a group of points. It’s absolutely impossible to understand why you would want to create events in this way. It’s not good.


“What has also been broken is the ability to RELATIVELY pull down the front or wend of a group of points.”

This also still works on my machine. And again, pulling down points and creating ramps to the next and prior automation point still works as well. Its added functionality. Not lost it. You can do it both ways now instead of always creating ramps where you sometimes don’t want them.

Mac 10.13.5
Nuendo 8.2.10

I think we might have a slight cross purpose going on. I am talking about the ability to edit a group of points, rather like in the MIDI automation lane.

In N7, after selecting a range of events (either automation events or MIDI controller events) there was a fantastic feature where if you dragged the left and or right hand most exteme point of the selection area, events would be scaled, in a relative manner. It would be possible for example to fade in some events, yet keep their relative values - a bumpy mountain would stay bumpy but be reduced on the left only. It was brilliant.

Here is a video of N7 doing just this:

With N8, the same edit creates new events at the perimeter of the section zone. Out still does the relative thing, but with extra events added which I don’t want. Your clever suggestion of grabbing an actual event, (automation point) rather than the selection zone extremity points, is great (thanks) apart from the fact that you cannot thereby achieve the relative scaling I have become used to in N7.

This is a video of N8:

It is definitely different, and I definitely have not found out how to do the relative scale edit in N8.


PS the feature still works as expected in the MIDI edit window.

I understand, but I think the new way is actually a plus for this reason:
In the old behavior, there is no way to keep the automation to either side of the range from being effected. In the new way, all you have to do is delete the two points that are left behind after the adjustment. This gives you a choice.

I do think, however, that it would be best if the choice to create the new automation points was achieved by either holding down Command (Mac) or not, rather than having to delete the two new automation points. This should also be the behavior of adjusting the levels of the entire range from the top of the selection, rather than having to grab an automation point. It is sloppy, inconsistent behavior.

Anyone else upset with this change?

This is a daily, nay, hourly annoyance now.

How can I successfully reproduce the behaviour of N7? I just want to drag automation events, with the same relativistic behaviour as before, WITHOUT ADDING NEW EVENTS!!! I literally cannot reproduce what I used to be able to do.

Hit this issue again today. Am I the only one? It can’t be.

I tried this and it seemed inconsistent. However, I’m wondering if automation node proximity is the consistent factor. In other words, looking at your two videos:

  • In the N7 example the left-most selected node is so close to the unselected node immediately before it that it doesn’t place a new node between the two automatically.

  • In the N8 example the distance between the left-most selected node and the one before it (that we can’t see) is large enough that Nuendo automatically adds a node.

You can try this by creating an automation node right before the first node you intend to select. If you do that close enough: do you still get the automatically added node?

Incidentally: To me this behavior seems counter-intuitive and wrong.

I don’t have a problem with either behavior, but there seems to be no logical reason for why this should apply only on the beginning of the range you’re changing and not on the end. Why only adjust this on the first node and not the last? That makes no sense to me.

The only work-around I can see right now is to create a macro that essentially consists of;

  1. “navigate - left” (default left arrow I believe), which selects the added node, and then
  2. “edit - delete”

This unfortunately only works if you’re using the pointer tool to select already existing nodes. If you used the range tool and new nodes were created they aren’t automatically selected, so “navigate - left” has no effect other than to shift the selection range, which isn’t what we want to do.

Yes, it works if you grab the one of the points, but that means…grabbing one of the points. The way it worked before N8 is you could just grab the arrow in the middle and drag up or down, not risking moving the points in time or accidentally adding a new point etc. Bottom line, it worked better the old way. It’s always frustrating when a software company devotes hours to making something very basic that worked fine, worse.