Many of us were caught out by this. It was the user base, @Fredo yourself included, that helped us navigate our way through to using initial parameters for this particular issue with the way VCA’s we’re implemented. It was not at all intuitive coming from Pro Tools. It was not seen as an issue by Steinberg at the beginning as far as I remember, so having to add initial Parameters most certainly did feel like a work around and to be frank, still does.
The ‘problem’ is with this being inconsistent within Nuendo, not between it and other DAWs.
If you only have a ‘clean’ audio track with no automation written then wherever you leave the fader is where it will be when you open up the project again. It’ll retain its position after save/close/revert. This is true even if you have a VCA with automation that goes from unity down to -oo, but only as long as you’re not located where -oo is.
So in other words Nuendo does save information about where a fader is located even though there aren’t literally “initial parameters” written on its automation track. If that wasn’t the case then all faders would either randomly locate to some random value or all snap to zero. But they don’t. They follow the logic that they open where they were when the project was saved barring any other information. So using VCAs is as if that overrides that data if the VCA is at -oo. But not if it isn’t.
That’s inconsistent and has nothing to do with initial parameter value automation. I think that’s what people are pointing out. Yes, initial parameters solves it, but it doesn’t make it less inconsistent the way it’s currently working.
2 Likes
This was a user request when the new automation system was introduced. (Remember that the Cubase userbase massively protested and wanted their “old” system back - and indeed have gotting it back …)
If I remember well …
The idea was to be able to mix without automation up to a certain point. Let’s call it a premix.
That was the point where the user wanted to start using automation. So the request was to write parameters -for all parameters, also plugins- as a starting point.
I know that a lot can be said, and a lot can be debated if it makes sense or not.
Just like the “old” Cubase system was perfectly possible with the new Nuendo automation system. All that needed to be done was enable “write to end” permanently. But that turned out to be a major issue for the users.
Anyway, compromises have been made.
It is what it is.
This is how it works.
The only thing I really don’t understand is: What is the problem with writing initial parameters?
Is it THAT much work?
I only do this once every few months: When I make a new template.
No big deal.
Fredo
Just a thought for future verisons, is it possible to make it so that when you create a new channel it creates an initial node at the top of the project and then when in read (or automation off) mode, if you move the fader it sets that initial node to whatever value you moved it to? This way VCAs always work from the get go because there’s always an initial node from when the track is created & you can still create a static mix in read mode for those cubase users that want to do that
1 Like
thx. Will add that to my template then
The problem is that if you don’t know all those details, it will bite you.
This is bad design. The fact that it was the result of a compromise doesn’t make it less of a bad design.
Steinberg seem to be able to stand up for what they think is right (see the recent VST2 thing), so it’s really bizarre they settled for a compromised system that’s bad for everybody (instead of being “bad” only for the Cubase crowd, who would relent in the end.)
What is the problem with writing initial parameters?
Because it puts the burden of conforming basic automation functionality of the software on to the user. Yes, it’s an easy workaround so long as you do not forget to add the initial parameter in the heat of battle (adding new tracks etc.). There is no margin of error in preventing future pain and headache. This workaround assumes everyone sticks to a template during workflow.
If this is not fixable, I would argue it’s on Steinberg to provide a workaround: ie. an option to automatically insert an initial parameter on creation of a new track.
Just to be clear (since I’ve recently re-transitioned into Nuendo after a couple of years in Logic) before asking any unnecessary follow-up questions:
This only applies to automation of VCA faders? Or all faders? So all VCAs need an initial automation point?
It applies to the tracks controlled by VCAs. Best practice would be to put automation points on the tracks that are controlled (as well as VCAs, in my opinion).
Ok, a followup discussion then: Won’t that render the mixer/fader useless?
From what I understand, if you have an initial automation point, that will always reset the volume. You would have to do all volume adjustments in the automation lane of those channels, correct?
An example: I have about 1000 tracks in my template. I was thinking about creating a VCA controlling all the short strings. But then, that would force me to create an initial automation point for all those instruments controlled by the VCA, and therefore none of those would conveniently respond to anything I do in the mixer, or with the CC121-fader. If I don’t always enable write mode and change the volume.
OR, I could disable read mode until I need to automate something with the VCA. But then I’d have to choose not to use any other automation (besides volume) as well.
If this is correct, that would render VCA’s so complicated workflow wise so it’s no point using them. At least not in my situation.
Also, adding initial automation points to 1000 tracks will take quite a while.
Feel free to correct me if these statements are inaccurate.
Well, one thing I suppose you could do is to set up a macro that engages auto “preview”, “latch” and set fill settings to beginning/end. So you press the macro and I think it would behave as if there were no automation nodes (because you’re in “latch”) and then when you punch out of that preview it should write that automation to beginning/end. It would be as if you had the automation point at the beginning and just moved it to the level you wanted.
I don’t work that way but off the top of my head it seems like a solution.
And just for reference - when I do post (by myself) I typically start with the production audio tracks and when I do the initial edit I write automation as well. My first pass of dialog editing I level things out and because of that I never need levels untouched. I get that if you’re coming from music it doesn’t seem ‘reasonable’. I started in music and indeed faders weren’t locked by automation. Just set levels ‘roughly’ and then automate. But post is a bit different I think.
PS: Isn’t there a command or function for setting initial automation points? I don’t use it but I recall there is something like it… Fredo?
there is, it is located in automation panel
2 Likes
Nope.
Once you get your head around the automation system, it is all pretty simple.
If you want to “invisibly” play with your faders or whatever parameter up until a certain point, you just lock the automation system “to front” and “to end”. Or only “to end”. At you own convenience.
The automation system will work in the background, you will never notice.
This also means that any parameter you touch will be “written” and remembered.
No more incidently moved faders or parameters, you can always go back to your reference point.
As soon as you disable the “to end”/“to start” automation lock, you can start tweaking the automation (be it my touch/trim/whatever) and in any mode (Loop/To End/To Front …)
Once you start using the automation to it’s full capabilities, you will never want to mix without.
It’s extremely powerful and will make your life/job much easier.
Fredo
4 Likes
Automation panel/Functions menu/
But as explained above, once you get your head around the automation system, it all begins to make sense.
Fredo
1 Like
The workaround described is pretty terrible for music mixing. Bottom line is it is a broken system and workarounds are required. I hope Steinberg fixes VCAs (especially with automation) as they’ve never worked correctly since their introduction. If you’re mixing for music I’d almost avoid them entirely unless you are aware of the bugs/workarounds and check that the result you get is the intended one.
2 Likes
I really don’t see how the workaround is “terrible” though. It takes literally one key press to engage the behavior you want and once that’s done automation points have been adjust to top/end.
twelvetwelve is likely referring towards the dynamic nature of “music mixing” where changes happen often and on-the-fly, and where it can be easy to overlook such a step, leading towards later disaster. I do understand how the workaround is probably not a big deal for post-production users who traditionally stick to their well-honed templates.
the thing that bother’s me is that it’s not even documented in the manual so if you don’t know, you basically have to go through a session of headaches (like I did) before you find out that there is a work around.
What Fredo has said was basically it for me. It took a while to get my head around it. Seemed totally non intuitive and illogical. I’m fine now but, the lack of documentation mentioned above was extremely unhelpful. Though I’m now used to the workflow, it still feels like a fudge. Probably just me I imagine!
2 Likes
Yeah I can see how this might be a problem for some engineers whom are used to working more in music and may not be automating things as much, or more selective on what tracks they want automation on etc and therefore can pose the issue. However like Fredo is describing above it all actually makes sense on why it works as it does and when you have animals, kids around (if working remotely these days) your faders may get moved or shifted by accident etc etc. Writing initial parameters is good practice when mixing also and keeping all on READ> Another issue that can arise from human error when all tracks during a mix are not READ enabled is if you press for example the Global WRITE OR READ button by accident or not intended it will turn READ on all of your tracks and if you copied automation from other clips without knowing it may activate on tracks you didn’t want.