[ISSUE] VCA ___ (controls other than level)

Could you please stop confusing “linked tracks” with VCAs.

If you have tracks controlled by a VCA then pressing solo on an individual track does not solo all.
If you press solo ON THE VCA they should all solo.

Why shouldn’t record be the same? If you don’t want that functionality you don’t have to press the button. It’s exactly that simple. I don’t think you fully see how VCAs work.

Could you please stop confusing “linked tracks” with VCAs

I have the impression that it is you who wants to achieve the same thing (linking tracks) through VCA’s.
It are indeed two different things. And they live happily next to each other.

First of all, why is it a problem to do exactly that thing by linking faders/tracks in the old fashioned way?
Secondly, I don’t recall ever seeing anyone using VCA faders for anything other than final mixing.

I don’t think you fully see how VCAs work.

A VCA is a voltage controlled amplifier.
It offsets the voltage of the faders assigned to that VCA, thereby creating a dual layer level control.
That is the definition of a VCA, and that’s how they have always worked on the traditional consoles.

For the record, I know that PT VCA’s have a rec-arm function; this is not about copying functions from another DAW, but about implementing functionality with a clear vision. Which indeed results in pro and contra’s.
I support the Steinbertg KISS approach very much, and as said, some things are missing at the moment.


I use the VCAs in PT always, from the very beginning in editing, just for solo/mute the parts of my session I don’t want to hear atm. They are constantly mapped to my first controller-page, even if I don’t mix. So for me VCAs without Solo/Mute makes less sense. And I have to say that the advertising pics I saw online let me assume, that there is solo/mute on VCAs.

Solo/Mute isto come, no worries.


I’m talking about the technical aspect of it, not the practical one. What I am proposing has absolutely nothing to do with linking, and I made that clear. “Linking” tracks to perform solo/mute/rec is no more “linking” than is adjusting levels. It’d all work the same way, which is the way it works practically in PT, which is that the tracks that belong to the VCA respond in tandem to the controls activated on the VCA - BUT - you still have individual control of the tracks.

Was that not clear? How is the above “linking tracks”?

Why is it a problem to perform level changes by linking faders the old fashioned way? Your question makes no sense. The whole point of using VCAs is increased convenience. Why is this any different than level? You could link all your gunshot sound effects tracks and they’d live next to your gun handling foley tracks living next to your other foley tracks and to the left of the gunshot tracks you have the impact tracks and the… you get the picture… very wide project with many tracks… and then you can ask the question: “Why is it a problem to do exactly that by linking faders/tracks”? and the answer is “Because the entire project is very wide and it’s inconvenient to change the level (or solo or mute) like that”. Same thing applies to changing rec status.

As to your second point, I don’t understand it. If you’re on a stage and you want to record enable your stems to punch in a fix is that not “final mixing”? Seems like meaningless splitting of hairs to me.

Ok, fine. As I already said: If included, nobody that ever uses Nuendo has to push the button. It can just sit there, completely unusued - like it is in the video of Nuendo 7 VCA functionality btw. So what are the “pro” / “con” in this case in your opinion?

About copying functions from another DAW and vision: Sometimes people here sound like they don’t want to “copy” from other DAWs because Nuendo has to be special. But what’s the point? More people use PT in post than use Nuendo. Regardless of whether it’s about growing market share or just getting more engineers - or - just making an app better, why is “copying” even an issue worth bringing up?

If there’s a “vision” I’m missing here then why don’t someone tell us what it is so we know.

A lot of what Nuendo does is very very far from KISS when compared to other apps. I don’t have a problem with it because it’s worth-while trade-off as long as stuff works properly.

I have to run, do I can’t answer in detail.
But I remembered a thread in the Cubase forums about ths C8 VCA behaviour.


I am well aware of what’s said in that discussion, and it’s exactly the confusion I’m talking about.

One simple question:
Now that the “saved grouping settings” bug for the VCA/Linking feature in C… is fixed, do you prefer the C… or the Nuendo 7 VCA implementation?

Before the difference is clear, and the way preferred, it is of no use of keep the discussion going.

The NON working Solo and Mute button in Nuendo is of corse a bug, and will be fixed soon.

Over and out… for now :wink:

The Nuendo implementation is supposedly lacking features, so until those features show up it’s really like comparing apples with oranges. I do agree that “linking” is better separated from VCA functionality though.

Sorry, I’m not sure I understand what the above means.

You wrote:

“What I don’t want, is the ability to record arm all tracks from a VCA fader/group with a single button.
I don’t want to let all tracks in a VCA group be selected when clicking a single track.”

The two above are connected in Cubase (if I understand it correctly) because the VCAs are connected via “linked channels”. That’s not supposed to happen in Nuendo 7 because that’s not how VCAs connect to faders. So IN NUENDO those two things are entirely separate issues.

See the difference now and why I’m saying that adding solo/mute/rec/input monitoring etc doesn’t matter to you if you don’t want to use it? It’s because if you were to add that in Nuendo, since it doesn’t create an actual “link-group”, it wouldn’t create the situation you’re talking about not wanting.

You know what I mean by now :wink:

We are basically agree…

But I do NOT want the record arm button, but can agree upon giving the rec-arm button an option in the prefs (enable/disable).

I want the VCA’s to work as a regular/original VCA system, with Level, Mute, and Solo automation possibilities.

All that extra stuff I want included in the Grouping/Linking feature. I do NOT wanna think about all other linked/grouped options when doing VCA fader/mute/solo rides.

As I said: I do think we are very close to agree. No more from me before the Mute/Solo button bug is fixed.

PS. Let’s just say that I have had an accident with it in a Cubase project.
In the event that the VCA’s are NOT signal routing dependent, there can be a challenge to track down an accidental run in “record ready mode”. Especially when using nested VCA’s.

Later :slight_smile:

I still don’t see how a rec button is confusing or bad for functionality if it works like solo/mute.

For example: “Return to start position at stop” (transport) is something that affects all users. You press play, you press stop, and what then happens affects us all. It makes sense to have a preference and/or toggle switch.

In the case of a VCA button it only becomes an active function if you press it. Don’t want to trigger rec of all tracks from the VCA they belong to? Don’t push the button. You don’t need a preference for it. You only need to not push a button.

If engineers today can’t not push a big red button in a DAW then, oh well… this is supposed to be a “pro” application I tell myself at least…

Nuendo 7 is awesome!

Just wanted to make that clear in case someone thinks I’m just whining. If Solo/Mute is the only thing that makes it to the VCAs then I’m fine with it, and all other added features are fantastic as far as I can see. I can’t see a single DAW being better than this one.

I’m quite happy about it.

Without losing myself into details, and limiting the discussion to the “logic” behind VCA faders:
It is possible to include FX tracks and/or Group tracks within a VCA group.
None of these tracks have a “record” function.
So therefore it is not logical at all that the VCA fader has a rec-arm button.

Just out of curiosity, why is it that the old fashioned “linking” is a problem for you?
So, why don’t you link the channels (there are plenty of options to only link a few parameters) to rec-arm your tracks.
Why do you want to do this at all cost with VCA faders?
Just asking, not arguing.


I don’t think that makes it illogical at all. If a track can’t be record armed then it won’t be record armed.

I think I wrote it earlier. It’s about ease of use and managing large projects. If I use the linking feature you talk about then obviously I need to navigate to the tracks in question in order to press record on one of them. This is exactly the same thing as pressing solo. If I were to use “linking” then I have to actually find a track within that link-group and press its solo button. Why are we letting solo be a part of VCAs if we can do it with linking? Exactly the same reason: It’s easier. You have your VCAs in one place, and you can access whatever “group of tracks” you need at any time by just using that one VCA channel. Putting all drum tracks into record for a punch-in, or all stems in a post mix, is easy, because the VCA for those tracks sits next to all the other “food groups” of tracks (i.e. guitars, keyboards, vocals, sound effects, dialog, whatever).

It’s about navigation when it comes to the buttons. It’s about more when it comes to volume control. But I hope you at least agree that “rec” is exactly the same in that respect as “mute” and “solo”, right? If we can use linking for rec, we can use it for solo and mute, right?

So why the difference?


Have you NOT ever touched a wrong button in a DAW by accident?
To hit the record button for multiple tracks in VCA group is one thing you do NOT want to do by accident.

Engineers today… he he. I am a retired (or reached the riterement age) audio engineer (40 years +) :laughing: Supposed to be a “pro” :wink: :smiley: :laughing: :mrgreen:

PS. I have also used Nuendo since v1.6 and Cubase SX, so… Chill :wink:

I’m with Lydiot on this one. Again I will say look towards PT - they have had VCA faders for a long time now and have had enough user reports and feedback to get that feature right. Why re-invent the wheel?

I am chill.

I can still press “rec” by mistake on the audio tracks. In the project window there’s the settings for what is shown on the tracks, including buttons. So “yes”, I agree that it could be something set in a preference. But I just don’t think your argument holds. “Record” surely is one of the more important functions of a DAW (or console) and I’d never ever not pay a large amount of attention to what channel I’m pressing “rec” on. With color coding this is even less of an issue. You could make the whole channel red as a traffic light and none of the others need to have that color. That’s how I’ve set up my templates, with all my outputs through which my stems go in bright red. I NEVER touch them. If I see red, I know to stay away.

I just think you’re making this into a way bigger issue than it needs to be.

I think there is truth to the above.

Or you into a lesser one… :wink:

And yes, I know the color red is often representing Danger, Danger, Watch Out :slight_smile:

Well, depends on the way you stick things into your head. (For your use anyway)

Why do you think of a VCA fader as a sort of “master” fader which controls other faders?
Would’nt it work in the same way if the VCA fader was part of that group?

And why do you think you have to select one of the linked faders to activate something, while you can as easily create an extra dummy which is suppose to control the rest?

If I were you, I would create a folder or, or an area, where I put a bunch of dummy faders -or isolated faders- that control different functions. And name them accordingly. “Rec arm drums” “volume harmonies” “breaks mute”

Quick overview, no hassle, and virtually unlimited linking optIons(what to link and what not).
Wouldn’t that give you more, and easier options than VCA’s?

Don’t get me wrong, I am not discussing for the sake of having an argument, I just think that:
A) there are more convenient options to achieve what you want to do
B) i am very found of the idea to totally separate the functioning of VCA’s from grouping or linking, because most of the people already have a hard time understaning what the difference is between grouping/linking and VCA’s. There is absolutely no relationship between both functions, so IMO, anything, any function that in some way suggests that it is a sort of linking, should be avoided.

A VCA sort of “trims” the volume of any fader within that VCA group, and any fader which is part if that group can be controlled individually without affecting any other fader within that VCA group, or the “master VCA fader”. Entering or leaving a VCA group has no effect whatsoever to that or any other fader.
That is the basic philiosophy of VCA’s.

But again, this is my personal opinion.
And I can see, and understand, your point of view.
We just have different opinions. And don’t worry, I have no influence on the decisionmakers.