linking automation points

dear all,

switching again from pyramix to nuendo for current projects, i’m trying to find a way to link automation-points between tracks - the manual stating that linking (control-link) between channels doesn’t link the corresponding automation-tracks.
any hidden shortcut or trick that i haven’t found yet?


not sure if this will solve your issue exactly, but when selecting an automation range, if more than one automation lane is selected (lasso’ed around), and you get the automation ‘boxes’ with handles on the edges, you can use modifier keys (can’t remember which exactly) to alter all the selected automation events [on all tracks] at once. to exactly copy a curve onto another parameter’s automation lane, i guess you have to resort to copy&paste (the ‘range tool’ works really well for this purpose btw).

I have looked for this kind of function before and haven’t been able to find it. If you could find out how to do this for us it would be great!


Not sure what you want to achieve.
Either just use the range tool to copy the automation from one track to another, so they are identical.
Then link them.
(And later on, they will both be updated when you write automation one one of both)

Or you ar asking for VCA faders, where channels are “slaved” to a master fader.

First one you can do now, second one hopefully in one of the later versions.


hey fredo,

want i want to do: i’m for ex. working often on classical recordings. lots of different stereo-systems put in different places, but all tracks recorded as mono ones. while mixing, i’d like to write automation with the pen straight in the linked tracks of the concerned pairs.
so no coyping of any kind wanted here, as i had to automate the left or right channel of my stereo-pairs first, then copy/link, etc. - no way to hear right away what i’d be doing.
VCA-faders would be a solution, yes… but it could be as simple as having the option to link the automation-events together with the other linkable-parameters. seems so basic to me…

for the moment, all is fine as long as i have a good controller to write my automation. on the road, mostly not the case, and a major pita compared to what i’m used to.


The idea is to be able to adjust the automation on several tracks at the same time after simply lassoing existing automation points. For example, move a send on three back vox tracks up 2 db in one go (or their volumes). Sometimes doing this through a group doesn’t quite work and it needs to be done on individual tracks (before the group).


see the vid. the modifiers i used were ctrl+shift for absolute volume gain shift, and ctrl+alt+shift for the fade-in and fade-out. (i haven’t figured out a way to write the same events at once with the draw [pencil] tool to both. i don’t reckon that’s possible at the moment and i’d consider that quite a drawback. please correct me if this is easily possible. currently if i gang all that’s possible, writing common automation data still isn’t covered.)

That’s terrific! Thanks.


…haven’t found a way to link the writing of event envelopes either.


Can we make this a feature request?
I often work with split stereo files from AAF coming from AVID.
Whenever I want to draw automation instead of just riding the fader the automation will only update on one of both channels even if they are linked. Having to bulk select is annoying…


That seems logical to me.
If the automation lines would be linked when drawning automation with a pencil, you would lose the ability to slightly modify one of both automation lines. For example a click in oen of both channels. Treating both channels differently is the whole purpose of split channels. If you always want to keep both channels in releation to each other, then this should be a stereo file. There is a reason why there are stereo and mono files …
And that Avid had a technical problem with that for a long time, doesn’t mean that this has become the standard.

For those who are not drawing the automation by pencil, the solution would be VCA faders.



i’d suggest linking automation events be added as another ganging option in the linking tracks dialog; and/or enable a modifier key to be used in conjunction w/ the pencil tool that would draw identical events to all selected automation ranges.

This has been a longstanding personal gripe of mine. In pro tools when you link 2 or more channels then draw automation it effects all grouped/linked channels. Always seemed very inconsistent in nuendo that physically moving the faders will effect linked channels but inputting them by hand (in the arrange page) doesn’t. If you want to change one channel you should just be able to suspend the link…work on one channel…and then turn on the link again. For me, trim mode has been the workaround, which you can use offline (I.e. While the transport is stopped). It would be much easier if you could just link multiple faders and then be able to input automation by hand to all linked channels. At least it would be nice to have as an option.

I think the problem is much deeper with a general problem with “linking” being just too rudimentary and not sufficiently thought through. In PT I use groups all the time - when automating manually or editing it, when editing in the edit window, when setting routing etc - and without it done right in Nuendo I just lose time, every single time I work in it. I cringe every time I see add-ons released by Steinberg since those resources would be much better used bringing the basic application - the foundation of the work we do - into this decade as far as some basic functionality is concerned.

By the way David, I saw Chaka two weeks ago. It was… interesting… I envy you!

…well - most of the projects i work on do not contain stereo files, but split-stuff. and anyway - besides stereo-material: arrays, B-format tracks, etc.



Unfortunately we are not living in a perfect world. There is no way I can convince all Avid editors I work with that stereo interleaved is the way to go. In fact ALL of the audio I receive in aaf is split stereo.
Pro Tools does a good job dealing with these files. Nuendo does not.

I’m just a customer speaking about my grief, here. Workflow over new features if you ask me…

Fwiw, Whether you’re linking stereo interleaved or mono tracks is actually besides the point. The same issue exists linking any combination of multiple tracks.

I agree with Lydiot that “linking” still needs an overhaul. It got some minor improvements with version 6 but it’s still pretty rudimentary.

Then it makes me wonder why you are going through all the hassle that dual-mono tracks bring?
Just convert them to stereo tracks, that’s what the “convert Tracks” feature is for.

And as far as I know, PT has switched to using stereo tracks a pretty long time ago …


I am aware of the convert tracks feature, thanks. And I was very enthusiastic when It arrived.
Unfortunately it refuses to work as soon as a fade is off by the slightest bit on one channel.
I stopped using it, it just stole too much of my time to look though the projects and find those bits.


I understand that.
The problem is that there is no “inbetween” or “fix user errors” solution.
If you let the merge tracks function ignore any differences, you would miss a ton of “It needs to be like that” differences that the previous editor has put in. Or you would be unable to find unwanted mistakes. I can’t count the masses of dual-mono tracks I’ve found where the channels were shifted a couple of frames in time.

Basically, it comes down to user error or carelessness. And unfortunately, there are very little tools that are so smart that they can identify these. Therefore I stand behind the “it matches” or “it doesn’t match” approach.

But I agree with you, it’s a PITA dealing with such projects.
But admit, the frustration actually begins with cleaning up the project. Finding tracks that belong to each other, moving them to unique tracks, finding leftovers, checking automation, clip levels, etc …