Not at all. The action is trivial. Provided that you are already in possession of the knowledge that it is necessary.
Once you know what happens, you avoid it.
It’s exactly the same thing with an electrical panel. You know that this specific 16A relay will trip the main if you switch it on. That’s why the electrician suggests that you just don’t use it. Replacing it is a hassle.
If someone has a template of audio tracks and VCA links with their initial parameters set, great!
But most often than not, it happens that someone is adding new tracks in the middle of a project, recording onto them, deciding at some point later on that their volume could be scaled relatively with a VCA, they create the link, forget about it and wonder what’s wrong next time they open up the project. And then, they could find this thread with luck, learn the trick, and use automation on the ganged tracks from then on.
yes it is if you add an automation event to an audio track, you can’t freely move the fader anymore. in my case this is the whole point of using a VCA: automate the volume without locking the fader
I’ve been doing precisely this for many years: 1) applying volume automation on audio tracks and 2) moving their volume faders freely—sometimes with my eyes closed to boost concentration. So yes, it can be done in Cubase.
I’m feeling a point is being missed here. I think what Salvattore was saying was that after automation has been written the faders will snap back to automation settings. So anyone who wants to freely move the faders without them snapping to any position at all can’t do that once automation has been written*. Of course, while applying automation faders can be moved “freely” as long as you are touching them while in “Touch” or if using “Latch”. But I don’t think that was the point.
*Workaround and caveat is using “Latch” with “Fill” options set and locked to “To Start” and “To End” which should feel like there was no automation, yet would finish each automation pass with automation points beginning to end where faders were last released.
Let me break it down further: (a) volume automation has been written to the audio track, (b) the automation is set to read (R) mode, and (c) the audio track’s volume fader is moved freely and accurately.
I kindly ask you to stay out of the conversations I’m having with other members, and I will do the same.
For the rest of the participants in this thread: yes, in Cubase, a user can write volume automation to an audio track and then move the fader freely and accurately. Explore Cubase—it’s a lovely piece of software!
I would stay out of it if I thought you actually understood what they were saying. Every single time I’ve heard people say they want to be able to move the fader freely they have been talking about the way the fader moves WITHOUT automation having been written, and after automation has been written the fader cannot be moved the same way. THAT is what I have seen people refer to when they have said “freely”.
And what does “freely and accurately” mean in this case?
You know I’m probably right, why are you pushing this?
This is a public forum. It’s perfectly reasonable for him to ask you quantifying questions to explain your statements, particularly regarding a subject where the specific, explicit details are critical for others to understand the scope of the issue, how and when it manifests itself, and what we can do to address it.
Even with 192 posts in this thread, and multiple other threads regarding this topic, poorly explained posts don’t contribute to clarifying the overall problem.
Not everyone trying to understand this is actively participating - nor should people like me who would rather keep their pie holes shut while we try and listen to the wisdom the collective has to offer.
@Aivaras
I am not aware of @MattiasNYC displaying any sort of bad manners nor would I expect anything like it. Matthias is a well-respected member of this community and his expertise and contributions are much appreciated.
I don’t get this either. I can move the fader but upon release it will snap back to the current automation value.
Is that what you mean or do you mean something else?