Because Steinberg Forums
Anyway, this isn’t a bug, it’s a limitation of the program. A bug is when something does not work as it is designed to.
The Issue Reports forum should be called Bug Reports imo, its purpose would be clearer to people.
It’s a well known Cubendo limitation/deficiency in any case.
I went ahead and submitted a feature request.
You can call this issue what you want, but it’s not working the way the implementation suggests and implies that it should work.
I hate to be a complainer, but Steinberg has added a lot of new features in the last few years that don’t really address my needs at all. (For example the last thing I can imagine ever using is the whole chord track feature…) I understand they are developing the features they perceive as the most attractive to the most users, and that, for example, implementing external effect routing that saves with the project and doesn’t get overridden when other project use the I/O is not a huge priority because not that many people use external effects.
However, I would guess that this (inaccurate automation) limitation is not that well known among users, or else more people would be clamoring for it to work better. Even if this is mostly a problem in playback/real time export, the idea that it is impossible to accurately hear the result of the automation prior to export is fairly disturbing because most of us make decisions based upon what we hear, then assume that the software will faithfully render what we’ve done. So I really think it is an issue that affects a lot more users than the small subset of us who need to use real time export, and it’s tempting to believe Steinberg wold actually prefer not to have to deal with it because it’s not as sexy to essentially fix something that’s broken as opposed to rolling out flashy new features. Plus it would require admitting that it’s broken to (what I believe to be) the vast majority of Cubase users who don’t have time for forums, aren’t aware of this limitation, and assume that what they hear during playback is exactly what the export will sound like. If the automation point is really only accurate give or take 10ms, I tend to believe there should be a warning that pops up the first time you try to use them. This explains a lot of ghosts I’ve tried to track down in the past - and, ironically enough it was the new alt to transient feature that made the problem too obvious for me to attribute to something other than what Cubase was doing. People pay me to help them make records, I have a lot of happy clients, and I’m not inexperienced or incompetent. My ears work fine. Yet I was unaware of this problem until this week after 14 years of using Cubase.
yeah it’s ‘offer’ with higher latencies, w/ lower latencies automation is ‘swifter’. i was reading a rundown of the vst3 sdk and it mentioned providing more precise automation. so chances are there is a design limitation of the vst2x format to deliver precise automation? i’d need a dev to confirm or deny this though. at any rate it is extremely annoying; not that it’s any consolation but all daws i’ve tried seemed to have suffered from similar issues.
Agree it is well known and IMHO for most uses not a problem.
It’s clearly not well-known.
Now, seeing that you moderators typically go on ‘cleanup’-binges; where can I read up on this design? I’d like to read in a document just what the implications are.
You basically just have to place your automation points where nothing bad will happen if the automation actually happens a few ms early or late (seems like about 10ms on my system at 88.2 kHz, 1024 buffer.
More detail concerning how I arrived at that figure: Soft-eLicenser (SeL) FAQ - Cubase - Steinberg Forums