Virgin Territory: DON'T read ANY automation in virgint territory EVER

To me a huge flaw in VT - and the only reason I don’t use it - is that whenever you locate in your timeline automation is read from the preceding automation node. The way I see it that pretty much completely invalidates the concept in a great deal of situations.

In other words: If you enable VT, locate to 1 minute into the project’s timeline, write volume automation for 30 seconds, and then stop, you would think that anywhere outside of that 30 second section automation will never be read, because that territory is “virgin”. However, if you move the position of the fader and then locate to 3 minutes, it will read the last value of the written automation.

It’s particularly unfortunate if you choose to enable cycle mode and loop a section trying to find levels. When the playback ‘head’ locates back to the beginning of the loop it will read last written automation.

There is no solution to this other than reprogramming the functionality (and it doesn’t seem like it should be that hard). Engaging any other automation mode, such as latch-trim for example, only makes VT unnecessary (in other words, if you’re going to enable latch-trim at all then why use VT in the first place?).

So, Steinberg, please take some time and tweak this so it’s finally meaningful. We’ve had Virgin Territories for years and I’m a bit surprised it hasn’t been addressed yet.

hum… this is the only way to have virgin territories usable… what the point of cubase not reading the last point when you move??.. as when you play from the start of the song, this point will be read, so this is the correct way of VT to work, to read the last value when you move in a "virgin territory … is you want disengage automation and be able to do things cubase won’t remember, what the point !!! Actualy VT is now broken and works as you wanted it to be… totaly unusable… good luck with that… Maybe you will explain me now how you project to use VT with that malfunction… i’m curious… :frowning:

I think we had this discussion before, right?

I would expect that if I’m in VT no automation is being read. At all. This would allow me to jump to any scene in a TV show or film or commercial and start working on a balance between all elements without faders jumping around as soon as I locate the playback head. That’s logical. I also think it’s convenient.

What’s the point of not reading the “last point” when I move? It’s that I don’t have to lose all my tested settings by making the mistake of locating before punching automation, in addition to it being illogical and counter-intuitive.

The way I see it, and other people, is that it is now working intuitively and… well… “better” or “correctly”.

But seriously, you can just go back and re-read the conversation we had before, because I’m sure I wrote pretty specifically what the point of all of this was. I hope this makes it into Nuendo, should I at some point upgrade to v8.

hum… so what the point to have automation in “read” mode if you’re testing ??? you have just to disengage “read” then when you have the right volume you engage write?? isn’t it ? you don’t see what the point that automation is read so that when you write you start from where you really are ?? hum… The point that cubase read the last point is that it is the only way that it reflects the value as it will be when you play the song from the begining… if not you would always be mistaken when moving in the project (as it is now) … At first I too didn’t understood the way VT worked, but after I understood, it is the only way for it to be usable… and it is very usefull inded (not now that it is broken since 9.5, completly useless…drive me mad)

as it is now, acocrding to you it is very usefull, hum… explain me how usefull it is when you have to click where you have automation so that your volume etc are right… if you move just after the automation, the volume stays as it was where you were before… let’s say you have a track at -10dB at the begining, you move in the middle of the song where it is at -2dB, but it stay at -10dB because you moved just after the automation data… how usefull is this ? what the point?

For the third or fourth time: When you stop playback you effectively relocate on the timeline. When you relocate on the timeline automation data is read from the previous automation point even though you’re in virgin territory. Since you can’t have “write” without having “read” it means that all it takes for you to lose your new settings is locating within that virgin territory.

But let me give you an example of why this is inconvenient;

Suppose I have a time line where I have different ranges of content, let’s call the areas A, B, C, D and E. I have written automation to A and E already, and now for whatever reason I want to automate C. I locate to C and it immediately reads automation from A. Fine. I hit play and move my faders to a starting point for C that I like, and I want to use that as a starting value and then write automation continuously across C. I now press stop. What I just did is undone because I located on the timeline back to the beginning of C. I now have the settings of A again. So I disengage read just like you said and I do the same thing again.

Now after having re-engaged “write” “read” is also engaged again. I press play, write automation, but want to redo it because there was something about it I didn’t like, so I press stop and then undo. Now automation is read from A again.

But wait, there’s more:

I’m probably not automating everything at the same time, even on one track. So I might have automated the EQ already and I like it, but now I want to automate volume for the section. Well, guess what, if I turn off “read” (and “write”) then EQ automation won’t be read as I’m working on my levels. Because “read” is off.

With the implementation we suggested the above issues are solved. Turning off “read” is not a solution.

I absolutely see the point in it. But just because you like to work that way all the time or sometimes, doesn’t mean that that’s the way I and others like to work when using Virgin Territory.

You’re in the Nuendo section. Nuendo is a post app. I’m a post engineer. Not everyone is using Cubase/Nuendo in purely “linear” way. We don’t all just start from the beginning and write automation as we go. Some of us sometimes jump around for various reasons. What you write above seems to imply that we all need to have that previous value read, but that’s a purely linear assumption. It’s based on that always being the case. But just because that’s how we end up experiencing audio doesn’t mean it’s always the best way to work.

But even if we say that we need to “read the last point” the solution is to a) not use VT, or b) to locate to the end of the section before locating to where you now want to write new automation. Done.

It’s useless to you. It’s now useful to others. It’s not all about you and it’s not all about me.

I honestly don’t understand what you’re trying to say. I know English isn’t your first language, but you really have to write more clearly.

Either way, you keep asking me what the point is and why something is useful, and I’ve now explained that to you at least four times. I’m fine with you disagreeing with me, but I just don’t know of any other way to explain why it’s useful to some people, so if you don’t understand by now…

There are two things to consider about virgin territory.

First, Steinberg implementation of virgin territory is correct. If you look into big digital consoles like Ams Neve Encore or Euphonix System 5, those automation systems work exactly like that. If no automation is written in virgin territory it does not mean there will be no return value for a fader at that point. Usually the automation system looks backwards for the last written value, and if it finds none it looks forwards.

The other question is if Steinberg implementation is the most appropriate for a DAW, which I don’t think it is. Steinberg just copied those linear automation systems, but automation workflow in digital consoles is a bit different. They don’t have automation in graphical form which you can easily manipulate like you can in Nuendo. So I think MattiasNYC is correct, even if I don’t agree that Nuendo virgin territory is flawed.

I would like Nuendo to go along Harrison, the third big name in digital film consoles. Harrison developed Mixbus DAW automation and they apparently have knowledge about both types of automation systems. I wonder what happened to Yamaha, Steinberg, and Harrison Strategic Alliance from 2015.

There is little I could not agree with Ben Harrison:
http://mixbus.harrisonconsoles.com/forum/thread-5269.html

Suppose I have a time line where I have different ranges of content, let’s call the areas A, B, C, D and E. I have written automation to A and E already, and now for whatever reason I want to automate C. I locate to C and it immediately reads automation from A. Fine. I hit play and move my faders to a starting point for C that I like, and I want to use that as a starting value and then write automation continuously across C. I now press stop. What I just did is undone because I located on the timeline back to the beginning of C. I now have the settings of A again. So I disengage read just like you said and I do the same thing again.

well… if it recalls the automation of A its because you didn’t write automation at the begining of C !!! virgin teritories means if you move and you want it to be “recalled” you have to be in “write mode” !!! what is your problem, it’s just common sense.
and well you see, you will have the problem still, even now, in worse, because it is not even the automation of A which will be recalled, but any value you were on before moving, and certainly not the value you were happy before making a modif on C…

Either way, you keep asking me what the point is and why something is useful, and I’ve now explained that to you at least four times. I’m fine with you disagreeing with me, but I just don’t know of any other way to explain why it’s useful to some people, so if you don’t understand by now…

well, I suggest use try it as it is now and tell me if your satisfied with it… I say it again… you are in a virgin territory but there is no way cubase (or Nuendo if they broke VT too) will remember a level which wasn’t recorded with automation as soon as automation is used… it’s my point on the “why” it is useless. It’s because of that. Virgin territories is not a new start, cubase doesn’t record value before you engaged automation, so no way it will be more usefull for you as it is for me.

So my point is you have a missconception of what virgin territories operation mode is… its not fresh starts, you could want that, in this case we will must have “frontiers”, more than “virgin territories”, with independants freshs start point and independant automation in one territory than in an other, this is a whole other thing

There are two things to consider about virgin territory.

First, Steinberg implementation of virgin territory is correct. If you look into big digital consoles like Ams Neve Encore or Euphonix System 5, those automation systems work exactly like that. If no automation is written in virgin territory it does not mean there will be no return value for a fader at that point. Usually the automation system looks backwards for the last written value, and if it finds none it looks forwards.

The other question is if Steinberg implementation is the most appropriate for a DAW, which I don’t think it is. Steinberg just copied those linear automation systems, but automation workflow in digital consoles is a bit different. They don’t have automation in graphical form which you can easily manipulate like you can in Nuendo. So I think MattiasNYC is correct, even if I don’t agree that Nuendo virgin territory is flawed.

I would like Nuendo to go along Harrison, the third big name in digital film consoles. Harrison developed Mixbus DAW automation and they apparently have knowledge about both types of automation systems. I wonder what happened to Yamaha, Steinberg, and Harrison Strategic Alliance from 2015.

There is little I could not agree with Ben Harrison:

hallelujah ! yes, the implementation was correct and very powerfull, but now in cubase it is broken :frowning: (and not fixed !!! as some say, it isn’t fixed in any way, MattiasNYC you must not have used it as it is now to say it is better… I persist it is totally useless as you can’t move in the time and having your automation recalled in a right way, you will not have two time the same mix unless playing it from the begining every time or filling every virgin territory with automation, that’s why from the begining of my posts about this broken behaviour, I say “good luck with that” ).

Thanks. That means a lot to me.

Well, to be fair I used “” to denote that it wasn’t to be taken literally. I can very well imagine that the design was on purpose in which case it wouldn’t be literally incorrect, just undesirable (by me and a few others).

Good question. I also sort of wonder what happened to the collaboration with Dolby, although that’s a different issue for sure.

+1

Please don’t discuss Cubase automation features/problems on the Nuendo forum. The two automation systems are slightly different, so you may be very well talking next to each other.

Fredo