Virgin Territory: Thoughts / Reactions

When automation was written for the Chorus one automation point was written at the beginning of the timeline. That automation point is the same value as the first point written in the chorus - in this case -3dB. So when you started playback the second time it read that very first data point.

guess what, that’s because you didn’t wrote your volume change, you changed it before writing…


So it should actually be entirely predictable. If you move the fader outside of where automation exists, then it stays where you left it. Once you read automation though - in the chorus that you automated - it’ll stay at the last value of that written automation (-6dB). Here’s an example:

?? hum… so cubase must know what value is before the automation… what you doesn’t understand is that they made a good job : when you write the volume change (not setting it before writing, WRITING IT) cubase insert a volume info at the very begining of your project, so this behave as you wanted, the only thing that is wrong with your method, is that you don’t write your automation, you write a static volume for the chorus, which then apply from the begining to the moment you started writing. If you hade written a volume change which passes from -10 to -3 just at the moment of the chorus, you will have -10 on the verse, as you wanted… no problem at all…

VT: ON, automation -3dB at chorus.
Intro: You move the fader to -10dB and let go.
Verse: -10dB
Chorus: -3dB (automation read)
Verse: -3dB
Outro: You move the fader to -7dB where it remains until you press stop.

lol, yes when you press stop it jumps to -3 because you moved your fader in read mode… not writing… if you wrote automation your fader wouldn’t have jumped to -3… again, if you want your automation to repeat the volume changes (moves) you make, you have to “record” automation…

So as you can see the purpose of VT is not to make your levels 100% repeatable, for that you need to write automation either throughout all VT, or not use VT at all. Instead it’s so that you can avoid having to disable automation read every time you want to experiment with a section. So in the above example when you have already written the chorus automation, you end up with the same experience automating the verse. You can just move parameters around without them “snapping” to pre-recorded automation values. Then you punch that automation in for the verse and move on to the next section.

totally wrong !!

I have no idea what your point is.

I have no idea what your point is.

I understand that, and that’s exactly what I wrote.

You’re just repeating what I said. In addition it makes absolutely no difference if the automation written is static or moving.

Yes, I know, it’s exactly what I was saying. Again you’re just repeating it.

No it isn’t. I’d be happy to explain to you what I meant since it’s obviously unclear.

So as you can see the purpose of VT is not to make your levels 100% repeatable, for that you need to write automation either throughout all VT, or not use VT at all.

wrong, the purpose of VT is not not making my levels repeatable…
and the levels are 100% repeatable, but for that you just have to write automation… simple… the only thing to have in mind is when you move a value in read mode… it will not return to the automated one, but this will not be recorded nor reproducible, and as soon as you press stop or go to the same position after, it will take the automation preceding… but completely normal as you didn’t wrote automation… you were in read mode…

You don’t see my point, obviously I don’t see yours… what the point hoping cubase reproduce your levels changes if you’re not in write mode when you make them…
you doesn’t understand the difference of placing a volume info at the beginning of the chorus (your fader being already at the volume of the chorus) and placing a volume “change” which then will place an info of the previous volume which worked for you verse at the beginning of the project… not complicated… on your verse there will be automation read… you’re never free of automation as soon as there is automation info on the parameter. even in the virgin territories. virgin territories only means you can write the moves you want not be annoyed by the events of automation further on the automation tracks… very confortable.


so my point is your post is very confusing and claims false issues.

Don’t take this the wrong way, but if you want to split hairs and argue based on the choice of words you should know that your English isn’t particularly great. I know mine isn’t either, but since we’re dealing with technology accuracy becomes more important.

Saying that “the purpose” is “not not making my levels repeatable” can be true at the same time as “the purpose of VT is not to make your levels 100% repeatable”. Those two aren’t actually mutually exclusive.

If you want to understand what I meant then you only have to read the rest of the paragraph. My point was that the purpose - the way I see it - is to be able to experiment with the settings without having to engage other modes of automation the way you would have to if you were in non-VT mode. That was my point. I also actually point out that it is predictable, which I suppose is the same as “repeatable”, but with the caveat that the purpose of the functionality is different. If all we wanted was repeatability and predictability then we wouldn’t use VT at all because as we both know you can grab and move a fader in VT while automation has been written elsewhere, let it go, keep listening and SOME PEOPLE will think this is now where the fader will be in this section. From THAT persons perspective it’s not repeatable and predictable.

You seem to be picking a fight here just for the sake of being argumentative.

Again it seems like you’re just repeating what I said.

If I assume that the last sentence above should have started with “what’s” and ended with “?” then the point isn’t mine, my point was responding to other users who thought it should be repeatable that way.

Again also what I said. I understand the difference just fine thank you.

Right. Just like I said. Although it would arguably have been even more convenient without the automation point at the start of the timeline since now you can’t loop or stop playback without having your levels revert. I can explain the point of this further if you want.

My post isn’t confusing I think. That you don’t understand it doesn’t mean I make any inaccurate claims about “issues”.

You pointed something out, I verified it, and then I corrected my posts to reflect what I had been missing. Now I have no idea what you’re not comprehending in my posts. You keep saying I’m wrong about something but every single time you try to give me an example of what I don’t understand it ends up being just what I had said before… It’s a bit weird.

Ok then,
I really still don’t see your point…

If you want to understand what I meant then you only have to read the rest of the paragraph. My point was that the purpose - the way I see it - is to be able to experiment with the settings without having to engage other modes of automation the way you would have to if you were in non-VT mode.

So here is maybe the most significant difference of perception of the use of VT… for me VT is very useful when writing automation, in writing mode, not in read mode. To have freedom when writing automation, not to have freedom to change things which won’t be remembered at all, in read mode.
and I still don’t see in what it isn’t predictable and repeatable…

and

Right. Just like I said. Although it would arguably have been even more convenient without the automation point at the start of the timeline since now you can’t loop or stop playback without having your levels revert

well, it would be a nightmare if there wasn’t this automation point at the beginning… as then you would have to record it yourself as soon as you want to do automation later in the timeline… the purpose of automation is to reproduce the volume changes you do, and it wouldn’t.

so leave it that way, if your post really help somebody, that’s great. :slight_smile:

So… How do you use Virgin Territories? haha

Yes of course the benefit is for writing automation, that’s why I wrote "without having to engage other modes of automation, not “no” automation.

Some users seemed to think that it wasn’t predictable. That’s what I was addressing. If you’re a user and you think that if you’re in read mode, hit play, move a fader while in VT, the fader should stay there until automation is read where it is written - then to that person it doesn’t appear to be predictable.

So… How do you use Virgin Territories? haha

well, I activate the option, that’s all. :slight_smile:

and I activate Write all, and I mix, that’s all. When I want to try something, I disengage write, and after I re engage write to have it written.

And with VT, I am no more bothered with the automation I made earlier, and that’s all I want.

At first I thought no automation where recaled when going in a virgin territory, so I was a little lost in the way to use that… but then I understood (seing it in action) it takes previous value (where it would be if you played from beginning, to that point), well, I always use it since.
I don’t understand what seems so complicated with VT, it’s pretty simple. :nerd:

what i miss with this approach is, when you’re ‘trying something out’, w/ write disengaged, and you’ve found settings in a plugin you like, a function to instantly ‘dump’ into automation whatever you have currently changed your automated parameters to (without the need to engage Write and playback).

i guess closest to this is still nuendo with its snapshots function.

I think you actually just described two of the things I was trying to say:


So one of the points I made that I think you misunderstood has to do with the above.

You write automation and then - after - you want to experiment; so you turn “write” off. So now your automation will recall whatever was written before (and if you’re before where you wrote automation it’ll pick up the stuff at the beginning of the timeline). You press play, and you “try something” with your automation. To then write it, you “re engage write to have it written”.

My point earlier was this: Suppose you do exactly what you described, but perhaps something happens - the phone rings, the pot of water is boiling on the stove, whatever - so you choose to not yet punch in by “re engaging write”… IF you then stop or let the playback either reach automation written later or cycle back, THEN the settings you “tried” will be lost, because it will again read automation. IF it did NOT read automation on stop/return (cycle), you would still have those last settings you “tried” in VT. This would have been a different way of working, and one that is arguably more intuitive when just looking at the automation written on lanes. Not necessarily better, but different.

That’s what I was saying earlier. Your intuition was exactly the same as mine, and it appears other users expect the same thing. It’s not “complicated”, it’s just not intuitive. So from that standpoint it’s confusing.

What happens if you use VT plus latch plus fill though? That doesn’t achieve what you want?

i’m going to have to try that :slight_smile:

(but not until c8 works properly, i gave up on it for now.)

Amen.

It’s ironic that I made this topic—while I’m not even using C8. It’s dead to me until (maybe?) next patch…

Despite this lengthy thread VT seems rather simple to me . . . and useless.

As I understood it VT was supposed to allow you to “Play” with the mix feely outside of areas that you’ve written automation to.
But it doesn’t.

If anyone is unclear I’ll give a simple example:

You’ve got a song (or whatever) with sections A, B, C and D.
Using VT and Touch mode you write some automation to section D (fader moves, we’ll say).

Now you move to section B and hit play and start messing with the mix (no automation here).
Everything is fine. You get to the end of section B and hit “Stop”. You nailed it. Sounds great.
So - using ANY method you return the cursor to the start of B.

AND when you do ALL your levels change - reset. You lose the mix.
So much for “freely playing with the mix”.

Most here know that’s because when you wrote the Automation to that final section D Cubase wrote a “starting point” to the very beginning of the song. And any time you locate the cursor within sections A, B, or C everything will jump to that point even thought there’s no automation in those sections. In fact, it’s exactly the same as “Standard” automation except Cubase waits till you locate the cursor to reset everything (instead of immediately after you “let go” of a control).

In fact, Cubase ALWAYS chases the last automation point, anywhere in the project.

If I turn off “Read” in the above scenario - as suggested by some - and then tweak my B section?
As soon as I engage “Write” to record my changes Cubase will again chase those starting levels - losing my tweaks.

It seems to me there’s a really simple solution here and that is to have a “turn off chase automation” button.

That way you could write things here, there, wherever when building your mix without this issue.
When you’re just playing back or rendering you would, of course, want to turn “chase” ON.

Does that sound like a good idea?
Or am I missing something really fundamental here - like you can already do that?

Hugh

I’m just thinking… could the ‘Suspend Read’ function be used to achieve something similar to what Virgin Territories is designed to do?

i.e. Enable Suspend Read, play around with your parameters until you are happy, then engage Write mode and write the automation to the relevant section and finally disable Suspend Read. I haven’t tried this, but just thinking aloud. I can’t remember if Suspend Read covers all automation parameters or just some, like fader levels, mutes etc.

EDIT: just had a look and you can suspend read for all parameters so maybe this is a reasonable concept.

YES!

That works!

Thanks.

'Course I still like the idea of a “Suspend Chase” button. That way I could leave “Read” on without things jumping around if I’m in a “no automation” zone. It would make VT make more sense.

Yes, I’ve just been playing around with this and it’s actually quite a nice solution for experimenting with your mix settings and then you can use the ‘Loop Fill’ function to write them to a section between the locators once you’re happy with things.

I’m not following what the difference would be between ‘Suspend Chase’ and the ‘Suspend Read’ that already exists.

And to be honest, now I’ve just discovered the value of Suspend Read, I’m still unsure what the value of Virgin Territories is. I guess VT is potentially a quicker way of doing it if they tweak the way it’s implemented so it doesn’t chase previous automation events when you stop/start/cycle.

THank you Hugh and everyone for such detailed descriptions of VT. I’m reading this thread to see if VT is something I would use in C 8.5.10, as part of figuring out whether there is enough additional functionality there to make me want to leave 7.5.40.

I wonder if I don’t understand the part highlighted in blue above. When I create an audio track and click activate the green “Automation Read” button on the volume automation lane, an automation line with value “0dB” is visible throughout the track, presumably written by Cubase as a default action.

So naturally it follows that if I automate part D, with the final value being “-3dB” for example, then I go to part B, nothing is chased … because Cubase has written automation there already, the fader snaps to “0 dB”, it does not remain at “-3 dB”.

Is this different from Cubase 8/8.5/8.5.10? Or have I forgotten that maybe I’ve activated a preference that by default writes “0 dB” automation throughout all new tracks?

Thanks for any clarification!

You know, I was so disappointed with “Virgin Territory” I have not touched it for a while.

What you highlighted in Blue above is still true. Cubase still chases in “Read” if you move the cursor even in a Virgin area.
However, what I highlighted in ?Pea Green? is not true (anymore?).
Cubase does not chase previous automation when activating “Write” in a Virgin area. I’m not sure if I was wrong at the time (Not Likely!! :astonished: ) or they’ve changed it.
In any case, if you deactivate “Read” and mess around in a Virgin area you can then activate “Write” without losing your changes. Just don’t touch that cursor after activating “Write”. Cubase will chase earlier Automation and wipe any changes you’ve made. You can only Play and Record after going into “Write”. But still, that is a good change.

The difference is . . . having to Suspend (or turn off) read to work on Virgin areas means when you DO reach automation it isn’t read. So you can’t hear how it flows from the previous bit you’ve been working on.
(Of course, when you reach that automation you lose the stuff you just changed . . . so :open_mouth: )

But having “Chase” suspend in VT mode just makes sense.
Like say I’m working in a Virgin section and I’m ready to write.
So . . .I engage “Write”. I realize I’m at the end of the section so I (doesn’t matter how) move the cursor to the start of my Virgin section . . . ooops! Just lost my changes.
Cubase chased some values earlier in the song.
There is NO logic in it and it defeats the whole point of “Virgin Territories”.

Actually, when you turn on “Virgin Territories” that line disappears (as it should).
Are you sure you’ve activated VT in the Automation Settings box (Automation Panel - the little cog at the lower left)?

I think they have definitely made some adjustments to it. Like my ?Pea Green? highlight above. I don’t think I was wrong at the time.
But it makes a big difference. In Normal Automation mode the levels WILL ALWAYS jump to the current level when activating write. Now they do not subject to not touching the cursor.

Also, there is the “Gaps” (I think they call it) function in VT where you can erase a chunk of Automation and create an empty area. No lines will connect previous and later nodes. You can then redo or whatever subject to the limitations noted above.

So . . yeah. It’s cool and worth looking into.

But the “Chase” thing?
That’s another one of those things I just don’t get. Like somebody at Steinberg wasn’t thinking for a minute.

Hugh




Thanks again, Hugh, that was really helpful in understanding. The remaining questions I have will need to be answered by actually playing around with it myself, I believe. I’m probably installing 8.5.10 next weekend, assuming I can do the trial (I’m not sure if the trial is just for 8.0, or 8.10), I’ll check it out.