How to apply an exponential fade-out in Cubase or Reaper?

[TheAdventuringPanda]

Is it possible to apply an exponential fade-out in Cubase or Reaper? Searching both manuals for the word "exponential" turns up nothing.

Reaper has options for fade-out curve-shapes, and a couple of the options look concave like an exponential curve would look, but not all concave curves are exponential, and the manual doesn't clarify whether any of these options are exponential. I tried asking on Reaper forum, but I couldn't pass the are-you-a-human test to register on their forum.

Cubase lets me design fade-out shapes with splines, but it's not mathematically possible to construct an exponential curve out of spline-curve-segments. In another thread, someone reports being able to apply an exponential fade-out in Cubase, but he hasn't provided a description of his method that enables me to reproduce it.

[Ph-J]

I replied in the other thread already

[SJ_Digriz]

select the event, drag the fade handle, double click on the fade to bring up the fade editor.

[TheAdventuringPanda]

select the event, drag the fade handle, double click on the fade to bring up the fade editor.

The Cubase fade-editor (Cubase manual p. 250) provides no way to apply an exponential fade. It provides ways to apply fades, but not fades which are exponential. The manual says:

"Curve Kind. These buttons determine whether the fade curve consists of spline curve segments (left button), damped spline segments (middle button), or linear segments (right button)."

It's not mathematically possible to construct an exponential curve out of spline-curve-segments or linear-segments. The word "exponential" has a definite mathematical definition, and it is key here.

I replied in the other thread already

-->

'sample editor', that's what I meant, sorry.
You can choose the curves, which are not named in Cubase, but are in WL :
(here they are in WL, the menu is different in Cubase, but I'm on my laptop now)

Thanks for this info. The options in Cubase, though, are just spline-curve-segments and linear-segments -- according to the manual and everything I find while operating the program -- and it is mathematically impossible to construct an exponential fade using spline-curve-segments and linear-segments.

[Ph-J]

Thanks for this info. The options in Cubase, though, are just spline-curve-segments and linear-segments -- according to the manual and everything I find while operating the program -- and it is mathematically impossible to construct an exponential fade using spline-curve-segments and linear-segments.

but you do get to see these curves, right ?

I just took them to be the same as in WL (exp+,exp, log, ...) even if they are approximations..?
I think you'll have to take it to the Steinberg forum if you want more details on their math

[iosys]

May I ask who will notice if it is not mathematically accurate?

[SJ_Digriz]

Typically when people ask about exponential curves for audio editing they just mean a curve that is weighted early or log weighted late. So pedantically, no they don't have "exponential" curves. But, neither does any other audio program, because you can't choose which exponents you are using. You simply get a weighted curve (usually not sample accurate so its pointless anyways).

And yes, spline curves can fully represent an exponential curve to sample accuracy and far beyond that. Just not the ones in cubase because you can't get enough resolution points. Of course that will be absolutely crucial to absolutely no one.

So if we are done with our pointless pedantic douchebaggery .. have a nice day.

[TheAdventuringPanda]

Thanks for this info. The options in Cubase, though, are just spline-curve-segments and linear-segments -- according to the manual and everything I find while operating the program -- and it is mathematically impossible to construct an exponential fade using spline-curve-segments and linear-segments.

but you do get to see these curves, right ?

Yes, it looks similar in Cubase:

I just took them to be the same as in WL (exp+,exp, log, ...) even if they are approximations..?

Seeing your new image, showing 4 segments connected by three points, it does look like WL and Cubase are using the same math -- both are using splines (finite-order polynomials) to approximate exponential curves (infinite-order polynomials).

I think you'll have to take it to the Steinberg forum if you want more details on their math

The Cubase manual clarifies the math they're using: splines. Steinberg confuses things by labeling one of their curves "Exponential", but now that I see your WL image showing 4 segments, it's clear Steinberg was speaking falsely. Like a car salesman selling you a car with "Porsche" written on the side, but the car is really a Hyundai.

Typically when people ask about exponential curves for audio editing they just mean a curve that is weighted early or log weighted late.

Oh really. Good to know what "people" really mean when they say exponential, and that they don't really mean exponential. Thanks for your insight into "people".

So pedantically, no they don't have "exponential" curves. But, neither does any other audio program, because you can't choose which exponents you are using.

But really I'm using no fewer than 3 audio programs which do let me choose which exponents I'm using.

You simply get a weighted curve (usually not sample accurate so its pointless anyways).

Really though, I'm using 3 audio programs which do give me sample-accurate exponential fades.

... will be absolutely crucial to absolutely no one.

In other words, it isn't absolutely crucial to you, for whatever you're doing. You being one person, despite your attempts to speak for everyone. You being totally wrong about what I'm doing with my own copy of Cubase, despite your pretending to have the slightest idea.

So if we are done with our pointless pedantic douchebaggery .. have a nice day.

So butt-hurt. Over a question about a computer program. Get a life, so your DAW can be just a computer program to you, and not whatever crutch you're currently using it as?

[SJ_Digriz]

[quote="TheAdventuringPanda"]
But really I'm using no fewer than 3 audio programs which do let me choose which exponents I'm using.
and so when you apply them they do nothing more than what cubase offers. But have fun anyhow.

[Ph-J]

Seeing your new image, showing 4 segments connected by three points, it does look like WL and Cubase are using the same math -- both are using splines (finite-order polynomials) to approximate exponential curves (infinite-order polynomials).

just to clarify: my second image is from cubase, not WL.

[TheAdventuringPanda]

But have fun anyhow.

whatever you say, butt-hurt Cubase fanboy in Alabama. (Readers outside the U.S., can read up on Alabama for context into this individual's dysfunction.)

[TheAdventuringPanda]

Seeing your new image, showing 4 segments connected by three points, it does look like WL and Cubase are using the same math -- both are using splines (finite-order polynomials) to approximate exponential curves (infinite-order polynomials).

just to clarify: my second image is from cubase, not WL.

oh, so maybe WL is doing real exponentials after all. Thanks for your help on this.

[SJ_Digriz]

Seeing your new image, showing 4 segments connected by three points, it does look like WL and Cubase are using the same math -- both are using splines (finite-order polynomials) to approximate exponential curves (infinite-order polynomials).

just to clarify: my second image is from cubase, not WL.

oh, so maybe WL is doing real exponentials after all. Thanks for your help on this.

nope sorry, WL interpolates that curve to the automation resolution. That picture you see is just a picture. Let me ask you what ratio on the taper means exponential to you? There are an infinite number of curves that can be defined as exponential mathematically.

[xoxos]

ftr, sj is right, but his criteria are above your scope of interest. don't bash him, five years from now you'll know what he was talking about, and realise he is trying to inform you


btw you're all all of you buggered up your slider is already logarithmic because decibels, so a linear automation contour would produce an "exponential" amplitude decay. hehehehe. you can hate me, i'm right.





developers are the only people who will ever hear what an actual linear decay sounds like

"whump - whar'd my sound go??" (oh edit that's not true.. several wav editors include a linear fade.. bloody useless, amplitude is log)

[SJ_Digriz]

btw you're all all of you buggered up your slider is already logarithmic because decibels

lol, if they didn't understand my statement ... this one is going to soar over heads at 30k ft.