Can your host do THIS?

[7XL]

I don't mind using the bus method, but that's almost the same as duplicating the track, except you can pach in more tracks into the bus to all be automated at once(if that's the sound you're after).

But, what if let's say I have 3 or 4 tracks, all have some kind of evolving effects that needs to be automated. For example one tracks needs an evolving wahwah effect, another needs evolving compression, another needs evolving phaser...etc. It's be much easier if I can just automate the dry/wet/bypass on the tracks themselves instead of having to create a bunch of buses to cater to each track's automation needs.

I personally think it's really short-sighted of the developers to not have an automation option for dry/wet/bypass.

You can do this in Sonar, I just tried.

Insert the effect on the track that you want. Arm the parameter that you want to automate, then you can either move the control in real time or you can draw it in. Then you can copy that same automation to as many tracks as you want. You can also assign that same automation curve to any parameter that your heart desires.

[jens]

it can't get much simpler and more powerful than in S3.. some people just don't want to learn anything new, do they

Why bother with a complicated workaround for automating effects parameters in an expensive (at least in the EU ) programme such as Sonar (which I'm sure is excellent in many ways - obviously!!) when you can simply draw automation curves for EVERY parameter in Tracktion?

There's no virtue in something being difficult, obscure, or just for a special elite of people....

erm - I moved from sonar to Tracktion and used both programmes many hundreds of hours so maybe you believe me that I should know?

Sonar's automation is far more advanced and user-friendly than Tracktion's - Tracktion's automation is indeed so poor and difficult to use that it is a real pain in the arse - not so Sonar's automation though

- If you need more info just ask

[AD80]

- Tracktion's automation is indeed so poor and difficult to use that it is a real pain in the arse - not so Sonar's automation though

HA! I guess it all depends where you came from. I came from Cubase to Tracktion and I find the automation to be excellent. It feels solid. Its easy to copy and paste. Its ultra- easy to activate by either dragging the automation "A" or activating the automation record button. And you can put automation from any plug-in on any track so you can keep it all on a separate track or on top of the track you're working on.

All these things are way better than Cubase IMHO. The only things missing are the curve drawing tools, and being able to drag the automation with the clips. So if you want a real pain in the ass use Cubase.

[Sepheritoh]

Re FX: you can insert effects into a track (literally), you can apply send effects at the master output (literally) and if you want more flexibility you can route send effects in a modular way by using the new "rack filters" (which basically works like energyXT). Total flexibility imo, and I can;t think what else you might wish to do with effects routing that isn't both possible and very easy in Tracktion.

Industry standard. Please tell me about the sequenser that can NOT do this.

Regarding busses, I don't need them, because I drive a car.

Seriously though, I don;t think that you need a massive mixing console full of complex features in order to do the sort of routing that is musically required, and music production should be straight-forward for musicians, not just computer programmers...

Agreed.

I think that Sonar 3 looks like an excellent programme, and I am tempted by the quality of FX on offer (in particular) and acidized groove clips. I say I'm tempted, but the jury is still out, because I don;t want to go for a programme that has a steep learning curve (which I won't be able to teach kids effectlively, as I am a music teacher) or something that massively slows down my own workflow (as time is precious).

The learning curve is pretty simple for me. I had more issues from that other german company's sequencer about learning to use it. Agreed that S3 is not a 5 minute job to learn, but if you want to use a software for 4 or more hours a day, spending the first 10 hours or so learning to use it is a good investment.

I have seen other sequensers that can do certain things better than the one I'm using and I still have a MAJOR issue with CW's absolute ignorance about suround sound. I'm digressing now, as that was not what the poor threat starter wanted to ask.

[headquest]

erm - I moved from sonar to Tracktion and used both programmes many hundreds of hours so maybe you believe me that I should know?

Sonar's automation is far more advanced and user-friendly than Tracktion's - Tracktion's automation is indeed so poor and difficult to use that it is a real pain in the arse - not so Sonar's automation though

- If you need more info just ask

Sure you sound like you have experience of both programmes, so I'm all ears!

Based on what you wrote, though, why did you switch from Sonar to Tracktion... sounds like you prefer Sonar?

Or did you move back when you found Tracktion's automation annoying (I don't by the way - it seems simple enough to me, but we all work in different ways, so that's no problem!!)

Or, do you now use both programmes, and if so what are the advantages, etc?

I'm pretty happy with Tracktion personally, but I'm also intrigued by Sonar... but one minute I feel tempted and the next I feel like...what the...?

[headquest]

- Tracktion's automation is indeed so poor and difficult to use that it is a real pain in the arse - not so Sonar's automation though

HA! I guess it all depends where you came from. I came from Cubase to Tracktion and I find the automation to be excellent. It feels solid. Its easy to copy and paste. Its ultra- easy to activate by either dragging the automation "A" or activating the automation record button. And you can put automation from any plug-in on any track so you can keep it all on a separate track or on top of the track you're working on.

All these things are way better than Cubase IMHO. The only things missing are the curve drawing tools, and being able to drag the automation with the clips. So if you want a real pain in the ass use Cubase.

Well said, AD80
I switched over from Cubase SX as well, and I can echo everything you said.

The Sonar crowd on this thread seem just a little bit defensive though ... it seems that their chosen app doesn't automate all the VST effects parameters except by basically bouncing things around their "advanced" "powerful" "Perfectly implemented" mixing environment, which seems a little bit odd imho. (and I'm assuming the "ferrari" represents Sonar whereas the "Scoda" represents Tracktion, but perhaps its best to let that one go!)

To recap the thread, Cubase SX, Logic, Tracktion, Acid Pro, Ableton Live, FL Studio, Orion all give you up front track automation of VST effect parameters, whereas Sonar...

[headquest]

Re FX: you can insert effects into a track (literally), you can apply send effects at the master output (literally) and if you want more flexibility you can route send effects in a modular way by using the new "rack filters" (which basically works like energyXT). Total flexibility imo, and I can;t think what else you might wish to do with effects routing that isn't both possible and very easy in Tracktion.

Industry standard. Please tell me about the sequenser that can NOT do this.

Regarding busses, I don't need them, because I drive a car.

Seriously though, I don;t think that you need a massive mixing console full of complex features in order to do the sort of routing that is musically required, and music production should be straight-forward for musicians, not just computer programmers...

Agreed.

I think that Sonar 3 looks like an excellent programme, and I am tempted by the quality of FX on offer (in particular) and acidized groove clips. I say I'm tempted, but the jury is still out, because I don;t want to go for a programme that has a steep learning curve (which I won't be able to teach kids effectlively, as I am a music teacher) or something that massively slows down my own workflow (as time is precious).

The learning curve is pretty simple for me. I had more issues from that other german company's sequencer about learning to use it. Agreed that S3 is not a 5 minute job to learn, but if you want to use a software for 4 or more hours a day, spending the first 10 hours or so learning to use it is a good investment.

I have seen other sequensers that can do certain things better than the one I'm using and I still have a MAJOR issue with CW's absolute ignorance about suround sound. I'm digressing now, as that was not what the poor threat starter wanted to ask.

I've no quarrels with anything you say there, Sepheritoh (especially the bit about the other german sequencer )

Regarding Tracktions effects routing, you're right about it being industry standard - just because it's cheaper than some sequencers doesn't mean it's bargain-basement. I rather think it raises questions about why some of the others charge so much more for the same industry standard stuff...

I'm interested to know if you've checked out the Rack Filters in Tracktion though -I believe these are something different and more flexible than is sometimes offered?

Also it sounds like Sonar may be - dare I say it? - a bit less than industry standard when it comes to VST automation (hence this thread...), although I appreciate it is optimised for DX effects, and that VST comes via a wrapper, so I guess that's the problem.

I'm still interested in trying out Sonar though, because it offers stuff that the others seem not to be so hot on right now, and that's got to make it worth a look despite any minor irritations!

Ultimately none of these packages should claim to be the perfect solution to all our needs, because they clearly have different strengths and weaknesses (a bit like the people who use them, of course!)

[Rik]

Also it sounds like Sonar may be - dare I say it? - a bit less than industry standard when it comes to VST automation (hence this thread...), although I appreciate it is optimised for DX effects, and that VST comes via a wrapper, so I guess that's the problem.

I never tried Traktion but I have Fruityloops in addition to Sonar. For every task that requires complex automation, I usually do it in fruityloops, with it, you don't even need to know what is automation. I've been really impressed with its automation.

With Sonar, there is no wet/dry control for inserts - VST or DirectX - (I can't say that I ever needed that), but except that, you can automate DirectX and VSTs as well. I bet that there is some CPU being saved without a wet/dry on all inserts.
All VST automation parameters are accessible like DirectX parameters.
And the way it works sounds to me exactly like Traktion: arm parameter, record, move the buttons and voila.

Erik.

[Mr. Slater's Parrot]

As stated by others in this thread, Sonar's automation is very powerful and flexible -- you can automate any DX/VST effect parameter with ease.

The issue seems to be: how do you automate the wet/dry amount of a plugin when that plugin was developed *without* wet/dry controls? In particular, how to do it when used as an insert effect and not as a send effect and without using busses?

One simple way to handle this in Sonar -- or any other host that supports automation -- is to use Chainer (or Console or EnergyXT as mentioned previously in this thread).

Do as follows:
o Make an instance of Chainer in Sonar as an insert effect on a desired audio track
o Inside Chainer make an instance of one or more VST effects. Chainer has wet and dry controls for every plugin
o Assign the wet and dry controls to a midi CC (each)
o Add automation envelopes to your audio track above that correspond to the wet/dry controls in Chainer
o Edit your automation envelope to shift the wet/dry mix however you want.

I just did the above in Sonar and it works like a charm.

There are many other great reasons for using Chainer inside Sonar and other hosts.

[LoRez]

it can't get much simpler and more powerful than in S3.. some people just don't want to learn anything new, do they

Why bother with a complicated workaround for automating effects parameters in an expensive (at least in the EU ) programme such as Sonar (which I'm sure is excellent in many ways - obviously!!) when you can simply draw automation curves for EVERY parameter in Tracktion?

There's no virtue in something being difficult, obscure, or just for a special elite of people....

Huh? C'mon guys. Sonar does it just like a real console and it works FINE! Some of you are obviously missing something or not thinking clearly. Wanna adjust the wet dry? Automate that parameter. You can even assign it to a knob and move it by hand. Doesn't have a wet/dry parameter? Automate the bus or automate the aux send! It works just like every decent console I've ever used. I don't get what the problem is.

[LoRez]

- Tracktion's automation is indeed so poor and difficult to use that it is a real pain in the arse - not so Sonar's automation though

HA! I guess it all depends where you came from. I came from Cubase to Tracktion and I find the automation to be excellent. It feels solid. Its easy to copy and paste. Its ultra- easy to activate by either dragging the automation "A" or activating the automation record button. And you can put automation from any plug-in on any track so you can keep it all on a separate track or on top of the track you're working on.

All these things are way better than Cubase IMHO. The only things missing are the curve drawing tools, and being able to drag the automation with the clips. So if you want a real pain in the ass use Cubase.

Well said, AD80
I switched over from Cubase SX as well, and I can echo everything you said.

The Sonar crowd on this thread seem just a little bit defensive though ... it seems that their chosen app doesn't automate all the VST effects parameters except by basically bouncing things around their "advanced" "powerful" "Perfectly implemented" mixing environment, which seems a little bit odd imho. (and I'm assuming the "ferrari" represents Sonar whereas the "Scoda" represents Tracktion, but perhaps its best to let that one go!)

To recap the thread, Cubase SX, Logic, Tracktion, Acid Pro, Ableton Live, FL Studio, Orion all give you up front track automation of VST effect parameters, whereas Sonar...

Odd...how come I can automate my VST effects in Sonar (except some old poorly implemented ones)? Maybe I sprinkled pixie dust on my PC and forgot?

[Sicklecell666]

hosts, shmosts..

Does your host do THIS?

[LoRez]

hosts, shmosts..

Does your host do THIS?

I wish! Now that would keep me home working on music.

[7XL]

Maybe I sprinkled pixie dust on my PC and forgot?

I'm coming for some, I just plum ran out up here....

[Lunatique]

The issue seems to be: how do you automate the wet/dry amount of a plugin when that plugin was developed *without* wet/dry controls? In particular, how to do it when used as an insert effect and not as a send effect and without using busses?

That is PRECISELY what I'm asking. I'm glad someone finally figured it out.

I'll try your suggestion with Chainer. Guess that's the closest thing to what I want. Thanks!

Huh? C'mon guys. Sonar does it just like a real console and it works FINE! Some of you are obviously missing something or not thinking clearly. Wanna adjust the wet dry? Automate that parameter. You can even assign it to a knob and move it by hand. Doesn't have a wet/dry parameter? Automate the bus or automate the aux send! It works just like every decent console I've ever used. I don't get what the problem is.

Ahh, there's a thought though--WHY do we have to stick to old traditions left over from hardware days? Isn't the whole point of software-based music making based on revolutionizing and innovating with new ideas and workflow methods? I long for the day when all the previous conventions are dropped and we enter an age of truly refreshing ideas. We're definitely headed in that direction, as many software designer are already doing it.