How is VST automation in Cubase nowadays?

[Psuper]

For the most part, Cubase automation, specifically the lack of a simple 'midi learn', is crap. Aside from that, I'm pretty happy.

Hit learn, move knob, done. How simple do you want it ?

Some VSTS within Cubase yes. However not the DAW itself (like any of the controls on the left, you have to manually build your controller hotkeys).

For instance, I want to assign midi learn to the EQ buttons for sweeps. In 10 you can't. Can you in 10.5?

No problem in 10, or older versions. Just use Track Quick Controls. It's been around for ages.

Yes quick controls suck, borderline useless.

RTFM dude. But stop whining about things you clearly know nothing about.

So you're saying setting up the generic controller and assigning the controls via dropdowns in quick controls is amazing in cubase?

Ok Neanderthal with rock and stick .. perhaps instead of pouring through manuals you should actually try to efficiently produce. This shit isn't rocket science.

[dionenoid]

So you're saying setting up the generic controller and assigning the controls via dropdowns in quick controls is amazing in cubase?

Ok Neanderthal with rock and stick .. perhaps instead of pouring through manuals you should actually try to efficiently produce. This shit isn't rocket science.

Dropdowns ? We're talking about Cubase, not Reaper

The Track Quick Controls window is in the Left Pane.

- Hit Learn
- Select slot
- Move/touch anything you want to assign/control
- Deselect Learn

Done. 1 second of work.

Everything can be assigned to one of the slots : Every possible parameter of any plug-in or synth, midi CC's, bypass buttons, send amounts, everything in the mixer etc.

Most synths even assign the most important functions automatically. Or the Macros.

Everything is saved with your project btw, and can be recalled by using Track Presets.

From the Quick Control window you can also do your automation :

- Hit Write
- Move slider
- Deselect Write

Done, another second of work.

Very efficient indeed. And ofcourse you can assign every QC slot to an external controller if you want. One time set-up needed is for that tho.

Seriously, watch some tutorials or something, but better is to just use it and try out. It's really no rocket science. The time you spent here to complain about it should be enough to learn all functions in the QC window.

[Psuper]

I've been using quick controls for awhile now which is why I (and plenty of others) know its clunky and a pita. Compared to Reason, it absolutely sucks balls in so many ways. Course Reason always had the best automation, but let me know when Cubase doesn't have ever changing quick controls for every track, overlapping doubled learns and auto assignments that easily trip up the mix, among other annoyances everyone will most definitely run into and often if they automate.

Right click any parameter, learn, it stays that way regardless of which track I'm on. That's what I'm after and that's far from what cubase offers.

[dionenoid]

Compared to Reason ?

[Mushy Mushy]

Automation in Cubase you say? Nope, never had a problem.

Capture.JPG

[Passing Bye]

Automation in Cubase you say? Nope, never had a problem.

Capture.JPG

Change buffer size now

[Mushy Mushy]

Automation in Cubase you say? Nope, never had a problem.

Capture.JPG

Change buffer size now

It's on 2,048 currently which is the max possible with my interface.

If it works why would I change it to something that doesn't

[Passing Bye]

Automation in Cubase you say? Nope, never had a problem.

Capture.JPG

Change buffer size now

It's on 2,048 currently which is the max possible with my interface.

If it works why would I change it to something that doesn't

Did you even bothered reading the first post and what OP is asking about or you just saw the tittle, made a screenshot and posted it, seriously

I think I remember it used to have accuracy issues, with accuracy decreasing with larger (slower) soundcard buffer size.

Anyone with experience of Cubase 9.5-10.5 have an opinion here?

so if you would go about changing your buffer size your automation would go out of place, there's still there, you might not encounter it or have the need to do it, not really the point of this thread.

[Mushy Mushy]

Automation in Cubase you say? Nope, never had a problem.

Capture.JPG

Change buffer size now

It's on 2,048 currently which is the max possible with my interface.

If it works why would I change it to something that doesn't

Did you even bothered reading the first post and what OP is asking about or you just saw the tittle, made a screenshot and posted it, seriously

I think I remember it used to have accuracy issues, with accuracy decreasing with larger (slower) soundcard buffer size.

Anyone with experience of Cubase 9.5-10.5 have an opinion here?

I didn't realise 2,048 was considered a small buffer size.

Most would consider that an ice age. Seriously.

[Passing Bye]

I didn't realise 2,048 was considered a small buffer size.

Most would consider that an ice age. Seriously.

Seriously, next time read the thread you are about to post into, so if you would go about changing buffer size at this point, your automation would go out of place, because it's not sample accurate, it's known issue, you may not encountered it if you don't change your buffer size in the middle of the project where you have tons of precise automation, many doesn't, JerGoertz was curious if that behavior still persists and that's all there is to it.

[Mushy Mushy]

Seriously, next time read the thread you are about to post into, so if you would go about changing buffer size at this point, your automation would go out of place, because it's not sample accurate, it's known issue, you may not encountered it if you don't change your buffer size in the middle of the project where you have tons of precise automation, many doesn't, JerGoertz was curious if that behavior still persists and that's all there is to it.

That's not at all what it says. He asks whether the accuracy changes with larger buffer sizes, not what happens when buffer size is changed mid way through a project.

[Passing Bye]

Seriously, next time read the thread you are about to post into, so if you would go about changing buffer size at this point, your automation would go out of place, because it's not sample accurate, it's known issue, you may not encountered it if you don't change your buffer size in the middle of the project where you have tons of precise automation, many doesn't, JerGoertz was curious if that behavior still persists and that's all there is to it.

That's not at all what it says. He asks whether the accuracy changes with larger buffer sizes, not what happens when buffer size is changed mid way through a project.

accuracy decreasing with larger (slower) soundcard buffer size.

We already established what he asked and he got his answer immediately, but you don't even bother reading at all, he asked about decreasing or increasing, it goes out of place in whatever direction you go, so there you go, you learned something new.

[Mushy Mushy]

Show me the words increasing or deceasing written by the OP.

Anyway, whatever. Better things to do than argue with people on the internet.

[Passing Bye]

Anyway, whatever. Better things to do than argue with people on the internet.

I really hope so, have a good one.

[dionenoid]

Seriously, next time read the thread you are about to post into, so if you would go about changing buffer size at this point, your automation would go out of place, because it's not sample accurate, it's known issue, you may not encountered it if you don't change your buffer size in the middle of the project where you have tons of precise automation, many doesn't, JerGoertz was curious if that behavior still persists and that's all there is to it.

Did you test it yourself ? Because i did and found no issues.

I tested some time ago when there was some talk about it on the Steinberg forums (with Cubase 7 or 8 i believe) and just now again, with C10. Both times no issues, using different systems and different soundcards.

All the automation points stay perfectly in place. Switching from 1024 to 128 to 2048, and all other available buffer sizes.
I tested with different plug-ins on each track (vst3, vst2, UAD, AA, various latencies). All of them automated, using bypass and several moving (micro-) edits on several sources (vst2, vst3 and audio).

But again, i found no shifting of automation points or heard any differences in sound whatsoever. I even did a null-test and the rendered file on 1 buffer setting perfectly nulled with the live automation on another buffer setting.

I also never had any problems with opening my old projects, or other ppl's projects with lots of automation going on. Projects that were made at different buffer settings, used different soundcards and different computer systems.

And btw : Cubase is sample-accurate (like most other daw's btw). I don't know where you get the idea that it isn't.