Cubase automation problems.

[druid]

Hi,

I'd like to know how Cubase SX 2 handles automation internally. Is it a sample accurate thing? it doesn't seem to be. Or is it based on the speed of your computer and the latency etc.?

Here's my problem: I was using VSTi parameter automation to do some quick changing of values, in time with notes. For instance, at one point I will have the cutoff at 25% and then at exactly the same time (in midi) I'll have a note play and the cutoff changed to 50% for the note. This is with Triangle II and knob inertia (at least in Triangle II) is off. There will be a significant delay in when the cutoff actually takes effect on playback. Even when I go to mix it down, it's better, but it still isn't changing in time with where I aligned it with the notes?

What's the deal? The computer isn't that great and even less so the audio interface, but if Cubase SX 2 did what I think it should be and calculated automation values per sample, then it should change for the note I've got it changed for.

Instead it sounds all messy, even though the graph I have is quite clean and straight etc.

I can try to get a screencapture of an example, and record a realtime audio demo and a mixdown demo of it as well, if you're not sure what I mean.

I come from using Buzz Tracker, and it works just fine without graphs in this sort of circumstance, every adjustment I make for automation lines up in time with the notes playing.

Does anyone know what's happening?

[druid]

I've had some success in solving the problem, it almost sounds fine now except I don't like how I fixed it.

First some background info I should've already put in the post above:

I am using an Athlon XP 2600+ with 1gb RAM, more importantly I am using Windows XP and a Sound Blaster Live Platinum (not the 5.1 version). I'm using default drivers and don't have specific ASIO support, but I can use ASIO MME and ASIO DirectX.

I was using ASIO DirectX before, and lowering the buffersize seemed to help (weird that my computer could play it without skipping though, I thought it would but it was only one instrument playing with one effect). I also changed the sample sync from output to input, which also seemed to help but I don't know why.

I switched to the MME driver, put sample input sync reference on (currently it is sample output sync reference, seems to be ok) and lowered to 4 audio buffers on output and 5 on input, and 1024 buffer (I think) for output and 2048 buffer for input.

So it works better now. Almost the way I remember programming it in Buzz Tracker, and I could live with this, but I want to know WHY it works like this? Obviously the automation graph is NOT sample-accurate, as in it's not calculated together with notes etc. They must be kept seperate and fed in differently or something.

Why should it matter what buffers I have? Shouldn't it just be choppy or a significant delay in output? Shouldn't the automation sound the same no matter what?

When I render it it sounds the same too - as long as I have realtime on. If I don't, it goes back to being screwy!

What on earth is going on here?!? Why is a professional application relying on hardware to sync an automation graph to notes etc? Why is it not processing all this internally and then outputting the audio data, meaning it will sound the same all the time no matter the quality of the hardware?

Or am I just missing something?

[druid]

That's another thing, I also set the audio priority to normal, from very high (which I'd set before from the default high).

Again, I don't see why Cubase would be stupid enough to let that affect how the graph affects audio data, in the context of time.

Perhaps Cubase is made so much for professional hardware that it has a lot of things that are seperated internally? Is there a way to sync everything up internally and make the output consistent?

[kritikon]

That's a weird one...it almost sounds like latency on the automation. Certainly with older Cubase VST versions, a long latency setting could affect automation, but SX is full PDC - and I always assumed the PDC included automation. On my setup, I've never noticed any delays in automation - and I have exactly the same PC specs (although I have a decent soundcard with ASIO drivers). Maybe it's that lack of ASIO for your soundcard? There is a tweak to do to get better midi timing if you're using emulated midi ports - but I shouldn't think that will affect automation, which isn't midi-based.

Maybe try lower buffers and see what that does. From memory, I have mine set to 448 or something close to that (of course, depending on your soundcard, that may not be an option I suppose).

It certainly sounds to me like a hardware thing - I've never had that problem with automation, even with older version of Cubase.

In the meantime, I suppose a workaround is to use a VSTi that allows you to assign velocity to filter cutoff (althuogh I can see that may not be a completely happy workaround ).

[druid]

Thanks.

I'm already looking to buy a new system - I'm in the preparation stage to see if it's all worth it, if I'm going to seriously use it. It's a kind of catch-22, actually. I need a new audio card to see if that's the problem before I go ahead, but the audio card is part of the upgrade I'm trying to find out if I need.

I will try to find someone who will allow me to test, or buy but return if I'm not happy with, an M-Audio Delta 44. Then we'll see if ASIO 2 and good soundcard fix my problem.

I still can't believe that the problem even exists though.

And FYI, my current minimum buffer is 512 and my minimum number of audio buffers are 3 (for ASIO MME). Such is the pain of old consumer soundcards. :)

And another quick question - the current resolution of automation can go from 0 - 65536 (or 65535, I didn't check), however if I attach a MIDI control to that parameter and automate it using MIDI, will I still get that same resolution or will it cut down to the standard 0-127 MIDI?

Can you attach VSTi automation to parts (if that's what they're called)? Or is it only MIDI automation that sticks with patterns/parts you've made?

[Sascha Franck]

And another quick question - the current resolution of automation can go from 0 - 65536 (or 65535, I didn't check), however if I attach a MIDI control to that parameter and automate it using MIDI, will I still get that same resolution or will it cut down to the standard 0-127 MIDI?

Things will be interpolated then. So, the resolution of your input (which is a CC) won't get any higher, but as soon as you start tweaking automation data, it's gonna happen in high resolution.

Can you attach VSTi automation to parts (if that's what they're called)? Or is it only MIDI automation that sticks with patterns/parts you've made?

Not sure what you mean, but I don't think you can.
If you move/copy a part, you usually need to select the automation portion of it as well, which IMO is quite a drag.
There should be options such as:
- Allways copy automation along with corresponding MIDI parts.
- Never copy etc...
- Ask whether to copy etc...

In addition, there should be an option to handle automation data in parts as well. Right now you allways need to mass-select the important notes to copy or move them, which can become time consuming, especially on small-zoomed arrangements.
In addition, if automation was accessable just like parts, one could apply timestretching and such to them, which opens up quite some new creative possibilities.
Alternatively, automation data could be written as some special class of MIDI data (this is what Logic does in case you don't want to use trackbased automation), which would result in nicely tweakable "automation chunks" as well.
In addition, in a perfect world, one would be able to assign each and every controller to each and every mixer channel or plugin parameter, then either use it to write to the automation as is or to record the aformentioned new "class" of MIDI events.
That'd just satisfy anybody I think.

As for your initial problem of the automation being incorrect and changing behaviour along with different audio driver settings, that's really weird and it defenitely shouldn't happen as SX's automation is supposed to be sample accurate, thus compensated as well.
I would say that this is a bug.

[Kim Lajoie]

I'd like to know what's up with SX2 automation too. I'm not getting the lag as described, but something worse -

If I add some automation and play it back, it's fine.

But if I go back and change the automation, sometimes bits of the previous automation pattern will come through. Sometimes it totally takes over, and sometimes the parameter is oscillating REALLY FAST between the current automation and the previous automation.

REALLY FOCKEN ANNOYING!

Forever,




Kim.

[druid]

Sascha:

Thanks for your input. Is there any reason to not use MIDI CC to control automation then, if it's interpolated? If I only perform linear alterations of parameters, it should turn out almost the same either way, right?

I'm also sad to hear about the lack of "attaching" support. It is a shame I find Cubase the most comfortable to use (so far, anyway). I like your ideas on it and wonder why Cubase does not already have this... I also think that it would be useful for Steinberg to have patterns (per track) and an arrangement section so you can structure things more easily, but maybe I am just used to my tracking environment! ;)

I'm looking to upgrade to Cubase SX 3, but as I've stated I'm looking to spend enough money on an upgrade that I'm not willing to start spending until I know I'm going to use it seriously. if I'm not, I might just drop music. I've come to a stage where I need a new host, the tracking feels old to me, I need to use more VST and also less crashing (Buzz Tracker). I want a graph for automation and I don't want to track it. Cubase feels the most workable.

Although I might give EnergyXT another go, and indeed I might see how that works inside of Cubase as well.

Jeez:

Haven't had that, but I haven't got that far yet either. I hope I don't get that. :/

[stefancrs]

druid, check out asio4all btw

http://michael.tippach.bei.t-online.de/asio4all/

[druid]

That seems to work better, even with low latency and higher priority for audio data (as opposed to MIDI) it works properly.

It probably was the DirectX or MME ASIO version - they apparently are not sample accurate.

I'm still going to experiment a little, because ASIO4ALL is not very stable on my system .. at least, not while I'm setting it up AND having Cubase open at the same time.

I'd forgotten about ASIO4ALL, thanks for reminding me.

[Sascha Franck]

Thanks for your input. Is there any reason to not use MIDI CC to control automation then, if it's interpolated? If I only perform linear alterations of parameters, it should turn out almost the same either way, right?

Yeah, it *should*.
Not sure whether there might be certain automation jumps due to interpolation though. Most likely there are, but probably you won't eventually notice them on most actions.
Not sure, but maybe Steinberg even implemented some "smoothing" (something that could often be found on, say, a MIDI controllable filter cutoff of a VSTi). In that case you might not notice parameter jumps at all, it might just feel a bit "slow" when moving things.

I like your ideas on it and wonder why Cubase does not already have this...

I hate to compare to Logic again, but when its new automation scheme was introduced with 5.0, it had that "ask, allways, never" options for copying automation data instantly. Which IMO is good.

However, I'm not using this sort of automation anyways (apart from some very slight levelings during mixing), no matter whether I'm working in Logic or Cubase, simply because I prefer to use automation in a more "creative" style.
Logic does at least offer some sort of workaround (not a brilliant one, but it's working OK most of the time)
I may for example automate a delay send. When doing it the "old-fashioned" Logic way (arming a track for record and recording MIDI "fader" data, which is the new MIDI data class I allready mentioned), parts will be created, just like "plain" MIDI parts, therefor tweakable as such. IMO these are WAY easier to move/copy, and (something I'm doing a lot) you can also timestretch them. Or momentarily mute them (rather than muting the complete automation track).

I was allready annoying the Emagic developers to death back then, so they would eventually implement an option to use the trackbased automation "part-style" as well. All to no avail (btw, one of the reasons I gave my Logic Control back, because that one is only working properly with trackbased automation).
Let's hope Steinberg will listen a bit better to their users (there seem to be quite some of them actually finding the automation scheme being a bit of a PITA).

I also think that it would be useful for Steinberg to have patterns (per track) and an arrangement section so you can structure things more easily, but maybe I am just used to my tracking environment!

I'd defenitely say it's not only you.
As said, at least when it comes to creative use of automation (as in: not only while mixing), there's quite some things getting in your way. Let alone "Touch Fader" mode isn't working as supposed at all (in cycle mode, it'll just overwrite anything when dealing with a VSTi, regardless whether you touch a fader or not).

Although I might give EnergyXT another go, and indeed I might see how that works inside of Cubase as well.

I'm almost ashamed to say so, but I still haven't tried energyXT yet. From what I know, each and every parameter could be adressed by a CC, so it might solve quite some issues, especially regarding the "automation shows as parts" issue.
On the downside, you'll lose the high resolution of Cubase's internal automation (as you would record AND playback CCs, rather than just using CCs to control the internal automation).

[tweakin]

I'd like to know what's up with SX2 automation too. I'm not getting the lag as described, but something worse -

Kim.

Yeh? Beat this.... (not that I'm happy about it!!)

When I write VST automation, save the project, close and then re-open the project, the mixer automation envelopes for all the VSTi mixer channels are all jumbled around and applyied to different VSTi mixer channels!! It seems to occur mainly after I load up a VSTi in a slot, and then later for whatever reason, remove it and load up another one in it's place, so it is created after other VSTi's in an earlier slot. Methinx this is confusing cubase?..

It's really frustrating having to select-drag all the automation to it's correct mixer channel each time you load the project.. (actually, in an odd way it has helped me really become super familiar with the mix!! but it just takes forever and does my head in ).

I've had a look around and can't find info in this - anyone else experience this? Or are you all smart enough not to use any second hand VSTi Slots? - after all there is plenty there!!

[tweakin]

Just answered my own question... not happy...

http://forum.cubase.net/forum/Forum2/HTML/068785.html