VCA’s conversation starter
 

Here’s a topic of conversation. Why are new and old mixers refusing to use VCA’s?
Lately I’ve come across a handful of mixers who either refuse to use VCA’s or simply do not understand them. I don’t get this. For me, VCA’s are a huge time saver and make me a much more efficient mixer. Why wouldn’t all mixers want to use them?

Please enlighten me.

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

Honestly the only VCA trashing I have read is from users who were using other DAWs as their primary. So I'm a little surprised at what you are hearing.

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

Lack of understanding. They're not necessary for basic Pro Tools use, and too many people get comfortable with bad habits and slow workflows.

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

I can think of NO logical reason to avoid VCA's ... They're a Logistical and Functional Godsend. Period.

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

There's the answer. Either that or they are on PT 10.

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

VCAs are my primary way of zipping around fast while mixing on the D-Command, it practically begs you to use them for "VCA spill" of an assigned group of tracks to the faders, from that VCA overview in custom fader mode.

That aside it's also great for VCA automation etc that can be coalesced down to tracks, even if you remove a track from a group.

Maybe it's because they have a hardware-world naming scheme which could, not so much put pure ITBers off but maybe make them assume they are irrelevant and related to old mixers which has no business in a 'mouse controlled' DAW on a computer. Had they called them supervisor channels or guardian tracks or remote group control faders... something new maybe people would look into them, VCA is an analog / electronics term related to mixers, amps and synthesizers and could throw some people off (sound more confusing than they are so they never bother with them).

I love VCAs already. :p

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

Agreed. Could not work without them.

I just wish they would “act” more like VCA’s. Wherein they don’t just control levels. I wish they could adjust parameters on a relative scale over inserts and panners. For example have a master channel strip on the VCA that only passes information through and could change the overall relative values of the channel strips within the VCA controlled group.

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

Hello, I use to mix via Vca's with Icon controllers when I started mixing.
Using the rotary knobs to select tracks for target plugin window, spill, it was easy with episodic and small films.
Then tracks got counts got larger, mix delivery are now containing multi-channel tracks, sub tracks etc...
Too many tracks to sift through, so I use Aux's exclusively. The only Vca's are the sound editors if they use them. I rarely adjust editors automation, I redirect to my mixing tracks.
Also Vca's are only Level and I need Eq and panning just as much.

Steph

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

I'm embarrassed to say that I really don't fully understand the concept of using VCA. Now I'm interested in finding out more. I generally use Aux Bus for Drums, Guitars, Keys and BGVs. Can someone explain the benefits of using VCA? I'm truly interested!

Thanks!

Re: VCA’s conversation starter
 

I used to do everything with aux busses. But if you pull a bus down, say -14db, then none of the individual tracks feeding the bus can be raised above that level. In this case a VCA is useful because you can use the VCA to get the 14db of reduction, and then while in spill, grab that individual track that needs to be much higher. And in TV mixes, there might be five groups of tracks all feeding one bus. Much easier to make 5 VCAs instead of adding all those busses.

One last thing: PT faders are post-insert. Riding a bus fader is post-insert. But riding a VCA fader into a bus gives you a rare opportunity to mix pre-insert. Very useful for more advanced dynamics processing.