Routing Automation - Why Isn't this Done?!

[reichman]

Interesting question. But looking at the big picture, routing in PT with the control key held down and the checkbox menus is just terrible. Routing automation is just one part of a larger IO window upgrade that needs to be done.

And by the way, I have the utmost respect for the heavy people on this list. Let's keep the discourse professional, right?

[SBP]

Originally Posted by audiograce

Quick question:
Why isn't everyone in the post community making noise about the single biggest omission in Pro Tools mixing for the post community?

Routing and Pre/Post fader switch automation are important parts of everyday post mixing ... I'm aware that there are work arounds, but work arounds do not a complete toolset make.

Am I the only one who thinks this way? Looking forward to your ideas.

Ya know what I think everyone has just given up asking for stuff like this. I personally asked for automation of routing and AUX pre/post changes in 1995. I still think adding these functions would make the software better.

Other 'improvements' also requested -but now just given up on. Opening multiple sessions (ie having access to several timelines). Fixing automation write to all so you can make a selection while in play (or just some way to protect or make safe zones of automation on the time line.)

Obviously this stuff is just too hard to make happen or it would have been done by now.

ProTools is a great product -Having worked with it for a long time now I realize part of its charm is the work arounds and hoops you need to jump in and out of everyday.

All the best

Bruno

[audiograce]

Originally Posted by SBP

Ya know what I think everyone has just given up asking for stuff like this. I personally asked for automation of routing and AUX pre/post changes in 1995. I still think adding these functions would make the software better.

Other 'improvements' also requested -but now just given up on. Opening multiple sessions (ie having access to several timelines). Fixing automation write to all so you can make a selection while in play (or just some way to protect or make safe zones of automation on the time line.)

Obviously this stuff is just too hard to make happen or it would have been done by now.

ProTools is a great product -Having worked with it for a long time now I realize part of its charm is the work arounds and hoops you need to jump in and out of everyday.

You're probably right Bruno ... so let's start making some noise about these things again! If you're going to have the most complete audio post solution on the market ... why not actually make it complete!? Right?

I appreciate all these responses.

Peace,

[Pete Gates]

Agree with these requests - particularly a proper routing view window. Also an automation pass filing system, tree type thing, would be great. I'd add that to the list. Some of these things are difficult but they should've been able to do them by now (easy to say!). Some, like a grid type routing window wouldn't be too difficult I would've thought. I have always wondered whether these ideas, which are obvious to all of us on the frontline, get through to the right person at Avid.

Pete

[Frank Kruse]

Originally Posted by SBP

Fixing automation write to all so you can make a selection while in play

AVID considers this issue to be fixed in PT 12 by half-implementing GradianAngel in PT12.X so they even marked the feature request "done" on Ideascale even though users complain that it isn't fixed:

http://protools.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/95623

If they implemented this idea they would solve a lot of thing all on the same ticket AND improve PT automation at the same time:

http://protools.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/118092

Same for the "preserve fades when editing" feature that still behaves weird (since PT7.2!!) when pulling cross-faded clips to other tracks. But they marked that request "fixed" until someone put it up on IS again. The fact that they flag requests fixed when they miss important points lets we wonder if they actually understand what the problem is in the first place.

http://protools.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/12867




Also couldn't agree more to the drop-down routing thing. Put this up years ago:

http://protools.ideascale.com/a/idea-v2/118803

I could go on with tons of stuff already on IS but what else can you do when even the "big guys" can not get enough attention.

Dolby Atmos etc. is all great and needed but for me there are tons of small things that eat away hours and days over the course of a project. Number one probably being recutting in PT, still no way to directly send sequences from AVID MC to PT and back linking to he same media without AAF translations, and #1 on the biggest time-consumer: No way to open more than one sequence to easily drag and drop whole sections from one cut to the other (almost 20 years after AudioVision!!). AVID MC can do it and pretty much every other DAW out there. Why not the industry standard?

So yes: By all means: You have my vote for routing automation (so much easier to create M&Es with it) but there are a ton of bread-and-butter things I'd prefer first. ;-) But I'm an Editor/Supervisor so my perspective is a bit different, I have to chop through a jungle of conforms and re-cuts daily and I'd like some more support in that area. In the old days we didn't have to fix mix-session, now it's the norm that the sound editor conforms and fixes giant mix-sessions as good as possible for the mixer who then goes: "Hey, it's all so much easier than in the old days". Of course it's easier because the editor "magically" conforms and fixes the mix session, something we didn't have to do in the so called "good" old days.
Things and challenges have shifted a lot but I see most efforts in product improvement being put into the task of mixing and ergonomic interfaces for mixers. The tools for editors, not so much.


Would be great if this could be balanced a bit more.
Probably not so interesting for AVID as it doesn't sell consoles....but maybe one day...

Thanks to third party developers we have tools like, Soundminer, Conformalizer, Spanner, EdiCue, Ediload and others to retrofit some of the essential things PT can not do but a bunch of things PT is lacking can not be fixed by third parties. (there's almost a whole industry out there providing extra band aids for gaps in PT's feature set)

Frank.

[MIKEROPHONICS]

Personally would much rather multiple session opening, as well as Franks suggestions above and a proper post Master console strip with DFC stem monitoring, metering taps and talkback dimming etc, and folders/bins (yawn) in the region list way before routing auto.

I still stand by my opinion that routing auto is a slight anachronism these days as the paradigm has changed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Norad155]

Originally Posted by audiograce

You're probably right Bruno ... so let's start making some noise about these things again! If you're going to have the most complete audio post solution on the market ... why not actually make it complete!? Right?

I appreciate all these responses.

Peace,

Hey AG,

Having never mixed on anything BUT ProTools, I don't miss not being able to automate routing... I also can't think of a reason I would want to... can you elaborate on a situation where you would want to automate that? (not challenging that it's valid request... just curious!)

Thanks

[audiograce]

Originally Posted by Norad155

Hey AG,

Having never mixed on anything BUT ProTools, I don't miss not being able to automate routing... I also can't think of a reason I would want to... can you elaborate on a situation where you would want to automate that? (not challenging that it's valid request... just curious!)

Thanks

Several circumstances come to mind:
Dialog:
If you use reassigns (and I do!) it is very useful to be able to pop between various reassigns without having to physically move the audio to a different track. (Speed and efficiency). For example, I might want to setup 3 or four different reassigns for various situations .. A/B dialog, Futz, flashback dialog, etc.
I also often like to switch between reassigned dialog and panned dialog. Routing automation would solve this easily. While there are already work-arounds that I use, it would be great to not have to use a work-around.

Music ... Pre/Post fader automation ... I think it's self explanatory... especially for source music.

Varied Stem routing for M&E's ... PFX ... I could go on ... not to mention Predubbing!

Peace,

[audiograce]

Great Post Frank .. thank you. And you're right ... one of the problems is that PT is a do-it-all platform ... we all have slightly different needs.

[Norad155]

Originally Posted by audiograce

Several circumstances come to mind:
Dialog:
If you use reassigns (and I do!) it is very useful to be able to pop between various reassigns without having to physically move the audio to a different track. (Speed and efficiency). For example, I might want to setup 3 or four different reassigns for various situations .. A/B dialog, Futz, flashback dialog, etc.
I also often like to switch between reassigned dialog and panned dialog. Routing automation would solve this easily. While there are already work-arounds that I use, it would be great to not have to use a work-around.

Music ... Pre/Post fader automation ... I think it's self explanatory... especially for source music.

Varied Stem routing for M&E's ... PFX ... I could go on ... not to mention Predubbing!

Peace,

Makes sense... having always had to drag to another track(or a work around with sends/sendmutes), it's never bothered me... but I could see where it could come in handy.

Pre/Post fader automation I DO miss... that seems silly that it hasn't been implemented yet.