Automation timing issue

[WildHoney]

Originally Posted by studiojimi

does it "look" wrong or "sound" wrong?

or both?

both. if you watch the video I posted, you'll see the exact behavior. And it sounds exactly how you'd expect it to based on how it looks.

[WildHoney]

Originally Posted by studiojimi

another thought

a lot of TOP cast automate with the dot instead of using a fader

Sorry Jimi, I missed the second part of your post. Not sure what you mean though -- can you clarify? Thanks

[WildHoney]

So, help me understand here, people. Does NOBODY use their controllers to writer fader automation? Is that why this doesn't concern anyone? Nor concern Avid? I'm just not understanding why this behavior isn't more well-known. It'd seem to me that if you're spending $10K+ for a C24, ICON, etc, you'd probably, at least at some point, if not all the time, draw in a fader ride via the controller and find that it just doesn't work properly.

[Brandonx1]

Originally Posted by WildHoney

So, help me understand here, people. Does NOBODY use their controllers to writer fader automation? Is that why this doesn't concern anyone? Nor concern Avid? I'm just not understanding why this behavior isn't more well-known. It'd seem to me that if you're spending $10K+ for a C24, ICON, etc, you'd probably, at least at some point, if not all the time, draw in a fader ride via the controller and find that it just doesn't work properly.

No we all do. We also keep our system delays in the 300 sample range. What is your system delay?

[WildHoney]

Originally Posted by Brandonx1

No we all do. We also keep our system delays in the 300 sample range. What is your system delay?

How do you manage that when, say, one Linear Phase EQ alone adds probably 4 times that amount of delay? (not in front of my system to see the actual delay value right now).

[studiojimi]

Originally Posted by WildHoney

both. if you watch the video I posted, you'll see the exact behavior. And it sounds exactly how you'd expect it to based on how it looks.

sorry man i was typing fast that day

some top cats...use the dot auto as opposed to using faders.

[WildHoney]

Originally Posted by studiojimi

sorry man i was typing fast that day

some top cats...use the dot auto as opposed to using faders.

Both useful, but hardly interchangeable. Even if you're a "top cat." ;-) And a pretty shameful excuse to give people who just spent $10K+ on a controller for a tactile mixing experience. . . particularly when all the non-"top cats" on logic and cubase are writing automation that plays back in time. . . .

[Brandonx1]

Originally Posted by WildHoney

How do you manage that when, say, one Linear Phase EQ alone adds probably 4 times that amount of delay? (not in front of my system to see the actual delay value right now).

I work in audio post production so I don't need or use plug ins like that.

[Brandonx1]

Originally Posted by WildHoney

Strikes me that the same nudge that I can do based on total system delay, ProTools could do as soon as I press stop. Sounds like one line of code to my thoroughly non-programmer mind. If total system delay is 1500 samples, PT should automatically shift any real time automation earlier by 1500 samples when the pass is completed. Now we're reading back the fader move in proper time. No?

No. It does seem like that is all you need to do but it's not. Imaging you have a pt session. With a signal flow like this: 0 delay for insert plug ins -> fader ->4000 sample delay after the fader before you output to the da converter. Pro tools busto advance the audio 4000 samples at the start of playback to compensate for this delay. You hear a loud sound and pull down the fader in exactly the correct time, you just missed the audio you wanted to attinuate by 4000 samples becAuse by the time you hear what you do with the fader, it takes 4000 samples to get ou of the pt mixer after that. You get it? Now PT can try and shift your fader move in time on stop but now the next time you hit play, you mix will sound different than the time you wrote the fader automation. So avid is quite screwed either way. Blame Einstein for this one, not AVID.

[WildHoney]

Originally Posted by Brandonx1

I work in audio post production so I don't need or use plug ins like that.

Granted, you can avoid most delay compensation issues if you avoid any system delay in the first place. But I assume you can see how this would be an issue for people who use Pro Tools as a music mixing/production environment, with plug-ins and such? I'd imagine that's a big reason why the HDX systems were designed with several times more delay compensation ability than the HD systems have.