Explain me PT HD VCAs please?

[acmost]

So it's not really a VCA, right but...is there an actual sonic difference between pulling a channel fader down as opposed to pulling down a VCA group that has that same channel assigned to it? The same result is happening, the channel fader gets pulled down or no?

Thanks!

[adam_w1]

there's not a sonic difference like "it adds an amplifier stage" or anything but it's a different way of grouping essentially, using what we would have called a VCA, or the behaviour of one at least - to change the levels of a group while keeping the internal balances the same.

It's super useful when you have already been dickin' around with lots of automation and don't want to mess up balances, or with post-fade send levels which don't get affected at the grouped via bus method by changing the bus volume, plus you can also group things which aren't going to the same outputs which you have to do with a bus - make sense?

[acmost]

Got it...no I'm a big fan of them, I use them all the time...but really nothing is different than pulling down the individual faders, right - just a different way to group them. If I pulled down every individual drum channel -2db, but left the drum auxes(buses) the same or.......pulled down a VCA(-2dB) assigned to all the individual drum channels - not touching the drum auxes...it'd be the same result no? My pre & post FX sends from those channels would react the same, wouldn't they?

[Bookerv12]

The big reason I like the PT VCA's is the ability to solo or mute a VCA group a little easier.

[adam_w1]

f I pulled down every individual drum channel -2db, but left the drum auxes(buses) the same or.......pulled down a VCA(-2dB) assigned to all the individual drum channels - not touching the drum auxes...it'd be the same result no? My pre & post FX sends from those channels would react the same, wouldn't they?

It's more a case of really being useful for things that aren't static;

doing what you said is a one time deal which is fine, but we don't really work like that. what if you automated cymbal crashes and a cool tom heavy bridge section and then want to change the level of the whole kit at various points? you could bus it all, and ride the bus, but no - it won't do the same thing at all - make sense?

[nst7]

This old article may help explain it some. It was written after the feature was first introduced in Protools:

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep.../vcagroups.htm

[acmost]

Originally Posted by adam_w1

It's more a case of really being useful for things that aren't static;

doing what you said is a one time deal which is fine, but we don't really work like that. what if you automated cymbal crashes and a cool tom heavy bridge section and then want to change the level of the whole kit at various points? you could bus it all, and ride the bus, but no - it won't do the same thing at all - make sense?

Of course...I don't mean it has to be static although it could be, you automate as need be. I'm not dissing the idea...I'm just asking if it's accomplishing the same thing...as pulling the faders down.

[acmost]

Once more with feeling...so, not trying to be argumentative at all...use VCAs - big fan.

My question is this & it has nothing to do with the reason why or when you would use or not use PT VCAs or any of that, it is simply this:

Will there be a difference in the sound of lowering an audio channel fader -2dB or lowering a VCA Channel -2db(that the same audio channel is assigned to). The result is the same, correct? The VCA is going to lower that audio channel -2dB, right?

Thanks!

[adam_w1]

it's exactly the same.

[acmost]

Alright then...thanks for the reply.