DP 9 and 10 Cannot read heavy automation well, Proven!

[toodamnhip]

Let's all keep this elephant in the room in mind please-

"Next Gen pre gen 2" is supposed to be more efficient! That IS it's SOLE purpose.

We all get into these little circles of logic. "How much more", "Does TDH do things wrong", "should DP be able to do this and that under what circumstance", "go to Pro Tools if you are unhappy", "my work flow is better than yours", ...... yada yada.

DP is supposed to be MORE efficient in the newer versions, not LESS. If a user discovers it is NOT more efficient, especially when it comes to CORE functionality like automation reading, this is the opposite of what should be, and should be of concern to the general user base. The technology may be complex, but the LOGIC of it all need not be. We are not programmers. We can all tear each others heads off guessing at a million things...but it is NOT our jobs. Our job is to report what we see. We are ALL honest people sharing viewpoints, fine. But..........

"Next Gen pre gen 2" is supposed to be more efficient! I have found this is not the case when it comes to automation capability.

Keep it simple.

[bayswater]

"Next Gen pre gen 2" is supposed to be more efficient!
Keep it simple.

I think we agree on both of those points.

[Michael Canavan]

If you assume everything in the DP 8 design was carefully carried over to DP 9 and 10, and that the designers are aware of the effect of changes, then fine. I'm not saying the workflow is not valid, just that we should not assume it is consciously supported, even it if worked in the past.

I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever argue that a feature was a fluke, so it's passing is not a big deal?
I would also point out that I've never heard any DAW ever talk about an automation limit. This is also in response to a IMO very reasonable assumption that a feature not sold with limits, that works in a previous version is broken.
I just think people are tired of TDH's posts about automation quirks in DP, because it's hard to wrap my head around the logic flexing it takes to assume things like automation limits as a reasonable response to automation being broken in newer version.

Where NextGen PreGen (PG) works and where you will see drastic improvement is on any track not routed to an Aux track, not record armed, and not with multi audio outputs like a Kontakt Multi etc. You will not notice any significant difference on tracks that are Real Time, like you tested.

And yet I didn't. The difference in CPU was just what you'd expect from the number of instance being run regardless of whether they were pre-gen or RT. My point was simply that the test didn't show anything to support the contention that there is something wrong with DP when it is used in a common arrangement, routing tracks to busses for purposes of applying effects. Using 20 times as many instances used 20 times a much CPU. If pre-gen was a big deal, wouldn't you expect the 200 tracks to be more efficient than the 20 busses?

You're talking about two different things here. NextGen decreases CPU load on the track it is implemented on, there never was any promises that 50 tracks bussed to a single aux with a plug in would perform worse than the same 50 tracks not bussed and with individual instances of the plug in on each track.

You can break anything if you want to, but it should be fairly trivial to prove to yourself how this works. Take a CPU heavy plug in on an aux track, buss 5 tracks to it, VS 5 tracks each with that heavy CPU plug in. More than likely CPU will be less for the 5 tracks VS bussed. You get into 200 tracks and the sheer amount of tracks will favor Real Time VS NextGen. It's a feature, it's not supposed to replace submixes etc. it's just smart to realize when and how PG works, when it's useful and when it's not. For example if you have dozens of Kontakt instruments it's best not to buss them to an aux, straight audio is a different story.


In a perfect world PG would mean you could do things like have a Sequence Chunk with those Konatkt instruments, copy to new Sequence, flatten all instruments to audio tracks with a key command etc. and be done with it. Since PreGen is pre generating the audio file to take CPU off of the track it's hard to understand why this isn't already an option, and why it goes to RT when bussing to a stem/aux track etc.

[FMiguelez]

Maybe also Get rid of the dumb ramping when one pastes sections of a song around. Its really hard to mix and automate in DP, I must say.
Try past a chorus into a heavily automated file sometime. After you have done so, look under the hood and watch 250 automation points slowly drift from bar 50 to bar 100....with your reverb slowly getting wetter, your compression ration slowly strangling your rhythm guitar as it increases or what have you.....Yikes.

TDH, I'm with you a 100% on these automation issues.

I just saw the thread, BTW, and I must say it is going in such a predictable fashion... And it will end predictably, as well (like my Slayed-MIDI King thread)

So, the way I see it, we have TWO very serious automation issues>
1.- The unreliable automation past a mysterious unknown threshold (the main point of your OP)
2.- The unwanted god-damned ramps that get created every time you paste, snip or cut regions and/or tracks (oh, and the MESS this creates with Takes too)

Personally, I mostly get hit by point 2, heavily, but I HAVE experienced point 1 a few times in particularly automation-heavy projects. In my case, printing VIs and all MIDI to audio seems to solve the problem, but I admit this is because that unknown "threshold of unreliability" goes up again, and I could hit it with audio-only eventually, especially if I start automating the way TDH does, which brings me to my other point nicely>

TDH gets heavily criticised for his apparently wasteful method of automating every plugin parameter, whether it is in actual use or not at any given time. If I may venture a wild guess, the issues haven't been fully understood, let alone tested, by a lot of the members.
So, unless you guys can offer a better workflow to accomplish the same thing equally fast and (supposedly) effectively, I suggest you don't shut down the method just yet. It's a GREAT method, actually. WHY???

Because if you do this constantly, what can possibly be faster than selecting a region and pressing a shortcut to automate everything during said region? This way, you don't have to worry about which plug-in parameters you need to automate and which you don't. You just select a region, press the shortcut and bam! Instant automation for everything for all selected tracks for the part you like the way it sounds, which is a perfectly valid workflow and a feature profusely described in the manual. So clearly, it should work reliably, as stated therein.
Unless, of course, you'd rather open every plug-in for every track and manually click on only the parameters you want to automate... How long would that take?

Do you know of an efficient and quick way to tell DP which parameters you want automated and which you don't, for lots of tracks?
Have you ever tried deleting UNUSED automated plugin parameters? That could easily take an hour or more if you have a big session
There are, supposedly, ways to sort of tell DP about some of the desired parameters, but that workflow doesn't really work at all> It's cumbersome, slow and unreliable.

So, does anyone have any recommendations to work quickly with a similar workflow? How would YOU approach it?
Say you love the way section B sounds. Compression, distortion, reverb, delay... it's all perfect. But now, you want to make dramatic changes for the C section. You want to lower the threshold and change the compression ratio in some instruments. You also want it a little dryer in general, but you want to add more early-reflections, just for 8 measures, to a particular return. Then, when the piece goes back to B and A, you want mostly the same settings as before.
If it weren't for having to spend an hour or so to fix the damned unwanted ramps that will inevitably result after the automation-pasting, that workflow takes literally 5 minutes to accomplish> Set everything the way you like and take a snapshot.

Do you know of a better way?

Ideas? Workflows that work faster than selecting a pressing a shortcut?
And please don't tell me to duplicate tracks for the C section... remember, we're already dealing with 100s of tracks... And there is also a D section

At this point, TDH, the only way you could convince the unconvinced and MOTU, is to MAKE a short VIDEO showing all these problems. 5 minutes tops, nothing fancy. It could show a typical DP session, with all your automation, and you could loop a point where it sounds different every time, as you've described here with text (and you could point it out as it happens).
Writing about this is too long, and much more could be accomplished in 5 minutes of video.

I'll tell you what> You do this video on the unreliable automation issue, and I'll follow by making one about the damned automation ramps. Then we can post it here for everyone to see, as if they were next to us, and we could send it to MOTU too.
Please let me know if you're interested. I see no other way to convince MOTU, by clear demonstration, to fix these crippling issues that have existed since their conception, and that no other DAW does, AFAIK.

[FMiguelez]

BTW, I take it you have already messed with the Automation Density parameter?
If so, any notorious changes?
Did that at least sent the "unreliability threshold" a little higher?

[HCMarkus]

I fully understand the frustration expressed.

Responding to FM's query... if CPU HP is available, I often just duplicate tracks that call for changes in timbre in a section of a piece, then make the changes willy nilly on the copy and erase the undesired corresponding parts in the original track.

[toodamnhip]

Maybe also Get rid of the dumb ramping when one pastes sections of a song around. Its really hard to mix and automate in DP, I must say.
Try past a chorus into a heavily automated file sometime. After you have done so, look under the hood and watch 250 automation points slowly drift from bar 50 to bar 100....with your reverb slowly getting wetter, your compression ration slowly strangling your rhythm guitar as it increases or what have you.....Yikes.

TDH, I'm with you a 100% on these automation issues.

I just saw the thread, BTW, and I must say it is going in such a predictable fashion... And it will end predictably, as well (like my Slayed-MIDI King thread)

So, the way I see it, we have TWO very serious automation issues>
1.- The unreliable automation past a mysterious unknown threshold (the main point of your OP)
2.- The unwanted god-damned ramps that get created every time you paste, snip or cut regions and/or tracks (oh, and the MESS this creates with Takes too)

Personally, I mostly get hit by point 2, heavily, but I HAVE experienced point 1 a few times in particularly automation-heavy projects. In my case, printing VIs and all MIDI to audio seems to solve the problem, but I admit this is because that unknown "threshold of unreliability" goes up again, and I could hit it with audio-only eventually, especially if I start automating the way TDH does, which brings me to my other point nicely>

TDH gets heavily criticised for his apparently wasteful method of automating every plugin parameter, whether it is in actual use or not at any given time. If I may venture a wild guess, the issues haven't been fully understood, let alone tested, by a lot of the members.
So, unless you guys can offer a better workflow to accomplish the same thing equally fast and (supposedly) effectively, I suggest you don't shut down the method just yet. It's a GREAT method, actually. WHY???

Because if you do this constantly, what can possibly be faster than selecting a region and pressing a shortcut to automate everything during said region? This way, you don't have to worry about which plug-in parameters you need to automate and which you don't. You just select a region, press the shortcut and bam! Instant automation for everything for all selected tracks for the part you like the way it sounds, which is a perfectly valid workflow and a feature profusely described in the manual. So clearly, it should work reliably, as stated therein.
Unless, of course, you'd rather open every plug-in for every track and manually click on only the parameters you want to automate... How long would that take?

Do you know of an efficient and quick way to tell DP which parameters you want automated and which you don't, for lots of tracks?
Have you ever tried deleting UNUSED automated plugin parameters? That could easily take an hour or more if you have a big session
There are, supposedly, ways to sort of tell DP about some of the desired parameters, but that workflow doesn't really work at all> It's cumbersome, slow and unreliable.

So, does anyone have any recommendations to work quickly with a similar workflow? How would YOU approach it?
Say you love the way section B sounds. Compression, distortion, reverb, delay... it's all perfect. But now, you want to make dramatic changes for the C section. You want to lower the threshold and change the compression ratio in some instruments. You also want it a little dryer in general, but you want to add more early-reflections, just for 8 measures, to a particular return. Then, when the piece goes back to B and A, you want mostly the same settings as before.
If it weren't for having to spend an hour or so to fix the damned unwanted ramps that will inevitably result after the automation-pasting, that workflow takes literally 5 minutes to accomplish> Set everything the way you like and take a snapshot.

Do you know of a better way?

Ideas? Workflows that work faster than selecting a pressing a shortcut?
And please don't tell me to duplicate tracks for the C section... remember, we're already dealing with 100s of tracks... And there is also a D section

At this point, TDH, the only way you could convince the unconvinced and MOTU, is to MAKE a short VIDEO showing all these problems. 5 minutes tops, nothing fancy. It could show a typical DP session, with all your automation, and you could loop a point where it sounds different every time, as you've described here with text (and you could point it out as it happens).
Writing about this is too long, and much more could be accomplished in 5 minutes of video.

I'll tell you what> You do this video on the unreliable automation issue, and I'll follow by making one about the damned automation ramps. Then we can post it here for everyone to see, as if they were next to us, and we could send it to MOTU too.
Please let me know if you're interested. I see no other way to convince MOTU, by clear demonstration, to fix these crippling issues that have existed since their conception, and that no other DAW does, AFAIK.

Hi FM, thanks for the back up man.
Yes, its true, I point out major problems with DP, and then people make excuses for DP.
* I don't have much time to make videos tutorials. If I mentioned how many projects I am currently contracted to finish, no one would believe me. I often post here while burning a mix to audio or something. I really don't have much time beyond that. But once I make something for tech support, I will try to post here. (Though I do need to freshen up on how to link vids from my accounts without leaving myself open to hacking).
* MOTU tech support wants me to send them a session file and also make a video about it, and I will when I have time. But already the very nice tech support guy, he's is very nice, mentioned he'd rather have a file with ONLY DP plug ins to be sure its not 3rd party plugs. To me, this almost ends the whole purpose for providing a session file. Who mixes a whole song with ONLY DP plug ins except maybe Magic Dave? It's like bringing a race car in for fixing and having a mechanic tell you to remove all "foreign" based parts..yeah..right. So until MOTU thinks its its responsibility to play well with 3rd party plug ins, I am expecting a response something on the order of-"it's not us, its them".
However, again, like Ive had to fight so hard to get others here to duplicate, IT WORKS IN DP 8.07!!!! 3rd party plugs and all. So all I am pointing out is that- My stuff, crazy work habits or not, works in DP 8.07 and does NOT thereafter. And I am facing more and more problems with operating systems as I fall farther back in time. One day, something will have to give. I will have to either buy yet another computer and freeze the old one in time/move forward and have DP suck, or go to Pro Tools. (By the way, Pro Tools has its own new set of problems, and cannot A-B compare mixes as seamlessly as I can in DP using "monitor" inputs). Pro Tools is no picnic.
* I think I would serve the general membership better if I posted a video on how I mix. The absolute wonders of having all parameters locked in is something that seems to escape almost everyone here. Not to cut anyone down, but man are members missing out by not having automation available everywhere from a given starting point. The idea that one has to set a compressor threshold one way for a whole song is just silly. Old school. Like an old mixing board or something. Really? I have explained my technique of "rubber banding" a mix here at the forum. (Using touch mode without writing to pull on a mix to improve it in various sections, and then writing data if one discovers a better setting in a given section). Busted my butt to write it all up. And few if any respond. So members here are not interested, that's ok. So with as little time as I have, I will not bother. I just report what I see and some get it, while others give me an ear full. What can I say, it's a big world full of opinions.
* Last thing- I cannot always bounce things to audio due to my bussing structures. Sections and parameters in my mix co-mingle in a way that does not always allow easy bouncing. It has a lot to do with compressor thresholds and effects sends from sub busses. I could do more bouncing to audio though, and may have to. But to me, a production and mix is always in flux until finished. I don't like to commit until it is magic. But I have already started recent productions without snap shooting all automation in. Just to see how it goes. I can do it of course. But like you mentioned, there are many times when you want to adjust one section differently, and then its a pain to have to weed out what is fully automated or not. Also, if you don't fully automate at the start and then decide to do so to a given part later, it is much harder because you gotta go in and search where and what automation is in a given track before locking in all other parameters. A pain indeed.

[toodamnhip]

So here's something related:

I have noticed there are thresholds to files, after which they have problems. I have noticed this for some time. Sometimes the files are large, sometimes not. The file I am writing about has like 12 stereo files in it. (Its a mastering session).

Today, after a not too large session file had a stereo audio track added to it, SCREEN Lag kicked in. Makes edge edits at a sample level almost impossible.

Thus, not only automation, but other "issues" seem to occur in DP after certain THRESHHOLDS of data, soundbites etc.

There's no rhyme or reason to it that I can see. Files working great, add one more automation maneuver, or add another stereo file, and bam, video lag problems. automation read problems.

All the while there is plenty of computer head room, plenty of RAM. Its almost like DP chokes itself internally after given session file points.

Sorry to be overly general here, but it IS a general problem I have noticed for quite some time. Files seem to have "make break" points, beyond which they have various problems like automation reading, graphics sluggishness etc. In the case of this particular mastering file, there is tons of computer headroom remaining, so it seems like DP chokes itself. My software advisor at the studio is always mentioning "software itself has it's programming limitations". I have heard word that MOTU is working on slow graphics issues in upcoming V 10s. Of course, this won't help me back at 8.07.

[HCMarkus]

Using a 4k display with AMD RX 460 under Sierra, I had really sluggish graphic response in DP. Moving to Mojave improved things for me in that regard. GUI response is now perfectly acceptable to me on my system.

[toodamnhip]

Well, I've made one video at least. Here is the wild automation ramping built into DP. The blue section is a chorus being pasted in. Notice the long automation lines that change in the prior sections. That's is a design flaw.
Hope this shines some light on the issue.
https://vimeo.com/user99962727/review/3 ... d73edbf235

[cuttime]

Hope this shines some light on the issue.
https://vimeo.com/user99962727/review/3 ... d73edbf235

...broken link.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Hope this shines some light on the issue.
https://vimeo.com/user99962727/review/3 ... d73edbf235

...broken link.

Maybe it just where the sun don’t shine...?

[wvandyck]

Well, I've made one video at least. Here is the wild automation ramping built into DP. The blue section is a chorus being pasted in. Notice the long automation lines that change in the prior sections. That's is a design flaw.
Hope this shines some light on the issue.
https://vimeo.com/user99962727/review/3 ... d73edbf235

Looking forward to viewing this when the link if fixed.
Given your tight schedule, the effort to make this available to benefit membership -and MOTU, is appreciated.

[toodamnhip]

Sorry guys, I’ve always sucked at putting up video links. I have a paid account at Vimeo but I guess I got a learn to use it. My last intern made it and now I’m without an assistant for the time being so I’m all thumbs at This. Lol. I posted the video up at my Vimeo, and copied the URL and pasted it in. I wonder if I have to change the permissions? I think I set them at “anyone with the link can view“. I’ll work on it. PS..... I DO KNOW how to use DP. Just suck at video linking.

[magicd]

I guess complaining in a public forum about a commercial product may put pressure on a company to change the product. So go for it.

If you want help from forum members that's always an option.

My definition of engineering is "creative problem solving". If I record a vocalist without a pop screen and get a ton of plosives, I don't tell the singer he/she sux. I get a pop filter.

No software is perfect. I use a computer to make my living and I could probably find a bug or annoying feature in every single application I use. But that's not the point. I don't expect the computer or apps to be perfect. It's my job to make it all work well enough that I can ultimately get the job done. And no question if I thought switching to a different computer or app would make things easier for me, I'd do it.

Instead of "proving" that something doesn't work the way you want it to, wouldn't it be more efficient to figure out how best to get where you want to go?

I'm on DP10 now. I know there are bugs because I've seen them reported and I've tested to verify. The good news for me is that I don't scale the windows. And as far as automation goes...

I've used DP for 25 years. I've been a small part of it's development. I have an unfair advantage in that I know the software very well. I've never had a problem with automation in DP. Not in DP version 1 or DP version 10.

YMMV

Dave (flame suit on)