Funky mute automation?!

General discussions on songwriting, mixing, music business and other music related topics.
Jason_Staczek
Junior Member
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Funky mute automation?!

Post by Jason_Staczek » Thu Mar 03, 2011 1:48 am

Is there some known weirdness with mute automation in N5? If I write mute automation then play back to audition, it doesn't always work correctly. I can watch the mute button change state but hear the track stay in the same state. However, if I manually touch the mute button with the mouse once after writing the auto, it seems to play back correctly.

I thought I was imagining this, or had some strange routings going on, but it's pretty reproducible. Am I hallucinating? Is there a workaround?

Thanks,

Jason
Cubase 9.5.x, Nuendo 8, SSL Alphalink MADI-AX, RME HDSPe MADI, Mac OS 10.12.x, Windows 10.x, PT12.x

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Rustami » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:32 am

I was really happy when suspend read of mute automation has been introduced... I would recommend you forget about mute automation as it's working unpredictable! I don't think it can't be fixed as it's conflicting with solo etc, etc...
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

Jason_Staczek
Junior Member
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Jason_Staczek » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:16 am

Rustami wrote:II would recommend you forget about mute automation as it's working unpredictable!
Really?! Automation is supposed to be predictable! That seems like a showstopper for a post app. Is this well-known or just the two of us?

So now when my Pro Tools music colleagues ask me about Nuendo I can say the metronome doesn't work, and when my post colleagues ask I can say mute automation doesn't work.

It's 2011. We were supposed to have flying cars by now...

Jason
Cubase 9.5.x, Nuendo 8, SSL Alphalink MADI-AX, RME HDSPe MADI, Mac OS 10.12.x, Windows 10.x, PT12.x

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Rustami » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:49 am

I can only repeat myself - mute automation is dangerous and unpredictable. I wouldn't use it anyway as if you press solo while writing automation by mistake it will write a bunch of mutes. If omit bugs...
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Rustami » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:51 am

Jason Staczek wrote: So now when my Pro Tools music colleagues ask me about Nuendo I can say the metronome doesn't work, and when my post colleagues ask I can say mute automation doesn't work.



Jason
Also you can say that Protools has no Pool, sample editor, interleaved tracks, its own bugs and so on ;-)
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

Jason_Staczek
Junior Member
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Jason_Staczek » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:28 am

It's true, none of them are perfect, but mute automation seems pretty fundamental, no?!

I also remind the PT guys that they're stuck with RTAS....
Cubase 9.5.x, Nuendo 8, SSL Alphalink MADI-AX, RME HDSPe MADI, Mac OS 10.12.x, Windows 10.x, PT12.x

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Rustami » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:00 am

Jason Staczek wrote:It's true, none of them are perfect, but mute automation seems pretty fundamental, no?!

I also remind the PT guys that they're stuck with RTAS....
Well, maybe you are right, but I get used to the fact mute automation is buggy so I abandoned it... I mean, it never worked normally in Nuendo.
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

neilwilkes
Senior Member
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:55 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by neilwilkes » Thu Mar 03, 2011 1:05 pm

I'm with Rustami on this one.
Mute automation just doesn't work reliably. The only way you even stand a prayer of getting it close is by making absolutely certain you have an initial state set for the mute button on the start of every track - but even then it can get funky.
Use fader/volume automation instead - much better and far more reliable.
www.opusproductions.com
Intel E5-2687W 8-core Xeon, 32Gb RAM, Windows 7 Pro x64, RME RayDAT, UAD-2 Octo x2 & Quad x2 (fully loaded), Adam A7 x5, WK ID Console
Nuendo 1-6, Cubase 6-7, WaveLab 5-7, DTS/DD encoders, Surround Edition etc, Waves Mercury
Blu-Ray authoring, DVD authoring & high resolution audio specialists.

Detailed Specs on request

Jason_Staczek
Junior Member
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Jason_Staczek » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:09 pm

OK. I can accept that this is a fact. But it is still astonishing.
Cubase 9.5.x, Nuendo 8, SSL Alphalink MADI-AX, RME HDSPe MADI, Mac OS 10.12.x, Windows 10.x, PT12.x

Sam
Junior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Sam » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:39 pm

If you want any fun bedtime reading on the history of this fairy tale - search the old forums for "solo/mute issue" haha....enjoy ;) It was a wild ride!

Jason_Staczek
Junior Member
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Jason_Staczek » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:56 pm

I would, but I'm not able to search the archives. Where'd the search button go?
Cubase 9.5.x, Nuendo 8, SSL Alphalink MADI-AX, RME HDSPe MADI, Mac OS 10.12.x, Windows 10.x, PT12.x

User avatar
illusionsong
New Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:20 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by illusionsong » Fri Mar 11, 2011 7:59 am

You guys have great attitude about this. I am so stubborn. I hate the bug. It also effects solo. When I solo tracks that are being bussed to a group not all the tracks that are not soloed get muted. Very irritating.
I guess I will abandon mute automation. It's crazy that nuendo sports such advanced automation features and that they can't root out a bug that is so fundamentally wrong to the whole process of mixing.
Is pro tools really just as buggy? I was thinking of moving to pro tools 9 hd.
J.P.

Computer: Mac 12 Core OS 10.75
Interface: RME Madi Fx
Converters: Orion / Burl B 80
Master Clock: UA 2192
Control Surface: Smart Av Tango
DAW of Choice : Nuendo 5.5 / Wavelab 8

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Rustami » Fri Mar 11, 2011 8:31 am

Yes, ProTools is buggy in its own way.
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

Jason_Staczek
Junior Member
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Jason_Staczek » Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:27 am

Pro Tools definitely has its own bugs, but I've never experienced broken mute automation.

For that matter, mute/solo is definitely weird in Nuendo even without automation. Just today I spent three minutes scratching my head looking at an unmuted track wondering why I couldn't hear it. Nothing else solo'ed or muted. It had just been imported. When I finally toggled the mute on that track it suddenly started playing again.

Go figure...

Jason
Cubase 9.5.x, Nuendo 8, SSL Alphalink MADI-AX, RME HDSPe MADI, Mac OS 10.12.x, Windows 10.x, PT12.x

DTSR
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by DTSR » Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:07 pm

Jason Staczek wrote:Pro Tools definitely has its own bugs, but I've never experienced broken mute automation.

For that matter, mute/solo is definitely weird in Nuendo even without automation. Just today I spent three minutes scratching my head looking at an unmuted track wondering why I couldn't hear it. Nothing else solo'ed or muted. It had just been imported. When I finally toggled the mute on that track it suddenly started playing again.

Go figure...

Jason
re: solo/mute go to the old forum site and you'll find plenty on this.

It boils down to Steinberg insisting that the "paradigm shifting" conception of mute/solo behaviour it is implementing ("forget how it was done before this is how it should be done") is worth getting to grips with, because even though it may actually be counter intuitive, it's fricken awesome. ;)

Sam
Junior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Sam » Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:35 am

It boils down to if my mute button is engaged, then I should never hear sound from that channel. If it is unengaged I should hear sound. Simple. This is not the case with Nuendo. I have to toggle mute automated tracks to hear them, mute automated tracks come flying on while I have the monitors way up listening to some quiet track I have soloed. It's crap, it's amatuer hour, it's embarrassing. Fix it.

DTSR
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by DTSR » Thu Mar 17, 2011 2:54 pm

This is the last discussion i recall on the matter, shortly after N5 was released, there are different views on the issue, and there are some suggestions that might be useful.

Some people like the way Nuendo deals with this, while others simply want a DAW to emulate the operations of a physical console; though arguably there is no necessity for this other than serving to support habituated tendencies.

Personally speaking, in some 6 years of Nuendo use, I have not once faced a situation where I needed to automate muting, I've automated just about everything else, but never this. However, i think there should maybe be a global mute/solo behaviour option, so people can choose.

Sam
Junior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by Sam » Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:03 pm

If SB cant figure out how to correctly implement mute automation, they should remove it as a feature and not leave it as a broken feature. Its broken when the mute button is lit and there is sound coming out of the channel. Its broken when I am soloing a track and mute automation on some other track opens it up and allows me to hear it.

Those issues are NOTHING to do with emulating any console in my book. They are broken behaviour/features...

Like I said - if there is no 'need' for mute automation - then why not just take that function out of the program? Fix it or change the paradigm and educate people on why it is better not to have it... ;)

DTSR
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by DTSR » Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:11 pm

Sam wrote: Fix it or change the paradigm and educate people on why it is better not to have it... ;)
better to fix it then, i guess, then people have a choice, because if it's removed, you can bet new users will complain about the "missing feature."

User avatar
MattiasNYC
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3784
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by MattiasNYC » Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:16 pm

DTSR wrote:[url=http://www.nuendo.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=23208]Some people like the way Nuendo deals with this, while others simply want a DAW to emulate the operations of a physical console; though arguably there is no necessity for this other than serving to support habituated tendencies.
"habituated tendencies".... Sounds like you're talking about what people are used to, right?

If they want Nuendo to be competitive (and sometimes it really doesn't seem like it) then getting engineers to jump ship from PT or Logic is necessary. So if those engineers are used to a certain solo functionality, then why not give it to them? Why have Nuendo be the odd one out? What goal does that serve if it doesn't have to be that way?

I'd understand if it was a matter of screwing up the system completely, but that doesn't seem to be the case to me. Fredo hinted at it in the thread you linked to above, but didn't give specifics, so I remain unconvinced. I think it's absolutely clear that if a track is not soloed, but has mute automated, it should not be playing if another track is soloed (see exception below). I think that's fairly obvious.
DTSR wrote:Personally speaking, in some 6 years of Nuendo use, I have not once faced a situation where I needed to automate muting, I've automated just about everything else, but never this. However, i think there should maybe be a global mute/solo behaviour option, so people can choose.
I actually agree. I even think automating mute is a terrible practice. Now with DAWs we can use visual cues by muting regions/clips instead of not seeing whether a track is about to be muted. Much better visual feedback.

I'll also agree with some that if you solo a group of tracks, and one track in that group has automated mute, then that automation should "play" and the track should switch between being muted and added to solo accordingly. So yes, there is nuance to this of course.
Nuendo 7.1.4 / Lynx TWO-B / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Ryzen 1700 3.7GHz (oc) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4@3200MHz / Nvidia GTX 660 / ASUS x370-A mobo/ 500GB WD Blue system drive / Crucial BX100 250GB SSD media / spinners for library/backup ::::: iZotope RX / Phoenixverb Surround / DaVinci Resolve / Faderport / Applied Acoustics UltraAnalog / my pet pony Frank

User avatar
MattiasNYC
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3784
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by MattiasNYC » Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:17 pm

Sam wrote:If SB cant figure out how to correctly implement mute automation, they should remove it as a feature and not leave it as a broken feature. Its broken when the mute button is lit and there is sound coming out of the channel. Its broken when I am soloing a track and mute automation on some other track opens it up and allows me to hear it.

Those issues are NOTHING to do with emulating any console in my book. They are broken behaviour/features...
I absolutely agree.
Nuendo 7.1.4 / Lynx TWO-B / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Ryzen 1700 3.7GHz (oc) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4@3200MHz / Nvidia GTX 660 / ASUS x370-A mobo/ 500GB WD Blue system drive / Crucial BX100 250GB SSD media / spinners for library/backup ::::: iZotope RX / Phoenixverb Surround / DaVinci Resolve / Faderport / Applied Acoustics UltraAnalog / my pet pony Frank

DTSR
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by DTSR » Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:00 pm

"habituated tendencies".... Sounds like you're talking about what people are used to, right?
call me cynical, but this could be a question of dogs and tricks. ;) People were once used to 8 track consoles and reel to reel, things evolved, as they do. There's no good reason why a DAW needs to rigidly stick to being a software emulation of two pieces of hardware, but that's what we are stuck with, because of the analog legacy that inspired its design.
If they want Nuendo to be competitive (and sometimes it really doesn't seem like it) then getting engineers to jump ship from PT or Logic is necessary. So if those engineers are used to a certain solo functionality, then why not give it to them? Why have Nuendo be the odd one out? What goal does that serve if it doesn't have to be that way?
I think you'll need to get an answer from SB on that, they seem to have done lots of kooky stuff over the years, i can only guess that they are taking a chance, trying something different, because they believe in doing things that way; as a result of identifying how it might improve work flow. We could probably also assume that the industry professionals they have worked closely with, in developing the post-based feature set we see, also share this SB vision. Time will tell.

Another point would be that we have a generation of users now who first cut their teeth on a DAW of one description or another, they've never used tape, or a physical console, and they are not looking to a DAW as a software representation of such equipment, so why should they be expected to adopt working methods that are essentially hangovers from the analog era?

User avatar
MattiasNYC
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3784
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by MattiasNYC » Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:30 pm

DTSR wrote:There's no good reason why a DAW needs to rigidly stick to being a software emulation of two pieces of hardware, but that's what we are stuck with, because of the analog legacy that inspired its design.
There is a good reason (which is the one I wrote about):

If your DAW is fighting not just to be an industry leader, but even to survive, then is the best strategy to do things differently which makes it more time consuming for engineers to migrate to it, or to conform to a standard?

If it was only solo/mute that'd be one thing (and perhaps we're just talking about the issue of bugs, not design), but there are other issues as well where Steinberg simply told the users "tough luck, this is the Steinberg way, compatibility be damned", which doesn't seem all too bright in my opinion.
DTSR wrote:
If they want Nuendo to be competitive (and sometimes it really doesn't seem like it) then getting engineers to jump ship from PT or Logic is necessary. So if those engineers are used to a certain solo functionality, then why not give it to them? Why have Nuendo be the odd one out? What goal does that serve if it doesn't have to be that way?
I think you'll need to get an answer from SB on that, they seem to have done lots of kooky stuff over the years, i can only guess that they are taking a chance, trying something different, because they believe in doing things that way; as a result of identifying how it might improve work flow. We could probably also assume that the industry professionals they have worked closely with, in developing the post-based feature set we see, also share this SB vision. Time will tell.
Sorry to be a downer, but I fail to see who these industry professionals are and how it has increased market share. Don't get me wrong, Nuendo is a fantastic product, but given all the fairly serious bugs considering that it's a post app the notion that they've "worked closely with" "industry professionals" rings partially hollow.

If the "lesser" users (no disrespect meant) find problems with choppy video, truncated video, dropped video frames, .aaf import problems, solo mute problems, and it takes a long time to solve, at least I wonder who these professionals are, and more importantly, how many they are. Not saying they aren't good at what they do, but apparently something is askew here. Look at the bigger picture.
DTSR wrote:Another point would be that we have a generation of users now who first cut their teeth on a DAW of one description or another, they've never used tape, or a physical console, and they are not looking to a DAW as a software representation of such equipment, so why should they be expected to adopt working methods that are essentially hangovers from the analog era?
That's not the point (I'm making). If they're in the US and many other parts they'll be looking at Logic because it's intimately connected with the Apple computers (duh, I know), and Macs (and thus Logic) are "the standard for artists". Second on that list, once again not everywhere, but in a lot of places, is Pro Tools.

Fine, if you're looking at composers, semi-pros and hobbyists, I'm sure a lot will choose Cubase. But if you're looking at people who do professional post work, you'll likely see people go where the industry currently is: Avid. Why would a "newbie" get Nuendo when the mix-stages he wants to work on have Pro Tools? The transition between the two is easier the more similar the DAWs are, so that's why I'm saying that some things, that are either essential for workflows or very basic, are better off being "the same" from the standpoint of Steinberg gaining market share.....
Nuendo 7.1.4 / Lynx TWO-B / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Ryzen 1700 3.7GHz (oc) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4@3200MHz / Nvidia GTX 660 / ASUS x370-A mobo/ 500GB WD Blue system drive / Crucial BX100 250GB SSD media / spinners for library/backup ::::: iZotope RX / Phoenixverb Surround / DaVinci Resolve / Faderport / Applied Acoustics UltraAnalog / my pet pony Frank

DTSR
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by DTSR » Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:17 pm

If your DAW is fighting not just to be an industry leader, but even to survive, then is the best strategy to do things differently which makes it more time consuming for engineers to migrate to it, or to conform to a standard?

Sorry to be a downer, but I fail to see who these industry professionals are and how it has increased market share. Don't get me wrong, Nuendo is a fantastic product, but given all the fairly serious bugs considering that it's a post app the notion that they've "worked closely with" "industry professionals" rings partially hollow.
I agree it is a fantastic but flawed product, and the impression I've always had is that survival, not leadership, is where Nuendo is positioned, relative to other platforms, but i don't know anything about facts and figures on this. Initially a progressive "pro-user" offshoot of Cubase, that then tried to reinvent itself as a post environment, it has always been kinda niche, but there have also been a number of bad decisions, which wouldn't have been made by a company obsessed with gaining market share. The Euphonix tie in helped, and I'm speculating that this offered them increased access to post industry professionals, for developmental purposes, but with Avid having swallowed that company up, where does that leave Nuendo? in terms of having a real future as a post production DAW? But if development continues, as it has done for over a decade now, surely that indicates that there are enough people out there using it to make it worth while?

It's possible there are bigger concerns right now than solo/mute behaviour, but I agree, it would seem logical to get common features right, because if there is a genuine concern about competitors, conforming would make more sense than experimenting with new methodologies and trying to convince potential customers of their merits (in an effort to change the post world). Ultimately, I don't have a clue what the market strategy for Nuendo is, but judging by the way they have done things to date, SB seems comfortable with it being a kinda niche big brother to Cubase that serves as a potential alternative to Pro-Tools for post production. I just hope market share moves in the right direction so they keep developing the product, but having said that, I would speculate that as long as Cubase has a solid user base, Nuendo's development will continue.

User avatar
illusionsong
New Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:20 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Funky mute automation?!

Post by illusionsong » Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:51 pm

:ugeek: Maybe the truth is that it is not in the interest of Steinberg or Avid to produce totally bug free software with perfect hardware (control surface) integration. If they did we would at least have the option to stop chasing the new feature carrot that has been so long in front of us and just settle for great performance of existing features. Things are undeniably better. Amazing utility. However when a pro product like Nuendo sports a totally broken mute automation system, and an equally broken and ridiculous solo system I smell a rat. It seems almost impossible to me that something so basic cannot be fixed. Since the bug primarily affects the pro user, I hereby decree that they do not fix it on purpose so we will keep upgrading in hopes it will be addressed.

Whose with me?
J.P.

Computer: Mac 12 Core OS 10.75
Interface: RME Madi Fx
Converters: Orion / Burl B 80
Master Clock: UA 2192
Control Surface: Smart Av Tango
DAW of Choice : Nuendo 5.5 / Wavelab 8

Post Reply

Return to “Steinberg Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests