Master Fader not following automation

[Coachz]

How come when I enable volume automation the master fader does not follow the 0dB level please ? See how the output stays at -6.24 dB ?

[Coachz]

bump on this Reaperettes !

[Glennbo]

If you right click your envelope and look at envelope defaults, do you have the default option of "Volume Envelope Amplitude Scaling" checked, or has it been changed to "Volume Envelope Fader Scaling" which will result in different behavior?

[Coachz]

"Volume Envelope Amplitude Scaling"

[Glennbo]

If you close and reopen the outputs for master track view does it change then? Just thinking it might be a case of not updating the visual for that view in realtime. I had a case recently where I had altered something and expected to see it in a view that was already open, but I had to close it and reopen it for it to update the visual.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by Glennbo

If you close and reopen the outputs for master track view does it change then? Just thinking it might be a case of not updating the visual for that view in realtime. I had a case recently where I had altered something and expected to see it in a view that was already open, but I had to close it and reopen it for it to update the visual.

No, there is no change and when I render the levels are way low because of it. So whenever I go to render a project I have to open the I/O to see if the fader is low even though the volume automation for the master channel says to be 0dB.

[karbomusic]

I think it's either a bug or a cool way to have a trim control when in read mode for the master FWIW.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I think it's either a bug or a cool way to have a trim control when in read mode for the master FWIW.

I think bug

[nofish]

Hm, read mode on master seems to act the same as trim/read?

[karbomusic]

Said behavior is the same on tracks.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Said behavior is the same on tracks.

On my tracks my fader's follow the volume automation when in read mode. what do you mean? My master is the only one wonky in read mode.

[karbomusic]

I mean that when you look at the master volume slider... the one in the I/O dialog... it never follows read mode in your video. The master volume on the track does move read. If you meant something else, I can't tell from the vid.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I mean that when you look at the master volume slider... the one in the I/O dialog... it never follows read mode in your video. The master volume on the track does move read. If you meant something else, I can't tell from the vid.

Right and I'm saying it should because it staying low is not following the Volume automation on the master channel.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Coachz

Right and I'm saying it should because it staying low is not following the Volume automation on the master channel.

I see the same thing if it is a regular track...




But that seems potentially more useful to me for some needs depending on the situation, such as being able to trim overall volume while in read mode but... I've never had this affect me that I know of so hard to judge.

[Coachz]

Oh dear. so every track including the master has a hidden trim fader that is tied to the main fader that is going to constantly change your levels of all of your tracks relative to the automation? that seems disastersous. So besides having a trim automation mode apparently if you just disable Automation and move the fader you just trimmed it also. No bueno

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Coachz

Oh dear. so every track including the master has a hidden trim fader that is tied to the main fader that is going to constantly change your levels of all of your tracks relative to the automation? that seems disastersous. So besides having a trim automation mode apparently if you just disable Automation and move the fader you just trimmed it also. No bueno

One has to explicitly open the dialog (and... only while in read mode) and start changing volume but even then, it's just trimming which is probably what prompted to open the dialog to begin with. I'm empathetic but I can't find the disaster, and as I said, 10 years, never bit me. IOW, I can't see how I'd be in full read mode, then be motivated to open that dialog to change volume, that sequence of events doesn't make any sense unless I was in read and wanted to make a small adjustment without moving out of read mode. When not in read mode, or when disabling automation, the two follow each other which is why I say it might be a feature not a bug.

[Coachz]

my main Master fader causes that IO fader to move whether the Box is open or not

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Coachz

my main Master fader causes that IO fader to move whether the Box is open or not

Not if in read mode which was my point - in read you can't move the main fader, but you can move the one in IO. In case my edit above was latent...

When not in read mode, or when disabling automation, the two follow each other regardless of which one you move, which is why I say it might be a feature not a bug when read is enabled.

I also can't figure out how this would break anything since no one moves a volume fader without expecting volume to change.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Not if in read mode which was my point - in read you can't move the main fader, but you can move the one in IO. In case my edit above was latent...

When not in read mode, or when disabling automation, the two follow each other regardless of which one you move, which is why I say it might be a feature not a bug when read is enabled.

when monitoring in the studio you're going to change the master volume level Without a doubt. But then when you're ready to render you want the master to render based on what the volume automation says and to ignore whatever position the master fader was at because now the volume says 0 dB in the automation data.

no matter how this is explained it still seems screwed up to me. volume automation should absolutely control the volume going out of that track and any trim should move all of those automation points up or down by that amount. any other way is confusing to me anyways

[karbomusic]

But knowing what you just said, why would you ever be in full read mode then suddenly decide to open the IO dialog and start changing volumes? I'm still empathetic but that makes no sense to me.

Just being in that mode should infer you don't want to change things unless you have a specific need like I explained.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

But knowing what you just said, why would you ever be in full read mode then suddenly decide to open the IO dialog and start changing volumes? I'm still empathetic but that makes no sense to me.

Just being in that mode should infer you don't want to change things unless you have a specific need like I explained. Automation doesn't "say" anything and is still 100% proportional to what the curve shows. I get what you are saying as far as the envelope value, I just don't see the practical problem really.

Because on the Master fader I monitor with it so I adjust the monitor volumes, but when I render I want it at 0dB and to follow my automation (like fade outs or fade ins). To be clear...I never open the IO dialog. Moving the master fader changes it when not in read mode.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Coachz

Because on the Master fader I monitor with it so I adjust the monitor volumes, but when I render I want it at 0dB and to follow my automation (like fade outs or fade ins). To be clear...I never open the IO dialog. Moving the master fader changes it when not in read mode.

When not in read mode they are essentially the exact same fader.

Can you show me how it then affects anything if you never manually change it by opening the dialog when in read mode. I can't seem to find how this would cause any discrepancy without opening that dialog and changing volume while in read mode.

[karbomusic]

A side note that I never use the master fader for monitoring volume - EVER - that's inferior IMHO, use an external analog controller (like presonus monitor station) or the actual "Hardware outs" on the master fader (right under the main fader in the IO box)- monitoring volume is what that fader is for.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

When not in read mode they are essentially the exact same fader.

Can you show me how it then affects anything if you never manually change it by opening the dialog when in read mode. I can't seem to find how this would cause any discrepancy without opening that dialog and changing volume while in read mode.

So what's happening is, I have automation on master that lets' say has a fade in from -10dB to 0dB. If I have been monitoring and moving my master fader (let's say at -12dB) with automation disabled (which I have to do to move the fader), then when I am ready to render and I engage automation without having touched the master, my render will be 12dB down.

Because you have kindly talked me through it, I think I have a workaround for my master. I never do this as you mentioned with the other tracks as I have no need and they work fine. So I'll just change my render button to this and be ok. Thanks for talking me through it. I guess it's an expected behavior but was a quirk for me.

Custom: Render File to Disk
Xenakios/SWS: Set master volume to 0 dB
File: Render project to disk...

[karbomusic]

All good, see the point about it being generally a bad idea to use the master as the monitor volume, use the hardware volume control instead which lives in that same dialog, an external analog controller or add a monitoring volume control to the monitoring FX. All of these leave the rendering and master track unaffected.

Not sure if you remember our discussions on KSystem/LUFs calibration but making sure the master was not the mixer's volume control is a key part of a great setup. That said, I can't tell you how happy I've been for years with an external volume for my monitors, it's the bees knees for multiple reasons.

[Coachz]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

All good, see the point about it being generally a bad idea to use the master as the monitor volume, use the hardware volume control instead, an external analog controller or add a monitoring volume control to the monitoring FX. All of these leave the rendering unaffected.

Not sure if you remember our discussions on KSystem/LUFs calibration but making sure the master was not the mixer's volume control is a key part of a great setup.

Yup, but since you have met me, you know I think different. :-) I try to do everything in Reaper but I'm never too old to learn. Thanks again for the ideas though as this removes at least one wrinkle from my workflow. I'm about 2 months away from releasing a new 18 song double jazz cd with my friend. We are having a lot of fun.

My latest wrinkle is that the mixes don't have enough bass and highs in my car. It seems I'm monitoring too loud in the studio and causing the problem per fletcher munson. I'm down to about 78dB now and think I'm getting closer to getting mixes that translate better.

I updated my script.

Custom: Render File to Disk
Xenakios/SWS: Set master volume to 0 dB
SWS: Select master track
Automation: Set track automation mode to read
File: Render project to disk...

[karbomusic]

Good luck on your CD!

[Coachz]

Thanks bud !

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

All good, see the point about it being generally a bad idea to use the master as the monitor volume, use the hardware volume control instead which lives in that same dialog, an external analog controller or add a monitoring volume control to the monitoring FX. All of these leave the rendering and master track unaffected.

Not sure if you remember our discussions on KSystem/LUFs calibration but making sure the master was not the mixer's volume control is a key part of a great setup. That said, I can't tell you how happy I've been for years with an external volume for my monitors, it's the bees knees for multiple reasons.

Are you sending a separate feed from independent outputs for your monitor feed? I have both a Samson C-Control and a Samson 5 port headphone amp, but my signal flow is from the main stereo outs of my audio interface to the first set of stereo inputs on the Samson C-Control. The C-Control has stereo monitor outs which are patched to the Samson headphone amp.

I've never really needed to hear a different mix than what the main mix has going on, so I've never set it up to be independent, plus I never use the master fader for anything (I do use envelopes on it sometimes though), so it always sits at 0db.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Glennbo

Are you sending a separate feed from independent outputs for your monitor feed? I have both a Samson C-Control and a Samson 5 port headphone amp, but my signal flow is from the main stereo outs of my audio interface to the first set of stereo inputs on the Samson C-Control. The C-Control has stereo monitor outs which are patched to the Samson headphone amp.

It's quite simple really, my main SC outputs go to a Presonus Monitor Station (could be any mixer really) and that physical knob controls all my monitoring volumes making whatever is set in reaper's master irrelevant to monitoring. That keeps what is rendered and how loud I hear it completely separate which is beneficial. There are also added benefits unrelated to this thread:

The presonus has multiple inputs and outputs, all switchable in various configurations. That means I have things other than reaper feeding it, and the three outputs go to my three sets of monitors which is how I can switch easily between monitors and sources as needed with the click of a button.

The biggest value is switching monitors on the fly and that big blue physical knob that allows me to cut the volume no matter what happens in the computer. Regardless of limiters or other protection, having that knob is great - it is also calibrated to a specific dB so when I put the knob where I marked it, that is exactly 83dB SPL when Reaper's output is -18 dbFS RMS. So, I have an exact predictable known mixing level solving the fletcher-munson issue.

At this point, if I had to use a mouse to change monitoring volume, I'd go bananas.

I've never really needed to hear a different mix than what the main mix has going on, so I've never set it up to be independent, plus I never use the master fader for anything (I do use envelopes on it sometimes though), so it always sits at 0db.

See above, nothing is independent, it's just an external control for the audio coming out of the computer so that my monitoring volume is unrelated to Reaper's output or render volume. I don't do any mix stuff that differs from render vs what I hear but if I did need to do that, such as some type of room correction, that would go in reapers monitoring FX because it doesn't affect the render either. I do place all my analyzers in monitoring FX but that's because it is global so that analyzers are always available in all projects.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

It's quite simple really, my main SC outputs go to a Presonus Monitor Station (could be any mixer really) and that physical knob controls all my monitoring volumes making whatever is set in reaper's master irrelevant to monitoring. That keeps what is rendered and how loud I hear it completely separate which is beneficial. There are also added benefits unrelated to this thread:

The presonus has multiple inputs and outputs, all switchable in various configurations. That means I have things other than reaper feeding it, and the three outputs go to my three sets of monitors which is how I can switch easily between monitors and sources as needed with the click of a button.

The biggest value is switching monitors on the fly and that big blue physical knob that allows me to cut the volume no matter what happens in the computer. Regardless of limiters or other protection, having that knob is great - it is also calibrated to a specific dB so when I put the knob where I marked it, that is exactly 83dB SPL when Reaper's output is -18 dbFS RMS. So, I have an exact predictable known mixing level solving the fletcher-munson issue.

At this point, if I had to use a mouse to change monitoring volume, I'd go bananas.



See above, nothing is independent, it's just an external control for the audio coming out of the computer so that my monitoring volume is unrelated to Reaper's output or render volume. I don't do any mix stuff that differs from render vs what I hear but if I did need to do that, such as some type of room correction, that would go in reapers monitoring FX because it doesn't affect the render either. I do place all my analyzers in monitoring FX but that's because it is global so that analyzers are always available in all projects.

OK thanks! It sounds like I am hooked up essentially the same as you. My Samson C-Control has four sets of switchable inputs and switchable outputs for switching between three sets of monitors (I use two sets plus a sub) and I exclusively use it's hardware volume control to turn volume up or down going to the monitors.

Since I am feeding my headphone amp from the C-Control, it is a clone of the main out with independent volume controls for 5 sets of phones. In my old analog studio the headphone feed was a totally separate mix where I could make the track being recorded louder than the tracks playing back without altering the main mix, but I've never found a need to hook it up like that with a DAW since I no longer run a commercial studio that has to deal with picky vocalists, Etc.

[karbomusic]

Ah, I just saw what the Samson C-Control is. So yes exactly. The only difference is I use total mix for headphone mixes/tracking monitoring but that's not really here nor there.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Ah, I just saw what the Samson C-Control is. So yes exactly. The only difference is I use total mix for headphone mixes/tracking monitoring but that's not really here nor there.

Veddy cool. Thanks for the info, because I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing some better way of routing the signal flow. Like you I have other stuff plugged into the inputs of my monitor control box. Main DAW out from the SC, computer OS audio out from an M-Audio 2496, and audio from a second video monitor that has a Raspberry Pi plugged in. The fourth set of inputs are currently unused. Doing A/B comparisons between sets of audio monitors is instantaneous, and the sub can be switched in or out with either set of monitors.

Getting that monitor control box was one of the absolute best purchases I've made for the DAW, and I found that sucker used on GC web site for $20.00! Shipping cost me almost as much as the hardware unit itself.


Edit: Just noticed they have a C-Control on GC's used pages again for $59.99

https://www.guitarcenter.com/Used/?Ntt=c-control&Ns=r

They also have a ton of Monitor Stations to choose from ranging from $119 to $399 for the rack mount version.

https://www.guitarcenter.com/Used/?N...rrencyCode=USD

[karbomusic]

I have the V1 monitor station but I think V2 is about the same. It sounds like our needs/setups are nearly identical. I totally agree on having it external like that. I do like active better than passive for the external mixer but that's just to keep from losing a few dB through passive. I also have my crappy computer MOBO sound card as one of my Mixstation inputs (and one for stuff like Pi's) but every time I enable it I remember why I don't like MOBO sound cards.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I have the V1 monitor station but I think V2 is about the same. It sounds like our needs/setups are nearly identical. I totally agree on having it external like that. I do like active better than passive for the external mixer but that's just to keep from losing a few dB through passive. I also have my crappy computer MOBO sound card as one of my Mixstation inputs (and one for stuff like Pi's) but every time I enable it I remember why I don't like MOBO sound cards.

Having multiple inputs fixed for me a rats nest of daisy chained audio things. Now it's very straight forward and I can easily isolate and identify things like when a buzz or hum develops.

The output level on my C-Control seems to be able to go more than what it is receiving, because prior to getting it, I would drown out my studio monitors playing acoustic drums with them, but now I can push them louder than I want when playing along on drums.

Edit: Forgot to mention that I do keep looking at the used rackmount Presonus Monitor Stations coz I may some day decide I don't need the headphone amp any more (seldom do I need more than two sets of phones and I can do that in the SC now). The two Samson units are each a half rack wide and mounted side by side in the rack of my desk, just below the video and audio monitors. If I got rid of half of it, I'd wanna lose the other half and replace it all with a rack mount Monitor Station.