FX Automation: Multiple Instances Of Same Cane Be Confusing

[Dave Labrecque]

Sidebar: I did a feature-length film a few years back, and I found it very helpful for several reasons to break it up into one EDL per scene and then a master EDL to transition between them. Have you considered doing that?

Advantages as I see it:

• Minimizes the chances of an accidental catastrophic editorial error, a session crash, or even EDL corruption -- due to so much automation tempting fate (been there)
• Gives you real power and simplicity to do scene-to-scene crossfades, sound bridges, etc.
• Much easier to tweak/maintain consistent, normalized loudness across the film

I was thinking it would also help with the reason for this thread, but I guess not. Oops.

All you can do is try the automation-type filter as mentioned (I usually find using the big smorgasbord or types too tedious for my work flow style, though maybe I'm just too ADHD) or just watch the controls move as you drag over the automation (not all that helpful when multiple automation moves are stacked right on top of each other, of course).

You know what would be super ergonomical? Something like you hold down the V key and click on the interface control for the automation type you want to reveal in the MT. Right?

[Todd R]

Sidebar: I did a feature-length film a few years back, and I found it very helpful for several reasons to break it up into one EDL per scene and then a master EDL to transition between them. Have you considered doing that?

yes...and have been down this road before...I find we lose options of transitions...

Advantages as I see it:

• Minimizes the chances of an accidental catastrophic editorial error, a session crash, or even EDL corruption -- due to so much automation tempting fate (been there)
• Gives you real power and simplicity to do scene-to-scene crossfades, sound bridges, etc.
• Much easier to tweak/maintain consistent, normalized loudness across the film

I was thinking it would also help with the reason for this thread, but I guess not. Oops.

Thanks for this :-)
I always work off of versions and keep a safety version of every important days work;
that said, I usually don't back up to separate drives- which is dumb; I'll fix that now.
Scene-to-scene stuff I handle in busses, but do agree those sub-mixes can be very helpful.
I actually find it harder to keep consistent loudness when breaking up the job.

All you can do is try the automation-type filter as mentioned (I usually find using the big smorgasbord or types too tedious for my work flow style, though maybe I'm just too ADHD) or just watch the controls move as you drag over the automation (not all that helpful when multiple automation moves are stacked right on top of each other, of course).

I'm figuring out a workflow that is pretty easy to separate.
Thanks to MicroStudio's urging I am using SS EQ for wind reduction and it's working pretty well so far;
I'm separating plug-ins by using input tracks, returns and busses and that is so far working well...thenagain I haven't gotten very far yet.
If I had a lot of tracks, it would be different...but I'm only at about 20 tracks

You know what would be super ergonomical? Something like you hold down the V key and click on the interface control for the automation type you want to reveal in the MT. Right?

hmmmm, for simple bypasses, I'd love to have a different automation event color for on and bypass...that would change the game for me :-)

[Microstudio]

I am a simple man I share what I could offer and still stand by what I said because it is the truth. There is no need to go to another DAW. From your picture, it looks like you are mixing film, not a song. Thus what I said could help you when using SAW because you can not Automate VST''s in SawStudio.

[Dave Labrecque]

It's been awhile since I did this. One detail I forgot to mention which may/may not make my individual-scene approach more palatable to you: Each scene would have a fully-discrete-track mix (where most of the work was done), then I'd build that out to separate dialogue, SFX, and music stems that would accompany the video in the master (scene-to-scene) EDL. That way I'd have more control over the transitions. Maybe you assumed that, but if not...

RE: consistent loudness... now that I think about it, I did that project way before I ever ventured into LUFS metering, etc. Did it all by ear (and maybe some RMS metering). What was I thinking? A good loudness plug-in across the master output bus would sure make it a cake walk to keep things consistent over a full-film EDL.

Good luck!

P.S. Beyond library sourcing of SFX, I did all the Foley, too. Super fun. You doing any of that? How 'bout ADR? We did a bunch of that, which was also pretty cool. I learned a lot doing that.

[Todd R]

Also any Sound restoration DeClick, DeNoise can be done without a DAW.

I read this as
"any Sound restoration DeClick, DeNoise can be done out of SAW"

hence why asked what other DAW; my mistake

But what do you mean by this sentence: "any Sound restoration DeClick, DeNoise can be done without a DAW"?
I do A LOT of "forensic" audio in SS; always have
and get great results...and am doing right now

[Todd R]

I am a simple man I share what I could offer and still stand by what I said because it is the truth. There is no need to go to another DAW. From your picture, it looks like you are mixing film, not a song. Thus what I said could help you when using SAW because you can not Automate VST''s in SawStudio.

Yes, it is a film...talking, atmos, FX, music. I mix all our films in SS...since 2011. It's audio, man! No need to get hung up on music only as the audio :-)
I've mixed quite a few podcasts too in SS

You certainly can automate VSTs is SS; it's limited to only On and Bypass- but it is automation-
SS is not able automate plugin parameters, so I suppose that's what you mean

So essentially you, specifically, don't use multiples of the VST plugin on the same track...therefore don't have a workflow
that's cool....just trying to clarify

[Todd R]

It's been awhile since I did this. One detail I forgot to mention which may/may not make my individual-scene approach more palatable to you: Each scene would have a fully-discrete-track mix (where most of the work was done), then I'd build that out to separate dialogue, SFX, and music stems that would accompany the video in the master (scene-to-scene) EDL. That way I'd have more control over the transitions. Maybe you assumed that, but if not...

I always export a full mix, clean VO mix, and a music mix. We seldom use soundFX, but this film is effects wall to wall, so I would export an M&E and a Clean FX version too.

RE: consistent loudness... now that I think about it, I did that project way before I ever ventured into LUFS metering, etc. Did it all by ear (and maybe some RMS metering). What was I thinking? A good loudness plug-in across the master output bus would sure make it a cake walk to keep things consistent over a full-film EDL.

Good luck!

I've been throught LUFS transition...it's taken some teething. I like the Fab Filter Pro-L...it does take some experience to know how to work with the Pro-L. I never "just slap a limiter on it"- have to work it...

P.S. Beyond library sourcing of SFX, I did all the Foley, too. Super fun. You doing any of that? How 'bout ADR? We did a bunch of that, which was also pretty cool. I learned a lot doing that.

I recorded everything in the film except a fair amount of camera audio in this film. All of our "foley" is on location recording of machines and humans working, etc...I've never done any studio foley. I haven't done any ADR, yet have mixed a lot of shotgun + Lav.

Thanks for the guidance, much appreciated :-)

[MMP]

When working on long form dialogue EQ, I typically find what I think is the best sounding piece for each character and use that as a template for Izotope match EQ which I then process to one track. I do tend to use noise reduction plugins on single extra tracks for each type of anomaly. Sometimes printing the reduction before doing a match EQ pass.

VST2 automation would be a godsend, but even expansion of SS to use VST3 plugins would make my life a lot easier. All the VST3 host plugins hide the settings down an extra layer, which becomes a PITA after a while. I am too old to seriously consider learning another DAW, so I have developed work-arounds, but sometimes get grumpy about it (you kids get off my lawn).

[Microstudio]

I read this as
"any Sound restoration DeClick, DeNoise can be done out of SAW"

hence why asked what other DAW; my mistake

But what do you mean by this sentence: "any Sound restoration DeClick, DeNoise can be done without a DAW"?
I do A LOT of "forensic" audio in SS; always have
and get great results...and am doing right now

What it means is you can run any VST without a DAW, you run it in Standalone to do what you want to the audio. If you need to DeNoise/DeClick audio you can do it that way then just put it into SawStudio without the need to do it in SawStudio. It's just another way to do it that's all.

[Todd R]

What it means is you can run any VST without a DAW, you run it in Standalone to do what you want to the audio. If you need to DeNoise/DeClick audio you can do it that way then just put it into SawStudio without the need to do it in SawStudio. It's just another way to do it that's all.

ah, right, understood :-)