How much automation have you used?

A

AlecBeretz

New member
Hey HR,

Could you all describe a time where you used a ton of volume automation, and why you did it? Uploading a screen shot would be cool too.
Or, if you never use it, explain why not.

Thanks!
 
Every single mix gets a TON of automation. And I do mean every single mix. Drum fills, cymbal hits, verb accents, delay accents, etc, etc.

Static mixes are boring :thumbs up:
 
Yup, what Jeffro said. A Ton!!! From intro to verse to chorus and back again; bringing instruments up or down, in or out of the mix. Always lots going on.

When I record automation, I usually focus on one track at a time. I might use the fader or go into the timeline and edit the points (nodes) of the automation track. If I use the fader, I will go back in and edit the points anyways to remove the superfluous points and clean up. Each point is a line in the edit file and no point is having more edits than you really need.
 
I agree with both the above. The most important automations I make are usually on rhythm guitars for impact. Narrow and a bit lower level in a verse, maybe even just on guitar center, then wide and raised volume in the chorus. It makes everything have more power.

Also, maybe vox up or down, and riding the fader too. Parts come in or out. More drum room in parts and not others. Drastic eq changes for a section or something. Just make contrast...
 
Lots of volume automation on rhythm guitars, solos and vocals. Even mixed a track where I had to automate the volume on almost every kick hit - that was a fun day in which many cans of beer were drunk!

I've recently started automating the volume on drum overheads too.. something I hadn't really considered before I tried it. Now I use it in nearly every mix.

Also automating plug-in parameters - EQ, comp, Lo-Fi, verbs, delays. The last 2 contains send levels too.

Everything can change at any time and even though it can be a bit of a P-take to get right, it's worth it.
 
i use automation the same way that i do riding a mix on a board...

plus, i'll use panning automation to work arrangments, using the same track panned hard left or right to suit a mix.....

same with vox, i'll pan them up center, and on certain parts of the arrangments, i'll change them to wide left and right....

and doing auto pans across the stereo spread is fun a lot of times as well...


i'll automate all of my effects sends.
all of them.


i hate mixes with a constant barrage of delays or reverbs...

i'll put it in ONLY where it matters, and where it makes sense to make the space..
why have soupy guitar parts when you don't need them?



i'll automate my sub-busses (sub group mixes) and i have even mixed entire songs with fixed faders on the tracks, and all mixing going on below the master sub....


i'll automate EQ, for special effect, or simply to De-Ess certain parts........
 
wow, very informative... thanks. i barely use any and tend to rely on the performance for dynamics, or i'll cut up an instrument onto different tracks. verse rhythm guitar, chorus rhythm guitar, etc. But I may start automating more...
 
I've never use the actual "volume automation" in the DAW....but as I edit, comp and slowly build the mix, I adjust the levels of track "sections", since most tracks end up getting cut up into chunks anyway.

I find the whole "volume curves" stuff all over the tracks to be kind of messy looking...so I do it this other other way.

That said, I tend to track with dynamics as much as I can, and also depend on the arrangement for variety during the song's progression, so there's really not a whole lot of dramatic volume changes going on when I edit and mix...it's more "spot fixes", like if there's a word(s) or note(s) too soft/loud.
When I'm actually mixing down the song....the faders on my console rarely move, and there's no automation curves happening in the DAW, since everything was set beforehand during tracking and editing.

I guess it's just a different approach.....
 
miroslav said:
I find the whole "volume curves" stuff all over the tracks to be kind of messy looking...so I do it this other other way.
Click to expand...

I think there are some DAW's that draw the automation right on top of the clip in the timeline. I can see how that can get cluttered looking. Cubase uses a sub-track that you can hide, so not so messy.
 
Chili said:
I think there are some DAW's that draw the automation right on top of the clip in the timeline. I can see how that can get cluttered looking. Cubase uses a sub-track that you can hide, so not so messy.
Click to expand...

To tell the truth, I think my l;atest version of Samplitude is probably like that too....though I've not even bothered to check it out! :D
I'mn just so use doing the volume as I edit, that I don't really have a need for automation at the end.
 
Chili said:
I think there are some DAW's that draw the automation right on top of the clip in the timeline. I can see how that can get cluttered looking. Cubase uses a sub-track that you can hide, so not so messy.
Click to expand...

Sonar X2 has automation lanes which can be displayed/hidden at will.

This makes editing envelopes a breeze
 
Logic has the automation hidden if you want it too as well to help prevent screen clutter.

And oddly, it would appear, i don't use automation that much. If i do it's usually for pans and effect on's and off's and only very occasionally for volumes. If i'm automating volume i much prefer to use the "touch" mode or alike so that it does, at least, feel like riding faders on a board, but with pans etc it's just easier to draw them in directly.
 
I ALWAYS use automation on every track, but the most common tracks that get automated in my projects though would be:

-Different types of Delays on and off (for vocals)
-Delay Mix
-Reverb Mix
-Snare volume (specifically on snare rolls)
-Kick volume (on faster parts)
 
Yeah...the FX stuff can add contrast...though for FX like delay and reverb, I just set them post-fader to an Aux...that way as the volume changes for the track, the FX follows, and no need to adjust or automate that...
...but it really depends on the music style, and there are times when more dramatic changes can work.
 
miroslav said:
Yeah...the FX stuff can add contrast...though for FX like delay and reverb, I just set them post-fader to an Aux...that way as the volume changes for the track, the FX follows, and no need to adjust or automate that...
...but it really depends on the music style, and there are times when more dramatic changes can work.
Click to expand...

So are you doing extra EQ work on your returns because any EQ on the track is not effecting what's sent? It's probably common practice to EQ the returns whether pre or post fader send anway, but is that something you look out for more?
 
No...I'm not doing any EQ on my returns. When I use post-fader Aux sends, they are also post-EQ for that track.
AFA the overall EQ of my FX...I set that globally for the reverb/delay, at the reverb/delay.
I don't believe much in having all kinds of different FX flavors per track. It's usually 1-2 reverbs (similar just different times), and then I simply adjust how much level to apply per track.
AFA delay, I tend to just create that within the original track with copy/paste...I don't do complicated multi-rep delays and whatnot, because again, I'm just using delay and reverb to put all the tracks, all the "players", into a specific "space".

Of course...the choices for FX and how to apply them is dependant on the song and style of music....so if I was doing more Techno/Trance/Dance stuff...then "space reality" might not be the main focus, and it would be more of FX/sound design for the sake of some "ear candy"....which is something different.
I try to mix more with the "band playing in a specific space" kind of mentality for most of my stuff.
 
What I originally understood to be automation turned out not to be automation at all. So I never use it but what I do do, I call "poor man's automation".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top