Cockos Incorporated Forums - View Single Post

inthepipeline · 04-17-2008, 05:14 AM

Marcus,

Actually the fader isn't limited to 127 steps, unlike the pan control which is. It uses (127 x 127)=16,129 steps. Have a look higher up this thread, where the working of the faders is un-covered.

What I'm actually referring to is the relationship between the physical position of the fader, which is logarithmic to the position of the automation point.

What I'm saying is that the automation points should have a direct relationship with the position of the fader, but the automation points should have a definable relationship (log, lin or whatever) to what happens to the fade.

When I mix, what I want to see and edit is relative to the actual position of the fader.

It is the relationship between the way that the envelope is displayed and what it actually does to the level which should
be different IMO.

*I*

04-17-2008, 05:14 AM	#46
inthepipeline Human being with feelings Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Bristol, UK. Slowly sinking island next to mainland Europe Posts: 542	Marcus, Actually the fader isn't limited to 127 steps, unlike the pan control which is. It uses (127 x 127)=16,129 steps. Have a look higher up this thread, where the working of the faders is un-covered. What I'm actually referring to is the relationship between the physical position of the fader, which is logarithmic to the position of the automation point. What I'm saying is that the automation points should have a direct relationship with the position of the fader, but the automation points should have a definable relationship (log, lin or whatever) to what happens to the fade. When I mix, what I want to see and edit is relative to the actual position of the fader. It is the relationship between the way that the envelope is displayed and what it actually does to the level which should be different IMO. I __________________ 10core Xeon w.128gig RAM, lots of SSD, HDSP9652, MOTU828, Tannoy System 8 NFM.