Arranging using vca's - ideas, discussion / issues

BenK-msx · 03-11-2015, 06:50 PM

hi - would put this in 'general' but it involves vcas....

Something that bugs me of late is having a short idea (e.g 16 bars) that i then want to flesh out and arrange.
its a mixture of takes and edits and midi as you'd expect from a bit of music..

no method i use seems devoid of faff and it puts me off finishing things tbh.

the section normally gets looped and to see what goes together i'll mute/solo/drop parts in/out, ride faders etc. but to get that 'printed' into reaper is tricky or messy.

fiddling with existing automation is messy/risky, having dozens of tracks in view with their volume envelopes open is messy.

in another thread i mentioned trying vca tracks to control the tracks with content, acting as a submixer, and then automating those.

I've tried setting that up, and despite some head scratching got something usable setup - which i'd like to show and also show the PITA aspects in the hope devs can help us out a bit!.

image 1: what i typically have as the start point - initial idea copied out to 'song' length. Always a bit of a mess.. - Before:

having set up vca tracks for each part including mute envelopes (no solo allowed??) i then hid the original tracks, showed the volume and mute automation - and handily, put them into the media lane instead of in an envelope lane..

neater.. the arrange view now looks like this - red line mute envelop, green is track volume.
After:

here i can play with what parts to start with and when to bring in others and ride the mix over time - also helps determine/visualise when to introduce new sections/parts.
-

here is the mixer view - inserts hidden as there is none.
also note am using *Global touch mode* , so as the piece is playing, can tweak a fader or hit mute. just go over the same time period to adjust another part. quite pleasing.

advantages:

neat overall view of arrangement to toy/improvise arrangement ideas. not visually distracted by original content & not messing with original content in anyway, easy to dip in and perform edits etc.

disadvantages: (see post 4 below, some of these are fixable)

can't see track media as a cue & there is *no metering* in the vcas (you could send from each original track however and have the vca tracks not go out to master, this is just a bit of pita to setup)

vca set up is very slow, each vca track is several clicks, and the 'content track' has to be set to be a vca slave, not volume slave as i thought, otherwise you write automation to the original track... bad.

you then have to visibly show each vca track's volume and mute envelope otherwise global automation mode won't play nicely.

after that however its quite nice to use in touch mode to either set levels when stopped, or adjust during playback.

clearing the envelopes to start over etc is also a pain, requiring some macros to do it quickly on the vca tracks.

i do think this kind of thing is A: important for a daw to be able to assist users with - and B: this method has potential to be very handy for music makers in particular - its the bit i hate but is also really important to the end product!

- it harks back to my tracker days when i had a 4 bar looping 'block' whipped up, then put a tape in my tape recorder, hit play on my A500, record on the tape deck & just muted, solo'd and unsolo'd tracks to record a little arrangement dub style !

---
initial FRs that spring to mind:

to selects a bunch of tracks and create new vcas for EACH track with settings as desired. including optional metering of slave on the vca master.
better envelope clearing across many tracks (usual request)

ideally ghost waveforms option would be ace, but i don't have high hopes for that.

excuse long post - bravo for getting this far. many other softwares have had these arrangement tools long time, sure reaper can get close with bit of thought.

BenK-msx · 03-12-2015, 05:29 PM

wasn't expecting the crowd to go wild on this, so it's ok ...

i will be looking into trying meters using sends and just seeing how things work in use and if some setup steps can be automated.

having tried plain copying, grouping and copying, regions, toyed with project tabs, even pips, this seems the most promising for this purpose.

--

would be good to know if the approach of starting with short section and then getting a skeleton arrangement via looping playback and dropping parts in /out is one that is commonplace?, as i genuinely have no idea, and it might just be me..

Win Conway · 03-12-2015, 06:00 PM

Lack of updates for VCAs has kind of taken them off the boil, looks like what they are now is what they will be for a long time, i suspect everybody has burnt out giving ideas for a feature that is not getting updated haha

BenK-msx · 03-12-2015, 08:23 PM

there is that.. and it seems most folk are happy with how they come up with rough arrangements !

anyway further investigating reveals that :

gripe 1: no meters on the vca track - is reasonably easily resolved with a send from the slave, and unticking master/parent send on the vca track.

should be an auto option though.

gripe 2: for peaks/view slave media as a cue - you can copy slave media or a glue/freeze of the track from the slave to vca and then *mute* it - still visible, and doesn't take up any disk load or cpu so thats ok if a little clunky. basically just peaks to look at.

can't yet find a quick way to set many vcas for many tracks, taking up a group for each vca track, puts you right off. it takes 3 precise clicks per vca track at the moment.

if can macro/script setting this up based on content tracks it'd get some use from me anyhow!

-
further idea for when in the momentof arranging, can copy useful bits of vol automation that you might wish to repeat later by doing the old 'attach them to empty items' trick. anyhoo

Coachz · 03-13-2015, 04:18 AM

yeah it's like they really don't give a crap about vcas considering all the potential and the lack of coding that has resulted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpunk_w

Lack of updates for VCAs has kind of taken them off the boil, looks like what they are now is what they will be for a long time, i suspect everybody has burnt out giving ideas for a feature that is not getting updated haha

Jack Winter · 03-13-2015, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coachz

yeah it's like they really don't give a crap about vcas considering all the potential and the lack of coding that has resulted.

What's wrong with VCAs then? It appears to me that they work like VCAs ought to

planetnine · 03-13-2015, 04:03 PM

I daren't complain because I got exacty what I asked for

but there is certainly scope for UI feedback, not to mention coalescing functions...

>

timboid · 03-14-2015, 01:22 AM

I plan to use VCA similarly to you. Right now I have 8 tracks at the top of my project where everything is being sent to. E.g. rhythm guitars would have master output disabled and would be instead sent to a track at the top of the project.
Often times the setup is actually a bit complicated as tracks might be foldered, but sent not to the parent track but to that extra track on top, and from their sent back into the parent folder. Reason for this is that folder again is not sent to a master and sometimes folder tracks can be sent to a several faders on top.
E.g. drum tracks would be within drums folder, but kicks mics and samples would be sent to a kick track on top, snares to a snare track, etc. Now I have drum tracks spread over a few tracks on top, and if I want to process drums as a whole I need to route "top tracks" back to a drum folder.
With VCAs I would avoid this complication.
However, I thought I still would want to actually send audio to the top tracks, as I sometimes need global processing and quick effect automation and it makes sense to have everything on top. But using VCA has its merits.
So I will try using top tracks as both VCA-masters and for processing audio. To avoid applying gain twice I would need to use all sends as pre-fader (post-FX). I think it should work nicely for gain scheduling, as I may have a limiter with a ceiling which is not affected by a gain of the channel.

paulheu · 03-14-2015, 04:46 AM

Can you elaborate on why you are using VCA instead of subgroups (or folders)? It seems to me you are really looking for the latter more than VCA.

This has been discussed here at length but the function of a VCA is really only to set the top value for the control range the channel faders linked to it have.

Coachz · 03-14-2015, 05:20 AM

See cubase, user friendly vcas. What a concept.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Winter

What's wrong with VCAs then? It appears to me that they work like VCAs ought to

paulheu · 03-14-2015, 06:38 AM

The way Reaper currently implements VCA is the way VCA would work in the real world. Anything any other DAW may tack on feature wise has nothing to do with the functionality of a VCA.

A VCA (master) really only has 1 function and that is to set the multiplier for the control voltage of the channel faders grouped under it between 0 (VCA master fader down) and 1 (VCA master fader up). Nothing more and nothing less. It does not 'do' or 'show' or 'cause' anything else. This also explains why you can mute a VCA master (set to 0 > all grouped channels go silent) but not solo it (there's no audio signal path at the VCA master itself).

Depending on you workflow using a VCA makes sense or not, basically only when you use aux sends to a post fader (FX) bus on the channels groups under a VCA master. If you do not then using a group or folder is basically just as good, if not better.

Frankly in the digital realm the functionality of true VCA is rather limited when compared to the analog domain where the advantages are way more profound. This is probably the reason why so many DAW designs basically provide some sort of fancy 'VCA like' functionality.

BenK-msx · 03-14-2015, 08:13 AM

(This) Its for simplification of a complex edit heavy automation heavy bunch of tracks really.

Visually pic 2 compared to pic1 as an overview of track/part volumes/activity is clearly neater.
The vca mixer view allows quick part level adjustment without any affect on content. I still go into the content and edit or add parts and still go into VCS to make arrangement tweaks.

So far it seems the neatest way ive come across to help me develop a skeleton arrangememt, vca is just the way of doing that.

Many other progs have arrangement tracks or sections this is a ghetto method for reaper.

Of course it material dependant. If all your stuff is one take or loops then fleshing things out is normally painless by default.

paulheu · 03-14-2015, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenK-msx

So far it seems the neatest way ive come across to help me develop a skeleton arrangememt, vca is just the way of doing that.

Why do you believe that using VCA is better that grouping tracks in to folders or using group sends?

If you would not have VCA what would an alternative solution be for you and how would using VCA be better?

I'm not arguing either way right now, just trying to understand your reasoning as I think you have the wrong idea of what VCA does.

BenK-msx · 03-14-2015, 08:55 AM

I like that it does not mess with the signal routing of the content, where you risk altering things detrimentally. This only alters level and i do not worry about send balance etc.

It may not be the original intended use of vcas but tbh that is irrelevant.

Youd have a point for mixing, but I am focusing on the creative stage where I experiment with the parts I have to yield a potential arrangement.

I can folder things up to aid the mix process later.

Little point sidetracking matters with 'what vca is' again, that was a crap thread... And presuming I don't understand it after all I posted above is kind of hopeful

timboid · 03-14-2015, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

Why do you believe that using VCA is better that grouping tracks in to folders or using group sends?

For example if certain tracks have FX sends and others have not.

paulheu · 03-14-2015, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timboid

For example if certain tracks have FX sends and others have not.

Yes, I mentioned that in the earlier post..

BenK-msx · 03-14-2015, 11:59 AM

I haven't made a musical piece for a long time in reaper that was without numerous fx sends, folders, takes and the kind of kak that you see imaged in OP, so folders for level control bring risks I don't have to consider with vca.

Messing up fx send levels/balance is the one thing vca doesn't mess with, hence it being highly requested.

Using it for this (perhaps) corner case of arranging is just a side benefit, and I wouldn't have the idea, try the method out, find it ok then post about it at length if I didn't understand a few things!

Coachz · 03-14-2015, 03:01 PM

The Cubase vca has an intuitive and useful UI that shows the result of your VCA, Reaper needs this imo. Also, the moving faders give important visual feedback about what is being affected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymi-...-DxCPPIE&t=257

Also, if VCAs are done, can I start creating projects with them or will they change again meaning I have to wait till version 5 comes out which could be many months ?

BenK-msx · 03-14-2015, 03:15 PM

Indeed other daws are good references, the vca thread thrashed out (unsuccessfully perhaps!) all the options, so is upto cockos now -
see what they do.
But I'd say you're safe to use them, any tweaks should hopefully just make setup easier or add the thing alike metering or optional fader moves.

I think the devs would have said at some point if it were a risk, they're normally good about that kind of thing.

Coachz · 03-14-2015, 03:49 PM

I thought they did mention it in another thread that vcas were not done yet or maybe that was 5 in general.

paulheu · 03-14-2015, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coachz

The Cubase vca has a...... k about what is being affected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymi-...-DxCPPIE&t=257

We've been through all his before in several other threads,, but what I am seeing in that video is not how VCA works, should be implemented or is intended to be used IMO.

Again, unless you use separate channels for (FX) sends which are post fader there really is very little use for VCA over a folder or a group-bus. Channels controller by a VCA master are IMO quite easily recognized and it should be apparent for anyone what the overall level is. If you must you can place the VCA right next to the controlled channels or leave them in a separate back as I would prefer. That there would be better and more intuitive ways to display the effect the VCA has in a digital environment, yes for sure. But moving the grouped channel fader IMO is not one of them.

Having a dynamic MCP would be a much better option IMO. The MCP would have three sections; Channels, VCA (which would only become visible once a VCA is enabled) and Master. If any VCA is selected you see the linked channels in the Channel view and when you select the Master you see all channels sequentially.

Coachz · 03-14-2015, 04:58 PM

Thanks. I do have separate channels (150) with many individual sends post fader and i only use TCP, never MCP. Ill give the current vca feature a go. Are there any tricks, instructions, videos on how to use it?

BenK-msx · 03-14-2015, 05:17 PM

not really!

is all done in the grouping matrix...
yeh.. that thing you use all the time right?!!

in there.

can swipe drag and create M's for master, again for S's for slaves (in the vca column naturally..).

thats about it.

Coachz · 03-14-2015, 05:55 PM

Never used grouping before. Ill give it a go. I still wonder if projects are going to break since this is still beta but i could really use this for a project.

Coachz · 03-15-2015, 05:23 AM

I setup a sample project and grouping vcas seem to do exactly what I need. Does this look right?

timboid · 03-15-2015, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

Again, unless you use separate channels for (FX) sends which are post fader there really is very little use for VCA over a folder or a group-bus.

There might be cases when you want interleaved grouping. E.g. VCA 1 controls tracks 1,2,3, and VCA 2 controls 3,4,5.

BenK-msx · 03-15-2015, 09:50 AM

Coach - can only ask does it sound right?

Am not certain how having folder parents and children set as VCA masters and slaves affects things without testing it tbh, they may get along fine or create a situation where level/balance changes can be more or less than expected due to the routing.

If intention is track 1 vca controls your vox then maybe it doesn't need to also be a parent to the vox content tracks. Tricky to know what you're after.

Anyway!! Anyone have any thoughts on arrangement related workflow?

Banned · 03-15-2015, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

[...] unless you use separate channels for (FX) sends which are post fader there really is very little use for VCA over a folder or a group-bus.

Well, another major reason is that VCA's allow you to use automation on both the master and the slave tracks. With 'regular' groups, that doesn't work; and folders are hierarchical, thus less flexible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coachz

I setup a sample project and grouping vcas seem to do exactly what I need. Does this look right?

No, it doesn't. You shouldn't use folders *and* VCA groups, because that will apply gain adjustments twice.

Banned · 03-15-2015, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenK-msx

Anyway!! Anyone have any thoughts on arrangement related workflow?

Yes, let's please not continue/repeat that whole VCA discussion here, so we can focus on BenK-msx's idea for actual use of the VCA feature.

BenK-msx: it seems a bit inconsistent that you seem to be using VCA's to clean up "a bit of a mess" first, but then mention "can't see track media as a cue" as a disadvantage?

BenK-msx · 03-15-2015, 12:21 PM

Indeed banned, in my op post any automation on 'content' track is left alone whilst I can automate the 'master volume' of the part, which was a major benefit.

I now think a separate secondary arrange view and mixer view would be handy for this and many other situations so users can overview parts and any additional automation or vca activity easily.

You q:

The mess is the edits takes, lanes and stuff in film mode and automation, after hiding the original parts it just transpires that having a visual cue as to where you applying some automation would be nice.

In order to not recreate a mess somewhere else, I think a track stem render would be best, contiguous. Just about seeing peaks of the original part.

Another way my be to have the content part track appear in arrange view (pic2 version) only when working on its master vca. Then it hides again. If you follow.

Banned · 03-15-2015, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

A VCA (master) really only has 1 function and that is to set the multiplier for the control voltage of the channel faders grouped under it between 0 (VCA master fader down) and 1 (VCA master fader up).

This is not entirely correct: you can also increase the level on VCA slave tracks by more than a factor of 1, by setting the VCA master level higher than 0dB.

Banned · 03-15-2015, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenK-msx

In order to not recreate a mess somewhere else, I think a track stem render would be best, contiguous. Just about seeing peaks of the original part.

Imho that would not be a very good approach. Whenever you would change something on a VCA slave track such as which take is active, you'd have to re-render its stem. Moreover, all the other info (item colors, item boundaries, item names, active takes, automation) seems at least equally useful for navigation (e.g. "I want to raise the VCA level during the yellow media item, then lower it during the green media item).

BenK-msx · 03-15-2015, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banned

Imho that would not be a very good approach. Whenever you would change something on a VCA slave track such as which take is active, you'd have to re-render its stem. Moreover, all the other info (item colors, item boundaries, item names, active takes, automation) seems at least equally useful for navigation (e.g. "I want to raise the VCA level during the yellow media item, then lower it during the green media item).

Yes that's a point and agree it not ideal, just a guide really, not there to be editable, pure visual. without having to show the content slave track itself, which ininiatlly wanted to avoid, for when am in 'quick arrange mode'

tbh I think getting the content track itself to appear next to the vca track the user is adjusting is bit neater but can make a different kind of mess if adjusting many tracks at Same time!

Thats where an additional arrange view window would come to the fore.
For having sight on the things you are submixing.

Boils down to being a very simplyfying visual ergonomic thing, the pic2 kind of view gives a sense of what is happening over time to each part, in pure volume terms e.g. in or out strong or weak whilst sweeping under the carpet the messy intial creative detail stuff, allowing user to focus on getting creative with arrangement only.

BenK-msx · 03-15-2015, 01:19 PM

Just reminded myself of the 'navigator' that hugely popular reaper feature which none of us do without.. /sarc.

Not near a reaper machine at the moment but having that in a good position atop something like pic 2 could work if it could follow current zoom.. No idea would need to try.

paulheu · 03-15-2015, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banned

This is not entirely correct: you can also increase the level on VCA slave tracks by more than a factor of 1, by setting the VCA master level higher than 0dB.

Fair enough, still the intent of my point remains the same.

Banned · 03-15-2015, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulheu

Fair enough, still the intent of my point remains the same.

And I fully agree with your point.

BenK-msx · 03-15-2015, 02:41 PM

Magic wizards, fader elves, vca's call them what you will, the point remains that it isn't the point what they were or intend to be, it is what they allow users to do in reaper today, Can we agree on that? Then let it go?? Or just let it go?? Arghhhh!