Jump to content

Plug automation order - agree or disagree


3ple

Recommended Posts

I always found Logic's automation numerology a bit nonsense.

I think inserts should start at 1, regardless of the channel strip being audio or a software instrument. If I have a compressor on insert slot 1, then that should be automation track #1 (audio or software instrument).

So in the case of software instruments, the Instrument would be automation #0, that way, when we copy automation from slot #1 from an audio track to a software instrument track, it doesn't assume that we are pasting it on the instrument lane. Does it make sense? Do you agree or disagree?

 

Let the discussion begin ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree from a user standpoint.

 

Remember when the software instrument was actually in the first insert of a channel strip? Then they moved the insert position graphically, but didn't change the numbers under the hood.

 

I remember when the instrument was actually down below, right before the Output. I think that it makes sense the way it is now, in terms of chain, but I think that the inserts should all behave the same way so if I put a reverb on slot #1 on an audio track and create some automation, when I copy that automation to a software instrument track also with a reverb on insert #1 it shouldn't go to the instrument's automation, specially because depending on the scale that's being used on the original source, it may not be converted the same say and even if you then convert that automation to the right lane, maybe it won't reflect how it was supposed to.

It would be easier to have the instrument as "slot #0" and then all inserts (audio or software instrument) would start on #1. Even when you look at the strip, sometimes it's confusing, because you are counting 5 plugins, but in fact Logic is counting 6, because of the instrument...

It's just one of those things that are not Logical in Logic... lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree from a user standpoint.

 

Remember when the software instrument was actually in the first insert of a channel strip? Then they moved the insert position graphically, but didn't change the numbers under the hood.

 

I remember when the instrument was actually down below, right before the Output.

Right. But before they moved the software instrument slot there, it was the first slot in the "Inserts" section. So back then the numbering made sense. It was... a while ago (Logic 4 I believe).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually found another problem with the way Logic handles automation:

For example I copied from an audio track that had the PhatFX as slot 2 to a software instrument track where slot 1 (in fact, slot 2, according to Logic's "logic") had a StepFX. Even when I then convert that automation to the right parameter, the problem is that the StepFX, because it received some automation information, automatically activated the filter so when I played the track, there was no sound on that track, because the filter was activated. It took me a while to understand what was happening so that is not only a workflow issue, but also something that can dramatically change a sound without our "permission"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I remember when the instrument was actually down below, right before the Output.

Right. But before they moved the software instrument slot there, it was the first slot in the "Inserts" section. So back then the numbering made sense. It was... a while ago (Logic 4 I believe).

 

Oh ok, I wasn't using Logic back then. I started using it on version 8.

But I still think that inserts should be separated from the source. In an audio track is the audio itself, on a software instrument is the instrument. The instrument shouldn't be considered "insert", that's what I mean.

For example, when you are in a real studio with hardware and all that, if you have a rack with a compressor, EQ, delay, etc, those don't change, regardless of the source. The source should always be considered "external" when it comes to the chain. If I'm playing a software instrument, that's the source, not an insert. It would make everything easier. There's a reason why you can't change the order of the software instrument in the chain, right? Unlike the other inserts. That's because it's not seen as a real insert :)

 

I hope one day they will change this, because it doesn't make much sense and it makes everything confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...