Tip of the day! Clip gain

You can easily adjust clip gain by holding the CTRL key down and clicking in the clip you want to adjust and moving the mouse up or down depending on whether you want the clip louder or not.
 
How about a feature request? When you move the clip gain, make it so the waveform grows or shrinks according to how you adjust the clip gain.

Didn't know that either, and it's something I would use a lot.
 
A lot of good tips are presented in this forum. Would it make sense to move them to the tip of the day thread, and delete the various "thanks Craig" posts so that a) it's a more compact read, and b) people don't get the mistaken idea it's "my" thread?
 
Or we could just make this thread a repository of tips when people have them...it wouldn't have to be a "tip of the day" per se, but it would probably average out to that over time.
 
It would be a drag to see these nuggets fall back into the stream, to use a panning for gold analogy.

I have seen this tip before and would love to see the waveform change but the 
control move the mouse trick does not do this for me,  I use a track ball maybe that is why.
 

Sorry Craig but you are wrong on this one. Clip gain adjustments should definitely change the waveform because that is what you are hearing. Raw audio information is not so relevant. Studio One handles it the right way as well.
 
How they get around it is when you click on the gain handle a dotted line appears that clearly displays how much gain you have either added or subtracted.
 
The reason why the waveform changing is great is because if you have a track that has a few variable levels eg waveform height varies, it is so easy to fine tune them all by eye and they all end up the same level. I could do that five times faster than you could level out the same clips manually.
 
I agree that it is a personal preference but as someone that has used it a million times in some very big sessions I could not live without it. It saves so much time as well because once a lot of clips are leveled out often (visually) no automation or further work is required. It is just fast.
 
 
 

Track gain, effects and automation is not related to the raw audio. Clip gain in a way is. Think of it as being just one level up from raw audio. It is slightly special. You are adding or subtracting gain to that raw audio therefore the waveform should reflect that change. Other DAW's such as PT and Studio One and any others that do alter the waveform have chosen to do so. They cannot all be wrong. Therefore the overall view is that it should be changed. As I said it speeds up things bigtime.  It is way faster to adjust clip gains by eye than any other method.
 
When you are working under pressure like some of us do and you are used to this feature and you have used it a lot (I would say that those who think it is not a good idea have obviousloy not spent a lot of time with this feature) you will never go back. Simple as that.
 
 
 

I should probably elaborate a little more on DSP-based normalizing vs. adjusting to the same level via clip gain. Sonar has three convenient features when you change either gain or normalization:

• There's a short crossfade between the modified and unmodified sections of the clip
• The setting persists in the project until changed
• The waveform is redrawn to reflect these changes

So to level a phrase or word, it's just click + drag + hot key normalize. With clip gain you usually have to create four points, possibly tweak to set a slope if the change is too abrupt, and verify that you've hit the right level whereas normalize will always hit whatever peak you specify. As I find this faster and more accurate than adjusting clip gain, I never felt the need for clip gain to change the waveform - applying normalization or gain redraws the waveform anyway to reflect the change.
 
Some people might not like that this kind of edit is destructive, but realistically with the 64-bit engine you can change something as many times as you like without affecting the sound quality. And I do prefer these changes be "baked into" the audio.

Jeff Evans
They cannot all be wrong.

 
You are quite correct, SONAR has it right so they are not all wrong.
 

Jeff Evans
It is cool to be able to cut a longer part into smaller sections and tweak clip gains by eye on the fly. (Still faster than any other method and you dont need melodyne to do it either)...It is very easy and fast in Studio One to re render the clip gain adjustments into the clips as well. (one button click)

 
I'm very familiar with this way of dealing with clips, as Sony Acid (among others) has it, and I use it all the time in Vegas to adjust opacity (and sometimes for audio). I'm also very familiar with Studio One Pro, having done workshops on it at PreSonus's request. For now, let's ignore the fact that Sonar's clip gain automation lets you create slopes, so you can fade up when a singer runs out of gas on a note without having to resort to automation, as SOP's clip envelopes can't do this. Instead, let's look at physically quantifiable reasons why Sonar's approach is faster.
 
Sonar DSP method: First, it's incorrect to say the operation in Studio One Pro only takes one click. It takes a click and a drag, and that can happen only after you've split the clip into individual pieces. 
 
Second, in either program, if you want to adjust levels to the same value you have to do the same number of clicks and drags to modify levels. The difference is that with Studio One you have to do an additional click for every split you want to make, while in Sonar you have to hit a QWERTY key for every region you want to process. The physical action of hitting a key takes less time because it's one motion; splitting a clip requires positioning a mouse and then clicking. But there's one other thing that slows you down in SOP. When you drag, you have to be relatively precise with your drag to obtain the desired level. With Sonar, you set the normalization or gain once, and then hit a QWERTY key to apply and move on.
 
If you don't want to normalize but want to adjust gain by some arbitrary amount every time you adjust, then you're back to using Sonar's clip gain. But in this case, what takes the time in either program is confirming that you've made the correct adjustment and it sounds okay. You would need to do that in either Sonar or SOP. Arguably, you could get in the ballpark faster by listening with your eyes instead of your ears, but at this point I'm pretty facile with moving clip gains the right amount of dB on the first try. In this one particular example of adjusting clip gain, using the Sony method could be faster over time. But given a choice between that or the Sonar options, I'd take the Sonar options because the most tedious work is always working on tiny little pieces of something, and Sonar is faster for that. 
 
There's also less after-the-fact overhead because the clip remains intact for other editing or moving. For example if you decide you want to use the clip FX bin, in Sonar you just have to insert it once. I haven't worked much in SOP since X3 but IIRC this point is moot because I don't recall SOP allowing for clip FX...I could be wrong.
 

It is great to see the waveform changes and to those who may be wondering if it is or not, the simple answer is yes it is.

 
Using DSP in Sonar redraws the waveform automatically to reflect any changes you've made. This includes any of the DSP menu options.
 
Melodyne Editor, Assistant, or Studio method: This is even easier because when you open the clip in Melodyne and choose the Percussive tool, Melodyne has already split the clip in all the places you would want it split. For vocals it even isolates plosives, esses, and fricatives most of the time and you can use the Split tool if it hasn't. That eliminates the Sonar DSP method's need to define regions, and SOP's need to create splits. You still click and drag for each section, so there's no real advantage there, except the visual interface gives you a cue as to the nature of the sound you're adjusting, and you can hear an abstract representation of it as you adjust. 
 

Under pressure it is just so cool to section out a little quieter bit, add some clip gain until the waveforms match and move on.

 
If you're only doing a clip at a time, that is faster. However for the "cut a longer section into smaller parts" editing you were referring to, such as leveling out vocals, guitar solos, rhythm parts, you name it, Sonar's options are faster. I've put a lot of research into finding the fastest solution because I have to do this kind of tweaking all the time for narration, and nothing I've found is faster (other than recording the take perfectly in the first place). When I'm doing narration that lasts 45 minutes or more, if I can save even just a few seconds on every tweak it really adds up.

I was disappointed to find that I cannot select a small section of a clip and use the same technique to adjust only the selected sections gain. :-(
 
That makes deessing that much more difficult. Unless it works that way with the clips gain shown. I'll check later.
 
BTW - Thanks Jeff for the tip about using a meter. That made adjusting the gain more informative.

Guitarpima
I was disappointed to find that I cannot select a small section of a clip and use the same technique to adjust only the selected sections gain. :-(
 
That makes deessing that much more difficult. Unless it works that way with the clips gain shown. I'll check later.

If you're talking about SOP, you have to split the clip to do that.
If you're talking about Sonar, you can draw the clip gain curve however you want, or use the click+drag+gain/normalize technique I mentioned on the clip itself.

Just for clarification. Splitting clips and rejoining and all those functions can be tied to hot keys too in Studio One (macros remember, a whole series of operations can be put onto one key easily) so it is quite fast. I have got the actual QWERTY keyboard especially designed by Editors Keys for SOP and it is excellent.
 
Rendering clip gain changes into a new file also is fast and does not involve dragging in any form. After a clip gain change you simply select the clip and hold down control and press B. It renders the clip, puts the new clip into the session and stores it in the 'Bounces' folder which is also handy.
 
If you split a number of clips, make clip gain changes you can also just select all of them and single hot key will glue everything back together too. Clip FX can also be rendered in pretty fast as well if you want.
 
De-essing is also cool when the waveform reflects clip gain changes. Because it is easy to slice out the sibilance, drop it down by eye to what you know works and then its done.
 
From your lengthy explaination it still seesm to me that Sonar goes down a more complicated road to achieve a result that Studio One does in a few seconds and clicks but that is only my opinion. Why have other DAW's elected to allow the clip gain waveforms changes too. There must be something in it!
 
But I am glad Craig that this discussion has got you thinking, I agree it is great when a thread does that. Me too, I am relooking into how I use and refine this technique as well.

I suspect that folks are wishing for visual feedback in order to make it easier to match volume levels from clip to clip. The problem with that is you can't always predict the relative volume by looking at a section of a clip. Loudness is based on average levels and spectral distribution - not peaks - so two clips can appear the same size visually and still be perceived as very different volumes. Conversely, you might adjust a clip to look the same in amplitude as an adjacent clip and yet they still won't match in volume.
 
For this reason, the proposed visual feedback is almost useless, its only value being to compare peak levels. For level-matching, you really have no choice but to rely on your ears.
 
Gain envelopes are great for this, especially when used in conjunction with volume envelopes and compressors. Because a gain envelope is pre-FX, you're adjusting the level going into your track compressor and thus making it easier to achieve transparent leveling via compression. 
 
What you don't want to do is mess with gain once the compressor's been dialed in. Then you switch to volume envelopes.
 
BTW, I do this using a gain plugin, specifically the free one from Blue Cat Audio. The gain plugin lets me decide where in the FX chain I want the gain reduction to occur.
 
 

Then there's Har-Bal  ;-)

bitflipper
I suspect that folks are wishing for visual feedback in order to make it easier to match volume levels from clip to clip. The problem with that is you can't always predict the relative volume by looking at a section of a clip. 
 

This is incorrect.  And the reason I say so is because it is coming from someone as I said before that has not had this feature so basically Dave is not in a position to say so.  How would he know?  Sounds to me like Dave is making excuses.  (Aw we don't have that feature so it must be wrong!)  And I suspect Craig as well has not spent as much time with this feature say as I have as well.  (I spend much more time in Studio One than Craig does, end of story)  Although I do respect the fact that Craig has come into contact with a lot more DAW's than most of us.
 
Obviously the transient or front edge of any clip is not used to match levels but the rms component or the guts of the sound if you like.  (Dave is wrong on this too the transient edge is less useful in fact)  I am rather expert at matching levels by eye and have become very accurate at it in fact.  (especially if you enlarge the track height a little while you are doing this)  And remember I use the VU meter so when I go back over a clip or clips that I have visually altered by eye, 99 times out of 100 the VU's just peak up to 0 dB nicely over the changes and what I hear is very even volume.  Not just on voice overs but on most things.  (and if the VU shows some slight variation it will only be small and it is very easy then to adjust)  Even drums.  I have got pretty good at matching very transient material too.  In fact with drums this feature is a godsend.  Because drummers are often hitting the odd hit a little softer here and there and this can really fix kick or snare hits that are a little low. (or loud)
 
Once you really start using this a lot you will never go back like I have said before.  It really saves time because 9 times out of 10 once you do level things out this way no further automation is needed.  And once you put the track through some light compression etc it just sounds very even and level.
 
If it is so bad why has Pro Tools, Studio One and I suspect most other DAW's elected to go down this path. (no one can really answer that I suspect. I am sure they too have really thought about it and decided yes we will do it)
 
I agree with Craig that Melodyne is good for this too (I have it too remember and we have had for longer as well)  but then once you get good at this then you don't even have to load up and use Melodyne. One less step. I tend to use Melodyne more for pitch tuning etc..
 
With clip automation I can see why it is best to leave waveforms alone, similar to track automation. I think with any automation you just have to know what you have done.

Jeff Evans
And I suspect Craig as well has not spent as much time with this feature say as I have as well.

 
I think in the course of using this kind of clip gain protocol in over a thousand videos, soundtracks for three movies, and six videos about Studio One that I qualify for knowing whereof I speak.
 

Once you really start using this a lot you will never go back like I have said before.

 
But that's where I came from, and have chosen not to go back to it.
 

If it is so bad why has Pro Tools, Studio One and I suspect most other DAW's elected to go down this path. (no one can really answer that I suspect. I am sure they too have really thought about it and decided yes we will do it)

 
No one has said it was bad. I simply believe there are faster and easier ways to do it. Pro Tools only added clip gain in, what, version 9 or 10? I didn't see the Avid forums lighting up with people talking about how Pro Tools was unacceptable because it didn't do this. Just because something was done a particular way years ago doesn't mean it's the best way to do something.
 

I agree with Craig that Melodyne is good for this too (I have it too remember and we have had for longer as well)  but then once you get good at this then you don't even have to load up and use Melodyne. One less step.

 
You're ignoring the steps saved by not having to split clips.