Happy Sunday, all. Just another query about a mundane but potentially beneficial mixing task.
 
So after I purchased the Concrete Limiter in that recent sale I posted a thread about using it on a bass track to smooth it out. I did not get a chance to reply because I got busy with some life mayhem but sharke and scook made provided an excellent insight. Basically it was to use volume and/or gain automation to level the track as best as possible before applying and limiting or compression. I have seen this done in many of the more professional mixing tuts I've watched but had kind of let that concept fade into the white noise of all the other stuff I'm cramming into my noodle but in retrospect it is definitely something I'd like to do even if it is labor/time intensive.
 
So I need a proper workflow and could use some tips. Specifically...
 
1) Metering: I know I can eyeball things with wave and/or just listen but that's a little imprecise. I was thinking that I could set the track level meter to "Peaks" with the "Hold Peaks" option engaged, pick a target dB level and then watch for spots that are higher/lower than the predetermined level I want. Then I just adjust the envelope accordingly and double check to make sure it doesn't sound weird.
 
BUT... is there a better way to do this or a better tool/trick within Sonar? Is there some secret way to choose my target level based on the overall level of the track so I am not turning things up/down more than they need to (I'm assuming some kind of RMS metering beforehand could help)? I'd like to avoid a) create more work than necessary for myself as well as not somehow weakening the signal (if that's possible with such things).
 
2) Gain vs. Volume: sharke initially mentioned volume automation but scook followed up with gain automation. I'm assuming that gain would be the one I want to use so the signal coming into the PC/fx bin is already smoothed as opposed to using volume which depending on Pre/Post status(es) of the strip would merely adjust the end result which would mean the limiter/compressors would still be getting slammed with the spikes and whatnot.
 
So Gain or Volume envelope?
 
3) Nodes and Envelopes: I have always shied away from extensive envelope manipulation because it just seemed weird and confusing to me in the past. Until the past couple years I actually used to just slice up clips and adjust the entire line instead of messing with fancy curves and nodes and whatever else and it was ALWAYS just volume/gain tweaks (which I didn't understand the difference between until just as recently). Point is I understand envelope automation now from a theoretical standpoint now but am pretty much a n00b in that regard. So a couple questions to make things easier...
 
a) What is the best/quickest method for inserting 4 nodes? Ideally I'd like to just swipe a problem area and have 4 nodes created automagically (straight on the line so there are no changes even if I'm a little above/below the base line) so I could then just drag the line in between the outside ones up/down and move the nodes back/forth on the timeline as needed for fading. I do not want to have to click four times just to create the initial nodes or worry about causing level changes when inserting them. I just want four nodes at "unity" (or whatever the base line is at) then adjust from there. Perhaps a lot to ask but that seems like the most common set up for an envelope change. Sorry if that's confusing.
 
b) Constraining nodes: What is the binding to constrain nodes to their current level? I should just look that up but basically I just need to keep my two outer nodes at their current level so I don't end up making then outside of the envelope area angle. I hate that.
 
c) Tools: Which tools are best suited for this type of envelope editing? The Smart Tool is great for cruising around but I find it a pain in the butt trying to hunt around for hotspots or remembering elaborate key bindings when I am doing lengthy/repetitive tasks such as this. Many times using two dedicated tools and using the toggle binding is sooo much easier so which ones should I fiddle with first to do what I am describing?
 
I know this is all stuff I could crash course myself on and probably will but am interested in hearing some more experienced users workflows in this regards. I won't be doing just a little bit here or there I actually want to go almost transient to transient with my automation envelopes with certain things so getting these skills down is important. As sharke pointed out in the thread I'm referring to the really intense pros envelopes end up looking like a pile of wacky spaghetti sometimes. I think it could definitely help make the final mixing easier, FX work more effectively and the end result sound more pro.
 
Could be an interesting discussion too.
 
Cheers and thanks. I'm polishing a comp right now (unrelated... just tightening up splices) so I'll be back and forth.

Answering that fully would take me the rest of the afternoon! But here are two of my favorite tips.
 
1. The meters have an adjustable range (right-click on the meter). If you set it to cover only the top 12dB, you can see which sections spend most of their time in that range and which ones don't.
 
2. To even out vocals, I drag across phrases and sometimes even individual words in a clip and use Process > Apply Effect > Gain. Vocals are one situation where I generally want a truly consistent level, as opposed to instruments whose levels change to create dynamics. Once the vocal waveforms are all in the same ballpark, then you don't have to apply as much compression to even out the levels. I almost never use automation on vocals except clip gain automation to raise of lower specific sections a bit.

Heh. Sorry, Craig. It's been on my mind for a few weeks so I've been trying to envision the workflow and that's the end result. Don't expect any point by point answers. More just ideas on the specific points from the automation fiends.
 
I will look into the metering option. That's a good idea for finding spikes and hadn't considered it. Not being familiar with that feature I'm only guessing but I'd imagine I could then set it so that after I tame the spikes I could set it so that the signal I want (that I have already set my spikes to peak at) will be the very top of the meter. That way the desired levels will register as a full meter and areas that need to have there volume increased dip.
 
Probably didn't explain that well but theoretically it could work and be more reliable than the Peak/Hold option.
 
As far as the Apply Effect.... again something I'm not familiar with but that seems a little too permanent and non interactive to me. I'd like to keep my options open until I have it completely correct and cutting through the mix where need be. I also need to learn how to quickly and effectively use envelopes anyway so it's a bit of a learning exercise as well (which pretty much defines everything I'm doing with my current project).
 
Thanks for the suggestions.

Your going through a similar process I'm going through as I'm in the final mix of an album so I'm dealing with 16 songs. 
Truthfully 8.5 was way easier for me when messing with tracks, audio and MIDI. 
I don't like the behavior of the the editing tools even after 3 months to get used to it I'm NOT! 
 
It's true it's better to start with a nice even level on a track and this is why I use a compressor going into my DAW on bass and vocals. But still there will be peaks. 
Your trick with using the peak meter to look for them is what I do too. 
 
Drawing envelopes is Sonars way of dealing with level. It's as your finding out a very tedious task. There is a better way. The Tool menu. 
 
If you've ever used a wave editor like Wave lab, Audition or Sound forge you'll see the much faster, easier way to deal with level. You simply zoom in on the wave ( scroll wheel), Highlight the peak and a tool will be there to change the level, all with very quick mouse move. They will also scan for peaks and mark them. 
The nay sayers all shout " That's destructive editing" So what!  you do have a back up, and I have never had anything go wrong or "heard" an artifact in over 10 years of performing this process. You can go both ways too, If a part is too quiet apply a + db. It's doing the work a lazy person would do with a compressor / limiter manually. If you get good at this you can construct a perfect track..you can even cut out noises which are more in your face when working on a solo track. You can zoom in to the sample just about. 
 
So one way of dealing with track editing is to TOOL COPY the track into a wave editor. I used to do this big time when I had Wave Lab 5 and Sonar 8.5./ XP 32 bit .  It was pretty cool. But you have to get your editor to show in the tools menu.  I have a theory that it will show automatically if it was installed before you installed Sonar. ( I'll find out later today. ) But if it doesn't show the instructions are in the knowledge base somewhere, I have them printed off, scook gave me the link. 
 
I just downloaded the trial version of Sound Forge and I'm liking it a lot. I can't get Wave Lab 7 ( 64 bit) to show in the tool menu so later today I'm going to try my luck with Sound Forge. I just put Windows 8.1 on my office computer and am using it as the guinea pig before I re do the DAW. So I'm off to install Sonar now that Sound Forge is running ( for 30 days) 
 

Wow. That sounds pretty intense. The only real wave editor type thing I own (on my main DAW) is Pyro and as much as I love it I think it would end up being more cumbersome (and I think it has a samplerate/bit depth limit I would generally exceed at 96/24).
 
The Tool Copy thing is something I have never heard of and will have to look into it if only for curiosity's sake. I'm used to being able to explode clip sections in my old DAW but Sonar (X series) doesn't seem to do that. At first I thought it did but it turned out to be the Loop Constructor View (which was ever so confusing when I first encountered it thinking I was merely dealing with an exploded view... lol).
 
However with my limited fiddling with the automation envelopes in Sonar X2/X3 it will do what I want it to. It's just a matter of how annoying and tedious it's going to be. I REALLY like the fact we have automation lanes because that was one of the things that made me shy away from envelopes before (it's confusing to look at a pile of spaghetti when you barely know what you are doing as it is). I just need to approach all this logically.
 
Basically my experience so far has been a lot of fumbling around trying to insert the nodes I need without altering the envelope then trying to get the desired effect. Eventually I get what I want but I can't spend two or three minutes (at best) setting up a single alteration if I am doing transient to transient work.
 
Oh crap... I just realized that I need to figure out how to link envelopes across tracks too because of all the dual input stuff I record. I think that is just a matter of creating a group on the specific parameter though (like right clicking the gain knob on one track, setting the group then adding the second tack's gain knob to that group... I hope).
 
Yeah, I'm a babe in the woods here. And I thought this would be simple. YIKES!!!

I have the meters in the console view set to show RMS. I find it far more useful as a visual reference than peak metering, in terms of seeing whether something has a consistent level. I also use the wave preview in track view for a similar purpose, though you have to route audio tracks to a bus for that to work. In fact, that's a feature I'd like to see added; the ability to switch regular tracks between showing clips and showing an audio preview.

John T
 In fact, that's a feature I'd like to see added; the ability to switch regular tracks between showing clips and showing an audio preview.

That'd be cool but wouldn't temporarily freezing the track produce the same result? Seriously asking... I rarely use freeze.

Hi Beepster,
Yeah, volume automation is both VERY common and VERY tedious. I've not used meters too much, I mostly just work by ear...my rationale is that sometimes something can sound too loud or too quiet even though from a pure peak/rms perspective it's not out of acceptable levels. A couple things I do:
 
1. Where possible I try to use an automatic leveller these days. Vocal rider has become one of my go-to tools. It will actually generate an envelope for you that is remarkably good:
 

 
There are some others out there as well...I think Melda has one, but I'm not sure if it will generate envelopes for you.

2. Control surface. Once things are generally levelled with a plugin I'll usually take a pass or two just "riding fader" to take care of the things I mentioned above (stuff that sounds too loud/soft even though the basic RMS/peaks are fine). Use a control surface to write your automation envelopes and do a couple passes.
 
Only after trying that do I start going in and creating automation points and dragging them around. Usually I can get about 95% of the way there by using the first two methods and only have to draw stuff in a very small amount.
 
Oh, and one thing about gain vs. volume...it really doesn't matter, they do the same thing just at different points in the signal chain. If you want to add level before the P.C., FX bin, Sends, Pan and whatnot, use gain. If you want to do it after use volume. 
 
Good luck
Dean

Here's the instructions for adding a Wave Editor to the tools menu
 
http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/Knowledge-Base/2007013099/Adding-third-party-audio-editing-software-to-SONARs-Tools-menu
 
Pyro is a burning program and not a wave editor, it might include some basic tools. 
The good Wave editors all cost money, Wave Lab Elements is $98 the least expensive so I bought that. But It no workie in the tools as I said. Steinberg and Cakewalk just don't play well together,,it's a plot!  
There are demos I'm running this one it's awesome. 
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/download/trials/soundforgepro
 
There is a way to demo Adobe Audition too but they make it weird with the cloud thingy. I'll pass. 
OK it's finished updating , back to work, Now to install X3e.. Deep breath and more coffee. 
 
 
 

Beepster

John T
 In fact, that's a feature I'd like to see added; the ability to switch regular tracks between showing clips and showing an audio preview.

That'd be cool but wouldn't temporarily freezing the track produce the same result? Seriously asking... I rarely use freeze.

Not really, because you can't keep tweaking a frozen track on the fly.