You might have to apply actual fades to the edges of the clip before the waveform shows it. Automation might not work in that scenario. 

jon you are funny guy you arent really offering anything other than self righteousness. total BS you are just playing devils advocate.  i'm sure you use visual cues of some sort whether it be db metering, phase analysis, graphical EQ, freq spectrum' track markers, a freaking computer monitor ! etc. Anyway for everyone else, it would also be cool to be able to have a separate gain control on a cumulative bus waveform...so you could tweek summed tracks without bouncing down. 

gerberbaby


jon you are funny guy you arent really offering anything other than self righteousness. total BS you are just playing devils advocate.  i'm sure you use visual cues of some sort whether it be db metering, phase analysis, graphical EQ, freq spectrum' track markers, a freaking computer monitor ! etc. Anyway for everyone else, it would also be cool to be able to have a separate gain control on a cumulative bus waveform...so you could tweek summed tracks without bouncing down. 

Real nice way to get my attention with and insult. Because you seem unable to understand what I am saying I will ignore you for now. 

Why would you want it any other way.

Because at best, the waveform as displayed in Sonar is only a rough approximation of the actual waveform - it's a pictorial representation of the actual signal level.

We've been advised many times before not to rely on it's accuracy for setting compressor/limiter thresholds & ratios so why would you not apply the same logic for fading transients?

Let your ear be the judge.

I am not talking about fade in or fade out waveforms here but back to clip gain. While the waveform drawing is not ultra accurate it is certainly good enough if you are lucky enough to have a DAW that displays changes in clip gain.

After doing a vocal or solo comp etc you enlarge the track height so it is quite visible and is reasonably large. Any inaccuracies due to waveform drawing are not an issue now.

The trick is to not get too concerned about the height of the transient at the start of a waveform but rather the average height of the body of the waveform. Once you get these to a similar height by eye, as I said in an earlier post the VU meters perfectly over these changes and the volume is nice and even according to the ears too. Sometimes when you match the body of the waveform the change in clip gain can sound unnatural. Your ears will tell you pretty fast if that is the case. It is easy to reset it back to 0dB as well in Studio One. A one click operation.

Yes it works and it is a great feature. Once you have it you will wonder how you ever did without it. It is fast and very effective. You can come up with all the reasons as to why you don't need it or why it may not work but the truth is it does work well, it's fast  and it is a great feature. Most DAW's do it so it can't be bad.

The weird thing is that if Cakewalk implements this in a future version of Sonar the sceptics here will all be singing its praises. 

californiamusic


Hmm I have "Display Clip Fade Attenuation" selected and my wave does not respond visually when drawing a volume envelope.  What am I missing here??!  ; )

Same here.  Stickman393 would you please enlighten us?

This brings up a question I've wondered for a while now. The proccess gain feature in Sonar. I use this by highlighting a section (Lets say the section is a little lower then the rest of the take in a track) go to process\gain and increse usually by 3 db, if that's to much, I undo and select something lower. I will also highlight an complete track if it's been recorded to hot (Not a track that is cliping, the damage is already done) and decrese. It gives me the desired result and I don't hear anything bad after I do this but I wonder if I'm doing some sort of damage that could show up somewhere down the line to that track.
Anybody know?

Hi Johnny. The command Process>Apply Effect>Gain is destructive. ie It is like Audio Suite in Pro Tools. Any changes here are permanent. You only have one level of undo and that is immediately afterwards. Once you save the session I don't think you can go back in Sonar and undo these commands.

This process will alter the audio in the original recording and the waveform in view. It is not bad certainly as long as the changes are good and sound good and don't add distortion or anything to the original sound. 

If I knew I was going to be doing a lot of this I would clone the audio track that represents the audio you have recorded and rename it in such a way that if all failed I could revert back to it. Edit the copy or the original but have the other as standby.

Then you could alter the various parts of the audio track using this permanent command. It is only bad if what you do ruins the sound for any reason or sounds unnatural. But in the end it is better to not alter the audio in anyway way if possible.

Clip Gain as per Studio One/Pro Tools etc does not change the original waveform in anyway. Just that clip is altered and played back at a different volume. The waveform visually does reflect what you are hearing and seeing etc. So it is better from that point of view.

MarioD

californiamusic


Hmm I have "Display Clip Fade Attenuation" selected and my wave does not respond visually when drawing a volume envelope.  What am I missing here??!  ; )

Same here.  Stickman393 would you please enlighten us?

It only works for when you grab an end of the clip and apply a fade in or fade out to the clip - normal envelope automation isn't respected. 
I apologize if I mislead anyone on this.

We already have this. It's just not implemented same way. I'm not at my daw right now. But I know I can highlight any section of a track (s), including a single clip (length), and and adjust the gain with the mouse by moving the cursor to the top of the track/clip where the cursor changes to a flat looking shape. Then drag the volume envelope up / down while depressing the left mouse button. 

Look at this video at around the 5 min mark to see an example. 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw5z9BKWD-I



Scott Garrigus has an excellent video on automation that shows this technique. Close to the 2 minute mark for how to do this in X1. 


http://www.digifreq.com/digifreq/video.asp?ID=6