Bajan Blue
Personally, if this gestapo like attitude of not mentioning other products that many of us have and use just so we can continue to contribute to a Cakewalk forum about music software in general, were to drive the likes of Rain away, firstly this forum would be demonstrably devalued and secondly I think MANY people would give up on it. period
What has got into people - this is a forum where other software is discussed, is it not.
This is only of BENEFIT to Cakewalk and Cakewalk users. If something like VCA is discussed,  it can only be a good thing, surely?
I had a horrible feeling when the reorganization and hosts etc were recently introduced that it would be a bad thing - seems my fears may well have been  correct.

Clearly you did not bother to read my posting on this thread. You speak of a gestapo attitude when nothing could be further from the truth. When members post this kind of thing that is in absolute opposition to what has actually been clearly stated one has to wonder what it is you have been reading? 
 
Using such terms can only cause problems and I would hope you will reconsider your position on this once you have read what was actually written. 
 
Your concern about hosts here is completely unfounded. No host has said you or anyone else can't post about other DAWs in this forum. 
 
 

Bajan Blue
Personally, if this gestapo like attitude of not mentioning other products that many of us have and use just so we can continue to contribute to a Cakewalk forum about music software in general, were to drive the likes of Rain away, firstly this forum would be demonstrably devalued and secondly I think MANY people would give up on it. period
What has got into people - this is a forum where other software is discussed, is it not.
This is only of BENEFIT to Cakewalk and Cakewalk users. If something like VCA is discussed,  it can only be a good thing, surely?
I had a horrible feeling when the reorganization and hosts etc were recently introduced that it would be a bad thing - seems my fears may well have been  correct.

It was a forum member who objected to talking about other software, not a host. Nothing has been deleted, no one has been banned, no one has been reprimanded by any hosts. And I stand behind this statement:
 
"If someone has nothing to do with Cakewalk software and comes into Cakewalk forums to discuss other software, at best that seems peculiar, and at worst, downright rude."
 
That's a RANGE of possibilities. I think it would be peculiar indeed if someone used only, say, Pro Tools and came in here to discuss some Pro Tools-specific topic. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to go to the Pro Tools forum, which is by definition filled with people who use Pro Tools and could therefore discuss Pro Tools-related topics with more authority? And at worst, if someone came in here and said "I use software XYZ, I've never used SONAR, you guys are all idiots for using it" that would indeed be "at worst, downright rude."
 
If you consider those actions Gestapo-like tactics, the only conclusion I can draw is that you don't know history. Here's a brief summary: 

• Identifying people to be put on trains and shipped off to gas chambers for summary execution = Gestapo
• Hosts saying it's okay to talk about non-Cakewalk software in a forum dedicated to non-Cakewalk software = not Gestapo. 

Now, can we get back to discussing the merits or lack thereof of VCA mixing? And can someone explain it to me in simple terms?

I swear, every time in my life I have heard someone accused of using "gestapo"or "nazi" tactics, it was followed by complete nonsense. The ONLY person in this thread who complained about another DAW being mentioned is in no way affiliated with Cakewalk or gthe forum hosts, so like Larry's gibberish, the entire accusation was just an excuse to  repeat displeasure of the mere existence of forum hosts. I truly wish Cakewalk would take the gestapo like step of filtering the word"gestapo" so they could at least find more original ways to throw baseless accusations.

After all that, I still don't understand what the huge deal is about VCA lol

Hosts have been supportive and courteous - they first interacted in this thread to show support and reaffirm our right to be posting here.
 
I still don't get why we bring up the completely hypothetical forum user who would have nothing to do with Cakewalk products, other than for rhetorical purpose. Every one involved in this discussion is or has been a Cakewalk customer one way or another, and I don't think anyone would argue that coming to these boards for support with another host could be regarded as misguided and strange or that badmouthing Cakewalk products would be rude and inappropriate.
 
I guess that it may happen that Sonar users who also happen to use MixBus or Pro Tools or whatever will interact with each other and assist each other here. But that's what a community does, and it's the exception more than the norm.
 
 
As for VCA, if it wasn't for a post about Cubase 8 on this very forum, and the discussion that followed, I'm not sure I'd have any sort of grasp on the concept yet. That's the kind of discussion that can be beneficial to just about anyone, no matter the DAW they use.

From Wikipedia....

 

In sound mixing consoles[edit]

Some mixing consoles come equipped with VCAs in each channel for console automation. The fader, which traditionally controls the audio signal directly, becomes a DC control voltage for the VCA. The maximum voltage available to a fader can be controlled by one or more master faders called VCA groups. The VCA master fader then controls the overall level of all of the channels assigned to it.[2] Typically VCA groups are used to control various parts of the mix; vocals, guitars, drums or percussion. The VCA master fader allows a portion of a mix to be raised or lowered without affecting the blend of the instruments in that part of the mix.
A benefit of VCA sub-group is that since it is directly affecting the gain level of each channel, changes to a VCA sub-group level affect not only the channel level, but also all of the levels sent to any post fader mixes. With traditional audio sub-groups, the sub-group master fader only affects the level going into the main mix and does not affect the level going to the post fader mixes. Consider the case of an instrumentfeeding a sub-group and a post fader mix. If you completely lower the sub-group master fader, you would no longer hear the instrument itself, but you would still hear it as part of the post fader mix, perhaps areverb or chorus effect.[3]
VCA mixers are known to last longer than non- VCA mixers. Because the VCA controls the audio level instead of the physical fader, decay of the fader mechanism over time does not cause a degradation in audio quality.

Digital variable-gain amplifier[edit]

A digitally controlled amplifier (DCA) is a variable-gain amplifier that is digitally controlled.
The digitally controlled amplifier uses a stepped approach giving the circuit graduated increments of gain selection. This can be done in several fashions, but certain elements remain in any design.
At its most basic form, a toggle switch strapped across the feedback resistor can provide two discrete gain settings. While this is not a computer controlled function, it describes the core function. With eight switches and eight resistors in the feedback loop, each switch can enable a particular resistor to control the feedback of the amplifier. If each switch was converted to a relay, a microcontroller could be used to activate the relays to attain the desired amount of gain.
Relays can be replaced with Field Effect Transistors of an appropriate type to reduce the mechanical nature of the design. Other devices such as the CD4053 bi-directional CMOS integrated circuit can serve well as the switching function.
 
Sounds to me as if VCA and DCA are nothing more than discrete methods of achieving a ganged (grouped) fader automation function. (I think we can look past a dated notion of a physical attenuator directly controlling a channel-amplifier's gain, since they don't exist in a DAW anyway.) Maybe 'VCA' sounds more 'professional'...I dunno.

SuperG
Sounds to me as if VCA and DCA are nothing more than discrete methods of achieving a ganged (grouped) fader automation function. (I think we can look past a dated notion of a physical attenuator controlling a channel-amplifier's gain, since they don't exist in a DAW anyway.) Maybe 'VCA' sounds more 'professional'...I dunno.

I too was under the impression that it was a questionably useful transposition of a hardware idiosyncrasy into the software world. But as far as I understand it, there is a bit more to it, mainly in the way that group of fader reacts in terms of their relative balance and the interaction with sends - it's not entirely achievable w/ simple grouping (temporary or otherwise), at least not in the DAWs I work with, though Logic has track stacks, which essentially gives you a (unique) lead fader and VCA type of grouping behaviour - exception made of the sends.
 
Genuine VCA implementation would allow multiple to assign a tracks to more than one VCA fader.
 
As to how incredibly useful it is, I believe that the simple fact that the concept seems so foreign to most indicate that it's not like it's something that will solve any issue that's been affecting the majority of us. 
 
 
The previous discussion about that feature in Cubase 8 had lots of good links in it.

As pointed out in the other thread about VCA Sonar has had the group function for ever. It is as described above and is proportional. These DAWs now have come up to what we Sonar users have had for a very long time. Thats what I get from all of this.  

Hey... this thread is still going.  
 
G*****o fears aside, what Rain referred to above in regards to VCAs is accurate, at least from what I could find out on the web.  It's like a super-grouping option that affects both volume faders and sends in what seems to be a somewhat unique fashion (compared to standard grouping).   That said, I still don't feel like I'm really missing out on anything.  Maybe if I did post work or similar it would be a bigger deal?   It's a mystery...  

John
As pointed out in the other thread about VCA Sonar has had the group function for ever. It is as described above and is proportional. These DAWs now have come up to what we Sonar users have had for a very long time. Thats what I get from all of this.  

They're not exactly the same, John - at first, I also thought so but there is more to it than grouping.
 
A very quick exemple. Let's say you have 3 faders grouped - the first two are at -3db and the third one is at -5 db.
 
Push the 3rd one all the way up to 0db. The others will simply reach 0db a bit earlier and stay there. Once you pull back that third fader, their initial "relative"  settings will be lost - the relation becomes absolute... At least in PT and Logic. I can't say for Sonar.
 
That's not necessarily something everyone would need but it's one illustration of how they differ from groups (which as far as I can remember works pretty similarly and offer as much flexibility in Sonar as they do in Logic).
 
There are others, but I'm just grasping the concept and there are people much better equipped than I am - and who don't have to worry about struggle with English language  - to explain it.