trim plug in?

[Real Talk Ent.]

Originally Posted by Joram

Trim plugins are very handy when setting up a mix. I use the trim on every channel as a gainstage. Put all faders on 0 and level with the trim plugin. On an Icon D-control it's like using an anolog desk: quick and easy.

That's what I was aiming for, thank you

But what I'm really trying to lear here is how to "gain stage" properly so I get a more acurate mix

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Mike Brown

He means the trim tool.

You can't automate the trim tool though like you can a trim plugin.

You could also use trim automation.... or VCA's....

Yes I do...I just get confused with big words!

It's just a method of trimming a whole track up and down simply, it doesn't affect or put in any breakpoints, it's just automation as it was, but a bit louder or quieter. Like revise mix on an ssl....

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by joeq

What happens when you want to trim the trims?

? Its easy to trim the trims.

It happens all the time. Especially in the post world.

I use a combination of fader automation, trim automation, trim plugin automation and VCA automation on many mixes.

Trim plugin automation I use all the time to automate the level into a compressor, fader automation for the main moves, trim automation (specifically read trim) to fine tune balances and VCA automation for overall group trims.

Working on an ICON, all these things are extremely easy and you never have to "fight" the fader.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by joeq

the PT trim plug has a ø button, which the PT mixer does not provide. A lot of plugs can flip phase, but the trim is a very low overhead plug, CPU-wise, so it's a good choice for tracks that have no plugs and all you want to do is flip them.

I use trims in the first slot to bring down the level of tracks recorded too hot. Not so much for adjusting during mixing. If my automation moves are OK, but the track needs to come down, I prefer to select the automation line and pull it down with the trim tool. Playing with levels in the plug chain can unbalance some careful gainstaging.

Like some others here, I would be astounded if any trim plug actually "sounded" better than another.

Blindfolded, I mean. tutt

I agree. If you can't trust the "Trim" plugin in Pro Tools then you probably shouldn't move any faders either.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by grrrayson

It always messes with the beginning and end unless you trim right on an existing point as in the screenshots. It should create four new points and make the trim a vertical move at the in and out points but drags things out at an angle from the nearest pre-existing points (otherwise).

Also, if you do this to a whole track, you still have to go back and change the beginning to drag it down. Or did they change this?

This behaviour in Pro Tools has always annoyed me.

I generally find inserting a trim plug-in much faster. Also, I like to keep my automation at unity or a constant base level.

Also, the selector tool doesn't jump to automation points, so to trim automation and then undo it and redo so as to audition the trim it's difficult to manually get it perfectly the same each time. Or am I missing something here too?

Regards,

Grayson

That's why I never do it with edit tools. I do it with automation.

Switch to Write/Trim or Latch/Trim mode. Move the fader by the chosen amount. Click "Write to All" on the automation Enable Window. No mistakes.

You can also quickly create a VCA just for that track. Adjust it, then delete it and click OK to PT re-adjusting the original fader.

And keep in mind, any automation on plugins is a bit slower than the normal fader response. Which is why I De-Ess in trim mode rather than using a trim plugin. It's not fast enough.

[grrrayson]

Thanks for the detailed response. I've been using a fader controller heavily lately, so I'll have to dig back in with the written automation.

Originally Posted by joeq

If you make a selection and drag up and down within it, new breakpoints will be created on the selection border and it will bend there. If you hold down the option key, you can suppress the creation of these breakpoints, and it will bend from the first breakpoints outside your selection.

I didn't know this option key shortcut, thanks.

You can separate the region at your selection and 'wiggle' the automation on either side of the selection. (Raise it up and put it back.) This creates two 'extra' automation points so that now the volume slides vertically on the border with no bends. There is probably a more elegant way to get those points, but this type of trimming is often the least useful, IMO as it can cause a jumpy sound.

I suppose I want there to be automation "regions" so that the selector tool has a more consistent operation between the wavefom view and the volume automation view–or some other way to minimize the extra "wiggles" needed. I agree with the jumpy sound issue, but sometimes it's called for (like when I get a really bad comp from someone else or I want to creatively put together two unrelated regions).

Why have two levels of automation when one will do the job?

If you want anything other than a global volume change for the whole track for the whole song, it seems to me you are right back where you started.

I agree with this, certainly. Keeping automation on one fader and keeping it simple as much as possible is preferable.

I just like to have the channel fader in the sweet spot at unity as much as possible for automating precision. It's not a big deal, but I like it. I try to set up a static mix like this with the fader plug-in first so I don't mess with dynamics processing. Exactly what Joram was saying.

Also, the trim plug-in is good for a quick A/B of a global automation trim (in LE!).

I don't understand why it would be any harder to remember or undo a move with the trim tool than it is to remember or undo a change with a trim plug?

I'm talking about undos and redos when you're many steps away from the initial move, where hitting Z 17 times would take away other moves after that you want to keep. This would also be solved if there were automation "regions" as I mentioned above. E.g., if you could double-click between two points with the selector tool and it would select all automation between and including those two points, like with an audio region.

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

That's why I never do it with edit tools. I do it with automation.

Switch to Write/Trim or Latch/Trim mode. Move the fader by the chosen amount. Click "Write to All" on the automation Enable Window. No mistakes.

You can also quickly create a VCA just for that track. Adjust it, then delete it and click OK to PT re-adjusting the original fader.

And keep in mind, any automation on plugins is a bit slower than the normal fader response. Which is why I De-Ess in trim mode rather than using a trim plugin. It's not fast enough.

Thanks for the input. Alas! I'm in LE...although getting HD at home is looking more and more tempting.

Also, I have just been going for it and riding esses on the physical fader more often lately...the only thing that bothers me about this is that it needs to be done last after I've automated for overall volume or I may have to reperform too many moves for this to be time-efficient (because of the lack of a trim mode in LE). Sibilance is a pet peeve of mine, so I like to do it early on; this also helps me see how EQ affects it.


Regards,

Grayson

[johnpaul]

hi there,

+1 (fader 0 - then use the trims) that works great ITB, plus I use
the Hard panning, R C L nothing else, what's coming between
is send (return aux) reverb - delay - fx IMO.


Johnny

[joeq]

Originally Posted by grrrayson

...I suppose I want there to be automation "regions" so that the selector tool has a more consistent operation between the wavefom view and the volume automation view–or some other way to minimize the extra "wiggles" needed...

...E.g., if you could double-click between two points with the selector tool and it would select all automation between and including those two points, like with an audio region...

But you can do that.

OK you can't double-click to select an region of automation, but you can certainly drag to select a region of automation. Or shift click to select a region of automation for that matter. Just drop a breakpoint at the beginning and ending of the area in question and drag the selector over them. As long as your selection includes both, the region in between can be trimmed easily. The amount you drag past the breakpoints will determine the slope of the fade to and from the previous automation.

Often I have so many breakpoints in a track already, that I don't even need to add any to make a selection that suits my needs.

I still don't understand what functionality you think is missing here.

[grrrayson]

Originally Posted by joeq

But you can do that.

OK you can't double-click to select an region of automation, but you can certainly drag to select a region of automation. Or shift click to select a region of automation for that matter. Just drop a breakpoint at the beginning and ending of the area in question and drag the selector over them. As long as your selection includes both, the region in between can be trimmed easily. The amount you drag past the breakpoints will determine the slope of the fade to and from the previous automation.

Often I have so many breakpoints in a track already, that I don't even need to add any to make a selection that suits my needs.

I still don't understand what functionality you think is missing here.

OK:

• Double-clicking to select the area between two (existing) breakpoints is a main thing needed for the selector tool to behave in the volume view as it does in the waveform view. Otherwise, how do you quickly and precisely select two breakpoints? You often have to zoom in and/or change tools, which interrupts speed. Generally the quickest way is to make new breakpoints with a trim tool function, but that's not always desirable or convenient.

• Also, as in the attached screenshots: if you select an time range without preexisting automation and use the trim tool, it will create 4 break points (screenshot 1 & 2). If that area contains preexisting automation, though (screentshot 3), it will only create 2 breakpoints (screenshot 4) and leave me with a "fade-down" that I don't want since I was trimming the whole area evenly...which I think would more logically get me to screenshot 5. As it is, I had to select the hand tool, make an extra breakpoint, and make sure I moved it to the proper tenth of a decibel. I don't like fiddling with this extra step.

• Further, for consistent cursor/tool behavior, there should be a tab-to-breakpoint function. Is there one that I'm missing? That should be much easier to implement than tab-to-transient yet it doesn't exist (to my knowledge).


In general, I love Pro Tools, think they've nailed audio editing, and I know my shortcuts and whatnot quite well so there's always a way to do this stuff–we're getting tweaky here. However, getting tweaky is what we do, and when you're doing days of editing and mixing on end these little things slow us down significantly. The disparity between audio editing and automation editing has always been egregious to me. Imagine audio editing if you couldn't tab to regions and you had to switch from the selector tool to the hand tool to select region boundaries! Yet that's roughly the case with automation editing, no?

Make sense? If I'm crazy/ignorant/missing something here, PLEASE tell me! I want to know the fastest way to do this stuff. I have things to do!

Thanks again for the dialogue.

Grayson

P.S. Sorry for the tangent, OP!