I suggest you ...

Track-base automation could be great.

It's already possible now, but only by creating a new dedicated automation track. Would be better if track-base automation looks like present clip-base automation, means directly under the audio(or midi) track, so they can be collapsed and you don't need to create folder tack. Thank you very much.

40 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Igro shared this idea  ·   ·  Admin →

    9 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • the dazed mindorchestra commented  · 

        the best solution for this i saw in Reason... would be really great :D the same intrument track but the automations are fre to move around and copypaste and so on^^

      • glurgle commented  · 

        sorry, where I said "automation track" at the very end of my last comment I should have said "automation lane", I was referring to the little sub-tracks that currently hold automation. They are a good idea, there's just no good reason for them (especially when you have more than a few) to be strictly tied to the clips in the parent track when you can select groups of clips very easily (especially clips that are right next to eachother

      • glurgle commented  · 

        I would prefer automation lanes act as independent "child" tracks of whatever track they are added to, so that you don't need a folder, but the clips in the automation track are independent of the ones in the parent track.

      • robenestobenz commented  · 

        I think the system we have now is good, but with one little change we could have the best of both worlds... just add a button with which you can completely collapse the inline piano roll. That's the only annoyance about using clips solely containing automation at the moment for me.

      • funkadil commented  · 

        i don't know, i mean, this already allows the best of both worlds doesn't it? You can have a single, song length automation track(routed to all other tracks), plus clip based if you have, for example, a looping ryhtmic filter motif controlled by an envelope. That used to require two tracks in xt1. The way I think about it, this is exactly like XT1 except we have the ability to tie automation to a clip. I think a good alternate feature to this would be a "split envelope from clip" option that would create a new track with just the desired envelope information in it so you could expand upon something you created on the original track. I can just see it getting really confusing to have midi clips combined with longer envelope clips in the same track.

      • djsubject commented  · 

        if you add points it should add them at the current value of the line not move it to exactly where the mouse was on the 2'nd clip, you should be able to enter numbers of the node also, thease are the key floors in Automation in XT2 IMO

      • Igro commented  · 

        I think i should be more clear. In other words, i would like to see that the current automation lines(curves) length not be limited by midi or audio clip length. If you do it, then we don't need to create dedicated automation tracks.

      • NAS commented  · 

        Yeah for sure the automation was better in XT1.4 for me personally

        NAS

      Feedback and Knowledge Base