what is your opinion on the new envelope curves>

[Not_Elba]

I agree with the Bezier-Spline-Curves.
It`s shouldn`t be that hard to integrate and you will not even notice any remarkable increase in CPU.
I´ve used many programms, especially 3d-Graphic and Compositing software, which make use of literally hundreds and thousands of Bezier-Spline-Automation Curves simultaneously (much more than you would normally use in Ableton). This is no excuse to not implement such thing.
These curves are only limited by the resolution of the underlying system. Naturally you can`t make use of the intermediate values of the interpolated curves. The higher the underlying resolution, the more usable a bezier or similar computed curve is.

However for modeling any curve imaginable with the least hassle and fewest points possible, the idea with the bezier handles is pretty much perfect.
Features such as presets (making use of a User preset library for your most use values)and curve optimization (keeping the shape as much as possible while reducing the control points to a minimum, especially useful to me for optimizing the messy automation curves from extern midi controllers. I wouldn`t probably hear a difference, but try to change the curve if you`re not happy with the result and just want to tweak it a bit. Any change will set a new automation point with linear interpolation, which is a nightmare to clean up afterwards. ) would be a very nice addition and much better than this, sorry, half-baked implementation.

[su]

Just to illustrate: Live's "fades" (that they already had) and New Feature: curved automation.

You wouldn't hear a difference anyway, so why bother? Just for the smoother looks?

there is a HUGE difference in those 2 fades, easy to hear

esp if you're automating pitch

[friend_kami]

No, it's not curves but that is how you should handle automation dammit.
Live's automation is fucking horrible. S1 handles automation really welk, although there's no proper curves but it still shits on Live and it's halfassed implementation.

[tintala]

No, it's not curves but that is how you should handle automation dammit.
Live's automation is fucking horrible. S1 handles automation really welk, although there's no proper curves but it still shits on Live and it's halfassed implementation.

As someone who is getting ready to upgrade for the 64 bit, this automation issue sucks... it's one of those things deterring me from buying... damnit..

[mr.ergonomics]

push... would be great if this limited control over the curve would be adressed in an later update... I don't have much hope, but this topic needs to stay up.

[madlab]

+1 Angstrom.

[Because789]

I have to admit it never crossed my mind that this could be thought of as an issue until I read this thread. When I want a fades-like curve I just split the segment and make two curves (as mentioned before). What you get is more flexbile then the fades curve and I quite like that. There might be one or two additional clicks needed, but you gain flexibility for them.

Nonetheless I understand that having different curve shapes could be nice. I just think that an implementation isn't that easy, since it has to work with features like splitting clips or copy/paste automations (since fades are property of a clip they are handled in a different way).

What blows me away is that you are supposed to hold ALT, click the envelope, then drag it in whatever direction you need to until you get the desired curve. There is even a change to your mouse arrow to indicate that you are holding ALT and that Live is ready for you to create some curves in your envelope.

WHY DOES THIS ONLY HAPPEN SOME OF THE TIME?

I am uncertain of what the circumstances are that allow you to do this. It only works some of the time for me and it really pisses me off.

There are two conditions which have to be fulfilled:

1. a start and an end point have to be set
2. the start and end point have to have different values

(maybe it's just one condition )

[Angstrom]

I have to admit it never crossed my mind that this could be thought of as an issue until I read this thread. When I want a fades-like curve I just split the segment and make two curves (as mentioned before). What you get is more flexbile then the fades curve and I quite like that. There might be one or two additional clicks needed, but you gain flexibility for them.

That's not correct because the new curves cannot do all of the required curve shapes. So even if you split the curve, you aren't able to achieve the shape you want. The X constraint on the curve handle means that the shape is limited to only allow a sub-set of possible curves.

[Because789]

The x constraint is a fact and I understand that it's annoying for some people. I just find it hard to think of a shape I actually need I can't achieve by splitting the segment. For example, the right one in this picture seems to me as a shape you declare of not being possible:



Of course, it's additional work and it would be nice if I could choose my shape, but I'm fine with that. And it still seems to me being more flexible then the fades curve.

[ian_halsall]

they are rubbish

[mr.ergonomics]

The x constraint is a fact and I understand that it's annoying for some people. I just find it hard to think of a shape I actually need I can't achieve by splitting the segment. For example, the right one in this picture seems to me as a shape you declare of not being possible:



Of course, it's additional work and it would be nice if I could choose my shape, but I'm fine with that. And it still seems to me being more flexible then the fades curve.

Possible means in this context also that it's possible to make it in a usable time. Try to adjust a curve out of 6 segments - you have to adjust all point and curves again. Especially when curves are used to modulate parameters to create a groove these small adjustments are absolutely necessary to get the right feeling. That means, adjust curve, hear, adjust curve hear....(20x). That is very very time consuming at the moment.

I agree that a lot of shapes are possible when using a lot of segments and adjusting them extensively, but that's just not usable and therefore not an enhancement at all. You should look at the volumeshaper vst (http://www.cableguys.de/volume-shaper.html). Adjusting curves there and in live it night and day.

[DrTone]

You should look at the volumeshaper vst (http://www.cableguys.de/volume-shaper.html).

Wow. I wasn't bothered by Lives new curve options until I saw this cable-guys thing. Dang! Now I want to have it.

But in reality, Lives curves are pretty useable. Making a curve "groove" always requires a bit of fine-tweaking. Even with this volume-shaper-plugin I expect the fiddle time not to shrink considerably. It may be easier to get you near the desired result. But in the end, it is that minute tweaking to get it really swing with the music. I fear, no curve options will take that off of you.

[mr.ergonomics]

sorry DrTone!!

Yes, it requires always tweaking and therefore the current implementation is - for me - really bad usability wise. It is very cumbersome and timeconsuming to adjust the curve with a lot of segments to the shape you want. With a not limited bézier/curve/nurbs implementation is is a matter of second to get the shape like. This is the case with volume shaper for example.

That said, the curve adjusting in volumenshaper is imho the normal way and nothing outstanding.

[Jack McOck]

I like straight lines. I can't hear the difference anyway. But if you're gonna do curves, do curves like Logic.

[DrTone]

sorry DrTone!!....With a not limited bézier/curve/nurbs implementation is is a matter of second to get the shape like.

Seconds? Dream on, my friend.

While I'm totally with you that L9 curve-implementation is far from being perfect, getting good sounding curves/transitions is always a tedious matter.

Basically, curves is another word for mixing - and as such will always require time to get right. Imo, its not just a matter of having more shapes at your disposal. You'll have to deviate from ideal curves to be inline with your musical content. It's the adjustment of these tiny deviations that eat your time and listening over and over through complicated transitions and the like.

I also agree that adding a lot of breakpoints and curve the interconnections is an extremely tedious task. However, I would never chose such a strategy. Basically, you have 3 choices: (1) adjust by hand & ear (i.e. ride faders, turn knobs), (2) do a lot of breakpoints with your mouse, but with linear interconnections, or (3) use curves, because a perfect mathematical curve can do the job. Clearly, case (3) is the least common case.

And, as you can see, a case with a lot of breakpoints with non-linear interconnections, is more or less nonsense. Mainly for the reason you stated yourself - its a waste of time. Much faster to insert two or three breakpoints to approximate the curved shape.

But in the end, I think we agree that we'd both be happy to see more flexible curves. You for speed and I just for the fun of it.