Automation in live, way more tedious than in most Daws

[flowdesigner]

Better automation in Live is definitely needed.

better arrangemt

[TRS80]

I would like to be able to draw exponential curves; really I'd like to be able to select from a range of preset line shapes. It's a feature that was in Opcode Studio Vision that I miss.

[Der_Makrophag]

See also:
http://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php? ... 4&start=30

and:
http://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=143177

This list could never end, but as these threads have link-list inside them selves I will not post more links here... feel also free to just make a search, to find out how important this is for EVERYONE (thats a forum rule anyway, so I wonder why there are so many singel threads and not one BIG!)!

[friend_kami]

not gonna happen until 9.
unlike other software companies, ableton waits with features the users wants until they got a big update, so they can charge for it.
which they do, each update (bugfixes not included).

so yeah, better automation tools is something we all want, but its not gonna happen until live 9.

[Der_Makrophag]

not gonna happen until 9.
unlike other software companies, ableton waits with features the users wants until they got a big update, so they can charge for it.
which they do, each update (bugfixes not included).

so yeah, better automation tools is something we all want, but its not gonna happen until live 9.

Of course, this is something for a major update. But some of the requests are even dated before live 8... when they announced, that there will be this curvy clip-crossfades I was almost sure that they will also implement these curves on normal automation. Bu they did not. I hope this is just because they were not really finished with doing this for the automation or something. The reason I am permanently supressing is, they just do not want to implement this feature ever... And if they find it somehow contrary to Lives philosophy, we can wait to death.

Sorry for this pessimistic view, but this could be the point. But I also prefer to supress it

So keep this up!

[Paradigm X]

That process sounds like this:
fuck, shit, oh fucking hell, fucking shit, shitting, oh for fucks sake NO!, fucking ... , ah there it is .. , shit, where the fuck has it gone now??? , there, no , there, where, what/ wait WHAT? FUCK!!!

You been in my room?

[IP]

Being an ex-Cubase user, I must agree that the automation in live leaves a lot to be desired!

The 2 absolute essentials that are lacking from automation are:

1) Ability to type a value for a point
2) Ability to snap the automation points

And as a nice to have, it would be great to see curves and the ability to draw shapes like sine waves automatically based on the snap setting.

Hope the Abes are onto this

+1

+double click is not needed. It could be single click to add a point and if someone needs to drop a full line to hold ctrl or something

+it should be possible to select many out of range points ... for ex. 3 points for 1.1.2 and 3 from 1.1.4

+to have value feedback on multi point selection (smallest and biggest value)

[anybody human]

I'm not expecting improved automation (and arrangement in general) to be a focus of Live 9, which would be shocking. I love Ableton but I've just accepted that the need for 2 DAW's. It's kind of ridiculous that I often feel the need to avoid detailed editing of automation in the program I use everyday. Sorry to sound negative, but the lack of such basic features drives me nuts. I've said it before, Ableton should just hire a couple people who've worked on ProTools, Logic, or Cubase and have them work on just basic DAW functions. It has to be a priority.

[Der_Makrophag]

I'm not expecting improved automation (and arrangement in general) to be a focus of Live 9, which would be shocking. I love Ableton but I've just accepted that the need for 2 DAW's. It's kind of ridiculous that I often feel the need to avoid detailed editing of automation in the program I use everyday. Sorry to sound negative, but the lack of such basic features drives me nuts. I've said it before, Ableton should just hire a couple people who've worked on ProTools, Logic, or Cubase and have them work on just basic DAW functions. It has to be a priority.

Problem seems not to be that they can't do it, but don't want to. Only that way one can explain this half-functionality of things like automation curves (you have curves on crossfades but not on automation or you have snap to grid with the pencil tool but not when ceating points "by hand").
At least this woud explain why there is not any effort in this direction up to now.

[3phase]

probably the best thing you can say about the multilane automation in Live is "it is there"
everything else about it is not so great.

I think the issues come from the incremental way that the interface has been built up, so by the time we arrive at Live8 every function must sit on top of an old interface.

If anyone does a lot of work in Arrangement they will have experienced the shoutfrenzy that occurs as you try to navigate to a drum in a group and open up three parameters for that drum, then scale the lanes, and zoom in so you can then edit the automation.

That process sounds like this:
fuck, shit, oh fucking hell, fucking shit, shitting, oh for fucks sake NO!, fucking ... , ah there it is .. , shit, where the fuck has it gone now??? , there, no , there, where, what/ wait WHAT? FUCK!!!

true..

and thats not the only area where working with the program is building up language like this over the years..

you accept the drawbacks in early stages of usage but in the cause of years and years it just feels pretty sick..


especially the huge contrasts between smart implementations and overly stupid ones really hurts somehow... you have the very smart magnifying glass zoom tool for the clips.. but in arrange you collapse and open the tracks all the time by hand as a donkey... not very consistent somehow..

its really like if there would be 2 teams designing the program the a team and the b team..
but the b team gains more dominance over time... probably because the a team is engaged with fixing the b-team bugs... a classical win win situation...for the b team

[cmcpress]

eh? really? I find using Automation in Live far easier than in Cubase - but then i'm still using SX3 - maybe they improved it in 4/5?

+1 on curves though.

[leedsquietman]

I use both.

Live's automation is OK if you don't need a lot of precision and hence, fairly quick. The clip envelope automation is especially fast.

Cubase's automation has more precision and options though and the new automation panel in C5 is a cool feature.

[3phase]

Problem seems not to be that they can't do it, but don't want to. Only that way one can explain this half-functionality of things like automation curves

seems that everything at ableton is following a very streamlined bussiness concept.. the creativity is rather in the biz concepts than in the actual sequencer concepts ..that mostly just copy other daw´s features... even the session mode with all the clip launch modes is a direct take over from opcode studio vision...

there is defetly more brilliace in the biz concept.. a small team of autodidactic coders is minimizing costs..

by design new features are only implemented in a half baked fashion to leave room for more upgrade sales..

a rectfied rainer campaign creates the illusion that we deal with a professional studio tool here..
and an army of rainers will promote the product without beeing payed to recover their expenses..

connecting with compnays like serato and max create a modern and smart image ( as long nobody talks about stability of cause) and creates all kinds of cross promotion abilitys..

if ableton would be in the design department as whitty as in the biz departmet we would have a brilliant program..that for sure..

just.. the half baked tactics stays a bit in the way for that

[Angstrom]

I think the issues come from the incremental way that the interface has been built up, so by the time we arrive at Live8 every function must sit on top of an old interface.

true..
and thats not the only area where working with the program is building up language like this over the years.. you accept the drawbacks in early stages of usage but in the cause of years and years it just feels pretty sick.. especially the huge contrasts between smart implementations and overly stupid ones really hurts somehow... you have the very smart magnifying glass zoom tool for the clips.. but in arrange you collapse and open the tracks all the time by hand as a donkey... not very consistent somehow..

its really like if there would be 2 teams designing the program the a team and the b team..
but the b team gains more dominance over time... probably because the a team is engaged with fixing the b-team bugs... a classical win win situation...for the b team

the lack of interface coherence is most obvious when you compare the zooming of midi clips, waveform view and the Sampler waveform(all Magnifying glass zooms and scrolls); compare that with the Sampler zones, rack chains, and rack velocity (right click for a list)

In UX design it's normal to establish a function and an action required to perform it, then train the user, then repeat the implementation.
This gives users a quick workflow, they only need to learn it once. "zooming and scrolling is done like this". Rather than "How is zooming and scrolling done in this context? is it magnifying glass, right click-for-list, or scrollbars, or something else?"

tldr;
yes, their UX choices don't seem to conform to any unified plan.

[Tarekith]

Would love to see an easy way to trim/scale automation already recorded, as well as a way to specify which tracks are actually going to record automation.