OSCiLLOT

[irrelevance]

I gave in in the end the environment looks similar to the scope modular so got more excited about linking the two. Those damn youtube videos!

[topaz]

The biggest let down for me about oscillot for me is the complete lack of automation

You can only have 8 macro controls total.

Also the step sequencer steps cannot be automated at all, but even if they could once you use up the 8 steps it's all over.

Very disappointed

[ObtuseMoose]

The biggest let down for me about oscillot for me is the complete lack of automation

You can only have 8 macro controls total.

Also the step sequencer steps cannot be automated at all, but even if they could once you use up the 8 steps it's all over.

Very disappointed

I can't tell if you're making an April Fools joke or not. On the chance that you're not joking, I'll ask: what sort of automation do you want to do that you can't?

Can't really help with the 8 macro controls.

And while it's a bit messy, you CAN chain Seq8 sequencers. (But it's a modular, it's SUPPOSED to be messy )

--
Moose

[topaz]

I wish it was an April fools.

Only 8 parameters can be automated.

[kleine]

So far 8 Macros can be automated and theses macros can feed multiple destinations.
I do understand this wish and if it would be easy or even semi-easy, there'd be automation for every parameter.
But since everything is dynamic in this modular system (you can create and delete modules on the spot), the normal
Live automation does not work. We'd need to come up with a custom solution which somewhat is on our list but i won't make any promises at this point...

Best,
C.

[topaz]

A modular synth is all about hands on, I'm trying to imagine any modular synth with only 8 controls.

The whole idea is to tweak like crazy but doing that with a mouse with no way to record any of those moments is such a major limitation.

I would hope this, along with at least being able to control individual sequencer steps should be at the very top of development importance.

[kleine]

btw: you can also control OSCiLLOT with MIDI CC data and the MIDIcntrl to CV module.
On top of the priority list is still sound, stability and usability.

Best,
C.

[topaz]

This makes no sense to push, the number one ableton controller.

[TomViolenz]

So far 8 Macros can be automated and theses macros can feed multiple destinations.
I do understand this wish and if it would be easy or even semi-easy, there'd be automation for every parameter.
But since everything is dynamic in this modular system (you can create and delete modules on the spot), the normal
Live automation does not work. We'd need to come up with a custom solution which somewhat is on our list but i won't make any promises at this point...

Best,
C.

Since you seem to work for Ableton an important question for me:
Can we expect devices like this (or even specifically this one) to ever be native Live devices again?!

M4L is something to create the odd one out, the ones that likely won't get wide enough use to warrant real development and the associated costs, the ones were it's better to have cheaper development in a CPU hungry and buggy device, than non at all.
This device is not one of these IMO and neither are the Convo reverbs nor the modulation tools like the Envelope follower and LFO!

[kleine]

That i don't know. My interest is to eventually make M4L devices which at some point you can't differentiate from native ones.
This requires of course even more integration etc.
But i understand where you're coming from…

Best,
Christian

[TomViolenz]

That i don't know. My interest is to eventually make M4L devices which at some point you can't differentiate from native ones.
This requires of course even more integration etc.
But i understand where you're coming from…

Best,
Christian

Well, it would be grand, if you could pass that sentiment on to your superiors, as I'm far from the only Live user, who harbors it!

[thecld]

That i don't know. My interest is to eventually make M4L devices which at some point you can't differentiate from native ones.
This requires of course even more integration etc.
But i understand where you're coming from…

Best,
Christian

Well, it would be grand, if you could pass that sentiment on to your superiors, as I'm far from the only Live user, who harbors it!

+1

Tom's right. Live would be superior if things like LFOs, Envelopes, OSCiLLOT, etc. would be native

[stringtapper]

So far 8 Macros can be automated and theses macros can feed multiple destinations.
I do understand this wish and if it would be easy or even semi-easy, there'd be automation for every parameter.
But since everything is dynamic in this modular system (you can create and delete modules on the spot), the normal
Live automation does not work. We'd need to come up with a custom solution which somewhat is on our list but i won't make any promises at this point...

Best,
C.

Since you seem to work for Ableton an important question for me:
Can we expect devices like this (or even specifically this one) to ever be native Live devices again?!

M4L is something to create the odd one out, the ones that likely won't get wide enough use to warrant real development and the associated costs, the ones were it's better to have cheaper development in a CPU hungry and buggy device, than non at all.
This device is not one of these IMO and neither are the Convo reverbs nor the modulation tools like the Envelope follower and LFO!

1. How do you not already know who he is? Aren't you an electronic music producer in Berlin?

2. This isn't an Ableton device. It's a Max For Cats device (Christian's company).

3. M4L is whatever the hell I want it to be.

[TomViolenz]

The location says Ableton. So it's pretty save assumption, no?

[kleine]

It's as Stringtapper says but i answered your post also on behalf of LFO and Envelope Follower, which i worked on as well.