Questions & Answers

Composers Need Ability to Force Recorded AUTOMATION onto a "TRACK" Lane Instead of "PART" to use Latch mode.

+3 votes
59 views
asked Feb 28 in Editing by stevenicel (3,100 points)

I'm not holding any hopes that the broader community could care less about this request... here goes anyway.

The Request: In the Title

The Situation: As Below

Most serious composer's (Electro or Orchestral) use midi controllers (breath or fader) to PLAY-IN LIVE expressiveness of string/synth/horn parts. The problem with Studio One in this regard, is that it forces any automation data recorded in record enable mode, to be embedded with the "PART", and doesn't allow for alternate "TRACK" lane capturing. 

Here's why this exclusive approach falls down: 

After the initial recorded pass/capture, composers need a way to enter "Latch/Touch" record mode to fine tune expression. This can't be done in PART AUTOMATION. For me, expression can be 3-4 different CC elements in one pass. Especially when using controllers for live 3-4 way expression part capturing (faders/TEC BBC2/breath c's/etc..). And if you have ever tried to accurately copy and paste 4 automation controls, across 10 different recorded regions, for 3 different tracks! in Studio One3, you'll no doubt know how painfully slow and counter-productive this is!..

As of 27-2-18 pasting automation onto a TRACK lane functions where it won't read back the TRACK automation unless you delete the complete PART automation lane first. Which means, those 10 regions of midi with embedded PART automation, must be copy/pasted out to the TRACK LANE first, just to use Latch/Touch record mode for fine tuning your live-feel. This is time consuming and full of potential automation layering errors.

So, Studio One needs one of two things for flexible expressive automation capture:

1. Allow "latch/touch" updating in part based automation.
2. Allow users the option to set "Record automation to track OR part" when track is recording.

Thanks in advance to the potential 1 or 2 who read and find this workflow benefit entertaining :)

4 Answers

+1 vote
answered Feb 28 by robertgray3 (16,800 points)

Great idea. Here's a vote! Just ran into a similar situation the other day and it was pretty tedious. Better control of where and how we're recording/updating automation is a good thing.

Solution #1 seems the cleanest to me. Just brainstorming in regards to Solution #2 - where would you prefer recording the automation data? In the MIDI part or on an automation track?

And I know how you feel about niche workflow FRs. I have one to try and reduce the need for duplicate MIDI tracks to trigger effects inserts and I'm starting to get the feeling that MIDI-triggered effects plugins might not even be that popular here, lol. http://answers.presonus.com/25522/direct-input-for-effects-inserts?show=25522#q25522

0 votes
answered Mar 5 by stevenicel (3,100 points)
Sorry for the delay @robergray3. And thanks for expressing value in this (IMO) semi-professional element of Studio One 3.5

In regards to your question. Ultimately I  wouldn't really mind which method, as long as users can easily record multiple lanes in the record pass, then"touch up" 1 or as many lanes as needed in Touch/Latch. Also, as long as users can effortlessly copy automation from part, to track, or vise-versa without needing a 10 step process.

I guess if I had to choose one, I like the more "global" viewing aspect of working automation from the "Track" lane, as opposed to "Part" based (I always have "automation follow events" enabled). I also have my automation lane/s set to show/hide from a shortcut key, so I jump in and out of track/automation editing pretty quickly without any visual clutter. I find this approach more musical because I can see (supporting what I hear) how the automation is "evolving" through the song. Particularly for parts that need fluid fine tuning from section to section like Volume, LFO's and longer evolving rhythmic filters. These can sound a disjointed if the transition points aren't seamless between events. Not saying this can't also be done in part based automation, but I find it suits my workflow preference along with all the automation shortcuts I use..

One thing I really don't like about the existing automation workflow is that you have to put "ALL" automation lanes (residing on the same Track channel) into Latch or Touch mode at the same time. This is not always a problem, but is a real pain when doing filter/res automation pass, and i accidentally touch another control with my finger (S49 keyboard controllers are touch sensitive) and it overwrites parts on that lane also.

This is not a efficient way to use automation.

All the best.
0 votes
answered Mar 21 by alexandergleich (4,000 points)
Just don’t forget about us composers. Game and film composers are also quite a large group besides those producers and songwriters :)
0 votes
answered May 21 by AlexTinsley (695,200 points)
 
Best answer

Thank you for the feature request. 

If anyone else agrees or disagrees, please VOTE!

The developers pay close attention to those that are voted on the most. 

You are allowed one vote. You can change your vote later if you choose.

(Here's some helpful info on how to use the voting system)

Please vote the original question / feature request. 

Please DO NOT Vote on THIS response!

...