Best VST automation outside Steinberg
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
my vote goes to FL, it's automation clips are awesome...being able to automate via "last parameter tweaked" is fast, easy and logical...
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- Banned
- 1648 posts since 11 Sep, 2005
I don't find it intuitive at all to have to manually assign a MIDI CC for automation. Fruity is better in that respect - load it up, start recording. To edit it, edit the automation of the event from the browser. Simple as pie.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
I haven't tried it myself, but I'm mighty impressed with the demo of the way Podium handles adding new automation clips. I don't imagine it could get much easier or intuitive than that. The only thing missing (or is it? I don't actually know!) would be the ability to stack these on top of the clip, the way Live or Tracktion does it.
I'm not a fan of eXT's way.
Greg
I'm not a fan of eXT's way.
Greg
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
but just because it's placed in the playlist doesn't limit it to song only...it's true that automation clips will only play in song mode, but a clip can be the same length as a pattern as can a loop in song mode...you can have automation clips for each pattern. However if working in just pattern mode and dont want to use song mode and loop the pattern FL still accomadates that as well, either by just recording the automation on the fly or using the event editor...arke wrote:Gaah, pressed submit too soon again ..
I meant to add, as poster said above, that automation clips are nice for certain things too. However, I do prefer the pattern automation.
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
original flipper original flipper https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8999
- KVRAF
- 2544 posts since 14 Sep, 2003 from Essex
HI
I am an XT user but for me the automation is a drag - having to open an envelope and then assign it to a vst imo is a step I could do without.
Logic has very nice automation, Live also has a very good implementation - SX is OK - but I hate the pile-up of automation tracks that appear (yes you can close them - but then you can't see them!) - Logic can display all the 'layers' with a transparent overlay.
For me it is about keeping the stages involved in automation to a minimum - let's not forget that automation is (largely) the software way of tweaking hardware controls on a mixing desk - it is best achieved through spontaneous measures - a convulted process can kill the feel.
Flipper.
I am an XT user but for me the automation is a drag - having to open an envelope and then assign it to a vst imo is a step I could do without.
Logic has very nice automation, Live also has a very good implementation - SX is OK - but I hate the pile-up of automation tracks that appear (yes you can close them - but then you can't see them!) - Logic can display all the 'layers' with a transparent overlay.
For me it is about keeping the stages involved in automation to a minimum - let's not forget that automation is (largely) the software way of tweaking hardware controls on a mixing desk - it is best achieved through spontaneous measures - a convulted process can kill the feel.
Flipper.
-
- Banned
- 1648 posts since 11 Sep, 2005
That's not even my gripe with the automation clipsHink wrote:but just because it's placed in the playlist doesn't limit it to song only...it's true that automation clips will only play in song mode, but a clip can be the same length as a pattern as can a loop in song mode...you can have automation clips for each pattern. However if working in just pattern mode and dont want to use song mode and loop the pattern FL still accomadates that as well, either by just recording the automation on the fly or using the event editor...arke wrote:Gaah, pressed submit too soon again ..
I meant to add, as poster said above, that automation clips are nice for certain things too. However, I do prefer the pattern automation.
. I hate it that it takes up a separate part of the playlist. Also, I'm more inclined to actually make all automation one big thing than many small ones, which makes it harder when changing a song's structure. Thus, I prefer the regular pattern automation. I usually have each instrument have one color which are grouped together in the playlist (and identified with it in the mixer), then at the bottom many gray patterns which are just automation. Of course, for something like a wind effect or a fade pattern I'll put the automation inside the pattern itself.For pretty much any project I have a large list of automation patterns at the bottom with descriptive names like "Arp HP In 8", "Tempo 104", "303 Pansweep 8" where the 8 at the end is the length of the pattern. Thus, before I record any automation I look if I already have something suitable and use that instead.
-
- KVRAF
- 2696 posts since 3 Aug, 2003 from Narnia
Same here... One of many reasons I might add.CorrosiveGod wrote:Logic does it best out of all the sequencers I've used, this is one of the reasons why am sticking with my old copy of Logic 5.5.1
-
BabyaSoftwareGr BabyaSoftwareGr https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=78490
- Banned
- 27 posts since 18 Aug, 2005 from Australia
FL Studio gets my pick as well as Logic 5.5.
-
- KVRAF
- 2327 posts since 13 Apr, 2004 from Vancouver, Canada
I really like the way Logic and Sonar layer the automation envelopes. It just seems more 'accessible' that way. It is probably the main reason for me wanting to migrate over to the Sonar camp...
The automation lanes in Cubase can get a little cumbersome, but the folders keep things semi-organised. Dunno... Guess I've just gotten used to doing things that way. At least I know that with Cubase, once I set an envelope to automate some parameter, it doesn't get orphaned, or stop working in any way!
The automation lanes in Cubase can get a little cumbersome, but the folders keep things semi-organised. Dunno... Guess I've just gotten used to doing things that way. At least I know that with Cubase, once I set an envelope to automate some parameter, it doesn't get orphaned, or stop working in any way!
-
- KVRAF
- 25037 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
well, eXT's automation is far from being perfect
- just as Original Flipper mentioned, it could be easier to assign an envelope to a parameter
- also each envelope-assignment has got its own track and therefor can't be laid on top of a track or on top of other envelopes
- you only can record clip-based automation but not envelope based automation
but it has got some mighty fine advantages which to me outweigh the disadvantages by far...
- you can stretch or shrink any envelope part (=clip) just as you want
- you can have ghosted parts so that if change the envelope in one part it accordingly gets changed at another place (e.g. imagine you've got an automation of a certain parameter in the refrain of your song - when you copy all the parts (clips) of the refrain including this automation-part
you only need to adjust it on one refrain if you want to tweak it later on)
- you can save any envelope-part and organize it in folders and suibfolders which then show up as a menue when you right-click on an envelope-track to load one of these saved parts (I've got four main categories: 'fade-in', 'fade-out', 'linear', and 'waveforms')
- you can organize your envelope-tracks just as you want e.g. they could get their own folder or you could put them in a folder with the respective tracks they are automating or whatever else fits your way of working
- each envelope-track can be assigned to as many different parameters on as many different tracks/instruments as you like
- apart from these envelope-tracks there's also midi-clip based automation (similar to Project5's clip-based automation)
- just as Original Flipper mentioned, it could be easier to assign an envelope to a parameter
- also each envelope-assignment has got its own track and therefor can't be laid on top of a track or on top of other envelopes
- you only can record clip-based automation but not envelope based automation
but it has got some mighty fine advantages which to me outweigh the disadvantages by far...
- you can stretch or shrink any envelope part (=clip) just as you want
- you can have ghosted parts so that if change the envelope in one part it accordingly gets changed at another place (e.g. imagine you've got an automation of a certain parameter in the refrain of your song - when you copy all the parts (clips) of the refrain including this automation-part
you only need to adjust it on one refrain if you want to tweak it later on)
- you can save any envelope-part and organize it in folders and suibfolders which then show up as a menue when you right-click on an envelope-track to load one of these saved parts (I've got four main categories: 'fade-in', 'fade-out', 'linear', and 'waveforms')
- you can organize your envelope-tracks just as you want e.g. they could get their own folder or you could put them in a folder with the respective tracks they are automating or whatever else fits your way of working
- each envelope-track can be assigned to as many different parameters on as many different tracks/instruments as you like
- apart from these envelope-tracks there's also midi-clip based automation (similar to Project5's clip-based automation)
-
- KVRAF
- 8389 posts since 11 Apr, 2003 from back on the hillside again - but now with a garden!
Podium's been emntioned twice, I'll clock in a third
DSP
DSP
-
BabyaSoftwareGr BabyaSoftwareGr https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=78490
- Banned
- 27 posts since 18 Aug, 2005 from Australia
Podium is also worth a try-I'll fourth that.