Propellerhead Forum

Propellerhead Forum (https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/index.php)
-   Feature Suggestion Forum (https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Convert CV Connections to automation (https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/showthread.php?t=105069)

Reason1O1 2008-07-17 17:05

Convert CV Connections to automation
 
I know you might be scratching your head, but hopefully this makes sense.

Let's say you connect a subtractor LFO 1 to the panning of channel 1 on a mixer. How about a way to convert that connection to the channel 1 pan automation lane in the sequencer (just as you can convert notes from a matrix to a note lane in the sequencer). The software would analyze the cv connection, as well as the trim knob, and come up with automation which replicates this connection.

So basically, you connect the CV routing, click "convert to automation lane" and the CV is converted to automation data in the sequencer. Then you can delete the routing, as it's not needed anymore.

The automation lane would take over for the CV routing and operate just as it did as if it were routed, except that it's now controlled by the automation lane, and you can in essence "See" your CV routing on-screen, edit the automation, fine tune it, etc.

It may not work for every circumstance, but it seems like it would make sense. I would think this would be a huge improvement and get around a lot of CV issues, such as not being able to automate the trim knobs, and being able to edit the automation afterwards.

Any thoughts?

Rob

marc64 2008-07-17 17:35

Yes, It would be nice to be able to convert an lfo curve, matrix curv etc. to automation lane :D

Or even be able to drag points in the stright line to make a beizer curves in the automation lanes, not just straight lines...

Like this http://www.math.ubc.ca/~cass/gfx/bezier.html ;)

dioxide 2008-07-18 00:28

Funnily enough I was thinking about this the other day and nearly posted it up here. I came to the conclusion that it's not going to happen until Reason supports higher resolution automation. The CV source has a resolution of 0-127 and so does the target parameter. So to be able to bounce that into the sequencer as automation you would need a resolution that's much higher than the current automation resolution. Or alternatively you would have to bring in a parameter smoothing feature in, the automation equivalent of portamento glide, so as to smooth out the steps.

Could be quite cool though as you could output envelopes and LFOs to the sequencer and edit them.

Reason1O1 2008-07-18 15:37

Even if the automation does not support a high enough resolution, I would imagine it wouldn't be that difficult to come as close as you could to reproducing the CV connection in an automation lane. Sure it might not be perfect, but at least it would open you up to editing, and automating trim knobs. I think the benefits far outweigh the negatives (low resolution). And if you really needed the higher resolution, you could still keep the routing and not bounce it to an automation track.

Definitely would be cool to work with envelopes and LFOs in this manner.

It would solve one of the biggest problems I always encounter, which is setting an LFO source to modulate the level in the mixer. If you do this, you end up with very little control over the level. I mean, you can mute it, but you're pretty much stuck with the LFO during the entire length of the song. With this approach, you can then go in and edit the LFO by reducing it in some parts, raising, lowering, etc. It's fully editable.

Rob

facher83 2008-07-20 04:00

I'm still in favor of a full fledged 'new' cable connector for all Reason 5 components, a digital connector, complete with a new spider component to split and combine, with the ability to transfer raw source 'values' to new targets... such as a piano synth sending digital link data stream to a strings synth. You then tell the Strings synth to suck out the notelane from the piano and apply it to the strings synth. Thus, your string synth plays exactly what the piano synth is.

Same goes for velocities. Apply it.

Mainly, I'm sure the more techno/hiphop/whatever have a use for a universal transmitter the way I have use for one that allows me to connect components in supreme ways.

I want to be able to send sequencer data from ONE main note lane source, split dozens of times to individual string instruments, and modify each individually... timing different, EQ different, reverb different.... but the same source, so once I program the linkage, the source is all I need to change.

I really want to program my Orchestra top notch instead of programming it each time I make a project and a single note. I want to automate it on my own terms.

Reason1O1 2008-07-28 22:57

That's actually one of my big pet peeves about Reason. It takes a lot of time to create combinators, matrices, etc. But the nice thing is that once you route everything up the way you want it, you can combine and create a patch, or save the song as a template. Couldn't you do the same? For instance, create one note lane, then duplicate it and/or move it to all the instruments you want to play the exact same notes, then tweak it the way you want, and save the song and you then have a template that can be used endlessly. All you then need to change is your note lane.

I guess what I'm saying is that you can create your orchestra exactly the way you want, with all your instruments you want, and then save this as a template song. You could even make it the default starting song, so that when you open reason, all the instruments and everything is right there ready to go.

I'm not sure why you need this new "digital connector"?

Rob

pparish 2008-07-30 04:58

Absolutely - I would really like to see extended automation in a future version of Reason that can control cable connections. Why not apply the routing flexibility that was introduced with the combinator to the rest of the program?

Good idea.

SiKo 2008-07-30 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by dioxide (Post 580156)
Funnily enough I was thinking about this the other day and nearly posted it up here. I came to the conclusion that it's not going to happen until Reason supports higher resolution automation. The CV source has a resolution of 0-127 and so does the target parameter. So to be able to bounce that into the sequencer as automation you would need a resolution that's much higher than the current automation resolution. Or alternatively you would have to bring in a parameter smoothing feature in, the automation equivalent of portamento glide, so as to smooth out the steps.

Could be quite cool though as you could output envelopes and LFOs to the sequencer and edit them.

I don't understand your reasoning...
besides that, we have now vector automation which smoothens the resolution ... right?

maybe it's just your wording and you're totally right, but then please explain me again.

thanks!


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:45.