"Model’s Type Menu" in Automation
This can be a bit tricky to develop.The idea is to have models to choose before editing the figures in the Automation Editor.
The objective is the fast editing.
The steps would:
Screenshot
6051 
The Menu
6052 
Note: with their names, obviously.
there are tools for that
there are tools for that
Can you explain?
I realized that Renoise is the only daw where i dont experiment with automatization enough. So i like your suggestion a lot.
I hate three things in Renoise modulation tab:
A) When you select curve in the bottom editor it is reseted to linear for the next pattern (wasnt in 2.8).
b ) You can not change shape of curve fast enough and through the whole track.
C) Tools are complicated and not very user-friendly imho
When i use Reaper or Tracktion i do it much more because:
A) You see more than one automation line
b ) Painting and moving by curves is very simple
C) You dont have that feeling “there is some modulation somewhere doing something”
It means. I can do what i need. But i dont try things that can be maybe interesting because the process is not fun :-]
I realized that Renoise is the only daw where i dont experiment with automatization enough. So i like your suggestion a lot.
I hate three things in Renoise modulation tab:
A) When you select curve in the bottom editor it is reseted to linear for the next pattern (wasnt in 2.8).
b ) You can not change shape of curve fast enough and through the whole track.
C) Tools are complicated and not very user-friendly imho…
I agree with @Akiz.I find it hard use fluentlythe native Automation in Renoise 3. Also in Keyzones, for complex instruments (samples withdifferent pulse velocities).
A couple of examples:
@dblue, thank you very much for this. I will look to use it to see if I served.Wow!It would be a luxury to go native…
With tools we are at the mercy of the author of said tool to make sure the tool is compatible with future renoise versions. I can’t even fathom why better automation hasn’t been addressed by the renoise devs.
… I can’t even fathom why better automation hasn’t been addressed by the renoise devs.
Redux? Others functions of Renoise?There are so many things!
Think it will be a matter of time.I’m sure!Little by little they will perfecting native tools. Renoise is impressiveand grows.Always it is going to improvebecause it is obligatory in itself. But there you go on leaden feet. There are many ideas, some not suitable, others do. We must discuss them.You have to justify much!
This is what we have the good stuff.However, sometimes I think that some third-party tools for Renoise, what they achieve is to halt its development.“When I seean external toolI think, something is missingunder the hood ofRenoise”.
If you’re done, why implement native? But I would prefer that everything was under the hood of Renoise. That is the way I think, and forget the external tools (On the other hand, they make their service and costs a lot to develop them).The large number of external tools is great, but too a “drag” for Renoise(functions already supplied = not native).It’s just a thought. Nothing else.It will not be in general,I suppose.
Personally, I am delighted with the new things of Renoise 3.1and it has its priorities,but too I miss others, like everybody else.It’s hard to please everyone. ToRenoiseTeam, we should hang a medal for his great work. It’s great!
But look, In this post I stumbled upon this:
there are tools for that
So better to do nothing.This is like flying a two-seater racing car, and suddenly your partner activates the hand brake.
I use irony:
Step 1) A usersays an idea “X”.
Step 2) Another user comments: “there are tools for that” (external tools)
Step 3)Do nothing and use external tools.
Step 4) Idea"X"ignored. No development under the hood of Renoise.
@Legendary Taunt. Have I answered you?This happens in many developments, not only in Renoise.
Not comment more!
Redux? Others functions of Renoise?There are so many things!
Think it will be a matter of time.I’m sure!Little by little they will perfecting native tools. Renoise is impressiveand grows.Always it is going to improvebecause it is obligatory in itself. But there you go on leaden feet. There are many ideas, some not suitable, others do. We must discuss them.You have to justify much!
This is what we have the good stuff.However, sometimes I think that some third-party tools for Renoise, what they achieve is to halt its development.“When I seean external toolI think, something is missingunder the hood ofRenoise”.
If you’re done, why implement native? But I would prefer that everything was under the hood of Renoise. That is the way I think, and forget the external tools (On the other hand, they make their service and costs a lot to develop them).The large number of external tools is great, but too a “drag” for Renoise(functions already supplied = not native).It’s just a thought. Nothing else.It will not be in general,I suppose.
Personally, I am delighted with the new things of Renoise 3.1and it has its priorities,but too I miss others, like everybody else.It’s hard to please everyone. ToRenoiseTeam, we should hang a medal for his great work. It’s great!
But look, In this post I stumbled upon this:
So better to do nothing.This is like flying a two-seater racing car, and suddenly your partner activates the hand brake.
I use irony:
Step 1) A usersays an idea “X”.
Step 2) Another user comments: “there are tools for that” (external tools)
Step 3)Do nothing and use external tools.
Step 4) Idea"X"ignored. No development under the hood of Renoise.
@Legendary Taunt. Have I answered you?This happens in many developments, not only in Renoise.
Not comment more!
Out of all the features available in Renoise since I’ve used it, the automation section got the least treatment. Then “tools” came around and people started adding their own functionality.
So actually, and forgive my frankness, but if you’re not a developer of renoise then … well no you haven’t answered my question. Maybe you’ve probably attempted to explain why it isn’t native, and you could sum it up by “well maybe that’s not a priority” which is fair. But in that case all the tools are just items that aren’t a priority right now to implement native.
I digress.
Fact is, the automation system could be improved on, but maybe it won’t. Thus to get quick and complex automation curves you have to use a specific tool for it. Which is also fine.
But what happens when the developer move on to other things and your favorite tool won’t work in future versions of renoise? This has happened before. Look at the earlier tools that were available for renoise previous versions. You can see the number of available tools decrease more and more.
So yeah, why not just implement it native instead of relying on the support of another developer? That’s my question.
One could say “well learn how to code”. Which I have mixed feelings about.
Anyhoo. Done with this topic. Enjoy your day and let’s keep things positive everybody.
@Legendary Taunt. When I started this post, I write:_“This can be a bit tricky to develop.” (_I think it’s complicatedand longcoding.)
I therefore prefer everything to be native, at least the most widely used (this avoids many problems with external tools.).So I created this post.
…Only the developers know it.
To see the difference…This seems so simple ( Model’s Type Menu in Automation ),something that looks small, But Ithink it is much more difficult to develop to natively than all this: Virtual Piano in Edit / Mix https://forum.renoise.com/t/keyboard-in-edit-mix-tab/44501 (something that looks big).This seems very complicated butinactuallyisalmost done.If it is useful, foul the time and desire…
Out of all the features available in Renoise since I’ve used it, the automation section got the least treatment.
I agree 100%. And also with the keyzones…It is improved. You will see!It’s a matter of time 
@Legendary Taunt. When I started this post, I write:_“This can be a bit tricky to develop.” (_I think it’s complicatedand longcoding.)
I therefore prefer everything to be native, at least the most widely used (this avoids many problems with external tools.).So I created this post.
…Only the developers know it.
To see the difference…This seems so simple ( Model’s Type Menu in Automation ),something that looks small, But Ithink it is much more difficult to develop to natively than all this: Virtual Piano in Edit / Mix https://forum.renoise.com/t/keyboard-in-edit-mix-tab/44501 (something that looks big).This seems very complicated butinactuallyisalmost done.If it is useful, foul the time and desire…
Point taken.
So better to do nothing.This is like flying a two-seater racing car, and suddenly your partner activates the hand brake.
No, it’s more like eating your soup instead of waiting for your birthday cake at the end of the year. The developers are well aware of the common issues with renoise (the automation section being somewhat lacking for a while, for example), it’s up to them to decide what is to be prioritised for what reasons. The tool API is a privilege, not a crutch.
Concerning usability of automation tools however, the selection in the automation editor in 3.1 is accessible with the api, as is the ability to clear point content with an a specific range.
Therefore, it’s possible to make a selection, have a popup XY pad dialog with a slider on each end, the sliders controlling the start and end value, while the xy pad, similarly sized to the selection, will act as the curvature point, acting as a weight, multiplier otherwise, like it is in many complex curve making designs in daws/plugins.
Concerning usability of automation tools however, the selection in the automation editor in 3.1 is accessible with the api, as is the ability to clear point content with an a specific range.
Therefore, it’s possible to make a selection, have a popup XY pad dialog with a slider on each end, the sliders controlling the start and end value, while the xy pad, similarly sized to the selection, will act as the curvature point, acting as a weight, multiplier otherwise, like it is in many complex curve making designs in daws/plugins.
You working on a tool Gova? 
No, it’s more like eating your soup instead of waiting for your birthday cake at the end of the year. …
I do not think Renoise changes throughout this beta period (about adding things that are needed).Moreover, I prefer Renoise Team focuses on improving what has already been created (the bugs);Renoise is a work of art in itself.There will be time to add toolsin the future. Always.But you have to comment.However, there are also things a bit inexplicable (what he say @Akiz and @Legendary Taunt).I see that here we all agree.Hey, this is great!
In this case, the Automation is a very powerful editor,and do not forget, unifying…It should be very pampered, more than other areas.
I think that all ideas should be very justified,be useful (before launching an idea, justification much, no more.). From there, you have to work.There will be time to add them if necessary in future versions, perhaps not in this.
For the moment everything looks fine. I am very happy with this version 3.1,because they have solved a big problem under the hood (Tell that to@fladd, about routing and multi-tracks 
).Only this arrangement is sufficient to release a new version.Instead, Renoise 3.1 brings many new and useful things. It’s great!!!
You working on a tool Gova?
Concerning usability of automation tools however, the selection in the automation editor in 3.1 is accessible with the api, as is the ability to clear point content with an a specific range.
Therefore, it’s possible to make a selection, have a popup XY pad dialog with a slider on each end, the sliders controlling the start and end value, while the xy pad, similarly sized to the selection, will act as the curvature point, acting as a weight, multiplier otherwise, like it is in many complex curve making designs in daws/plugins.
Now that is quite some API insight!
gova`s doing some pretty damn reliable tealeaf readings this week if anyones interested?
lolwut?
No, I’m not writing anything, way too busy. I’m just saying that it’s possible.
lolwut?
Just a (probably poor) reference to the keen insight
Does anyone have any other ideas to further improve the Automation Editor?
I wonder what yourselves think!
Does this tool you use it much?Do you use often this editor?
The tool API is a privilege, not a crutch.
<3
