This issue emerged from this thread during beta, but since the thread is so long, and the original issue is [done], I thought it was time it got it’s own post.
Essentially if you have multiple one-shot lfo’s in a track all set to modify a single parameter, the last in the chain takes priority because it continues to broadcast even after it’s one-shot is finished. The other one-shots cannot adjust the parameter when they are triggered.
I have made a VERY basic example here. Two lfo’s are set to adjust the volume of track 1. When the first is triggered it fails to change the volume since the second retains control.
As a minimum I believe the ‘continuous broadcast’ behaviour for one-shots should be optional. The best scenario (suggested by taktik in the above thread) would be for optional loop points on the custom lfo shape (similar to the loop points in the sample editor).
I really would find this very useful, and it would save me a great deal of time.
I totally agree that loop points is the supecalifragilisticexpialidocious perfect solution. Twenty thumbs up. Yeah!
I agree even MORE that moving the whole custom lfo waveform bit to a dedicated envelope device with loop points is a better option. As it is we have sort of a bastard child of envelope device and lfo, which, while awesome, isn’t a particularly clear concept.
Optional continuous broadcast on the device in its current iteration is a pretty bad interface design choice. As it is, continuous broadcast is how lfo devices always worked, and changing that behavior simply breaks the consistency of the device. It’s that simple. Adding a button to toggle this behavior further muddles an already complicated and crowded device.
You can fix your problem by disabling LFO devices you don’t want broadcasting. As has ALWAYS been the workflow for using multiple LFOs with the same target. Until we get some kind of weight device that takes a set of inputs and outputs a weighted average of them or some such, imho this is just something you’ll have to deal with, especially since your specific case is more about using the device as a straight envelope, not as a continuous modulation source.
I just totally, totally disagree with any notion that the LFO oneshot should have an optional sustain. It’s easy to work around if you need it, and you rarely need it.