MOTUNATION (formerly UnicorNation) is an independent community for discussing Digital Performer and other MOTU audio software and hardware. It is not affiliated with MOTU.
Forum rules
This forum is for most discussion related to the use and optimization of Digital Performer [MacOS] and plug-ins as well as tips and techniques. It is NOT for troubleshooting technical issues, complaints, feature requests, or "Comparative DAW 101."
seamonster wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 3:50 amwhen you add a new automation control point at the same value as an adjacent point, it’s often not precisely the same value. For example, if the proceeding point is value -6, the new point might be value -6.05.
What exactly are you doing to add the second automation point?
I vaguely remember this being discussed, but since it never affected productivity for me I didn't give it much thought.
I just checked this with volume automation and, if I understand the problem, inserting automation points by clicking is 100% accurate unless the track is completely collapsed to its minimum ("Mini" in the track pulldown mini-menu), at which point clicking to add an automation point inserts a point that's off by a lot - a couple of db. If the track is expanded, even a little, to "Small" (and all the way to "Immense"), inserted points are the same value as the adjacent points on a flat line. Also, inserting automation points with Automation Snapshots are accurate at any track height, including "Small", as is Shift-Opt dragging points.
I'm not sure if this is what seamonster would call fixed, but that seems to be the current behavior.
Last edited by dix on Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I wouldn’t have expected an automation point created by just clicking in the lane would give anything better than an approximate value that can then be corrected using the info window, regardless of how careful you are or what track settings are in effect. I’ve always looked at the info window while dragging the pointer to set a specific value. Is this in the manual somewhere?
bayswater wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:49 pm
I wouldn’t have expected an automation point created by just clicking in the lane would give anything better than an approximate value that can then be corrected using the info window, regardless of how careful you are or what track settings are in effect. I’ve always looked at the info window while dragging the pointer to set a specific value. Is this in the manual somewhere?
The accuracy could be determined by the mouse or track pad being used, and the scaling % DP is set to. Unlike DP, Logic has sticky behavior when you click on an automation line, so it's easy insert identical points. This may be more of a DP feature-request than a bug fix.
bayswater wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 9:12 am
What exactly are you doing to add the second automation point?
Clicking on the automation line. E.g., if a volume point is at 6 at Bar 20, and I want keep it at 6 for 8 bars till it changes, I'll want to insert another 6 just before bar 28, and another 6 right on bar 28 which, now selected, can be easily changed to the new value via control+C to add, say, 3dB. I don't want to be adding that 3dB to "6.05".
dix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:31 pm
Unlike DP, Logic has sticky behavior when you click on an automation line, so it's easy insert identical points. This may be more of a DP feature-request than a bug fix.
If it's a feature request, it's been asked for by many folks for over 20 years now (since DP 3). You said it's only an issue at the smallest track height for you; that at taller heights a new point will match an adjacent point precisely (assuming you're not inserting in the middle of a ramp). That's not my experience in DP 9.52. Is it possible it was fixed in DP 10, and you just don't remember when it might've been an issue for you?
I should probably ask Barry Wood about this – we haven't been in contact for some years now! Time flies.
dix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:31 pm
Unlike DP, Logic has sticky behavior when you click on an automation line, so it's easy insert identical points. This may be more of a DP feature-request than a bug fix.
If it's a feature request, it's been asked for by many folks for over 20 years now (since DP 3). You said it's only an issue at the smallest track height for you; that at taller heights a new point will match an adjacent point precisely (assuming you're not inserting in the middle of a ramp). That's not my experience in DP 9.52. Is it possible it was fixed in DP 10, and you just don't remember when it might've been an issue for you?
I should probably ask Barry Wood about this – we haven't been in contact for some years now! Time flies.
It's possible that no one who worked on DP3 is still working at MOTU, so it is perhaps somewhere between a bug and a suggestion at this point. Logic's sticky approach would be a good suggestion I think. With modern high screen resolutions, when you're that zoomed out one pixel either way could be a big diff.
Somewhere along the line, maybe with DP10, the data displayed in the Event Info pane became more consistent - always showing data with the same metric that the plugin parameter being automated is using (%, db, Hz etc). DP might have been improved at that time in the way you describe. Btw, I've only checked out volume automation, not plugin data. As I mentioned scaling may have something to do with the accuracy of point insertion as well. I've only tried inserting automation at 110% – where I keep DP currently.
I appreciate that everyone likes to work how they like to work, but have you considered snapshot automation, and/or option-shift dragging automation data points as workarounds?
dix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 3:50 pm
I appreciate that everyone likes to work how they like to work, but have you considered snapshot automation, and/or option-shift dragging automation data points as workarounds?
The problem exists also with option–shift dragging of control points, a method I typically use – then I usually (not always) have to manually type in a corrected value anyway. It would be fantastic if this was fixed in DP 10 (as I noted it's not on the list of fixes for DP 11). Maybe some hoary long-timer would confirm or deny?
I did diligently use snapshot automation in my first few years with DP, but gradually my work-flow decided it was more trouble than it was worth. (Maybe if it's been substantially improved in some way since then, I might give it a look again.)
dix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 3:50 pm
I appreciate that everyone likes to work how they like to work, but have you considered snapshot automation, and/or option-shift dragging automation data points as workarounds?
The problem exists also with option–shift dragging of control points, a method I typically use – then I usually (not always) have to manually type in a corrected value anyway. It would be fantastic if this was fixed in DP 10 (as I noted it's not on the list of fixes for DP 11). Maybe some hoary long-timer would confirm or deny?
I did diligently use snapshot automation in my first few years with DP, but gradually my work-flow decided it was more trouble than it was worth. (Maybe if it's been substantially improved in some way since then, I might give it a look again.)
Ha! Well, I'm as hoary as anyone! I can confirm that shift-option dragged automation points are 100% constrained (duplicated identically) regardless of track height in DP11.1 - even at "Mini". There's always some undocumented fixes in updates. I guess this was fixed in one of them.
dix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 6:21 pm
Ha! Well, I'm as hoary as anyone! I can confirm that shift-option dragged automation points are 100% constrained (duplicated identically) regardless of track height in DP11.1 - even at "Mini". There's always some undocumented fixes in updates. I guess this was fixed in one of them.
Thanks. That would be sweet if true, though I'd think that if it were fixed in recent years, you would have heard hallelujahs from the rafters around here. But if one or a few others weigh in and confirm your reading of the situation, I s'pose an upgrade to v.11 would be in my near future!
seamonster wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:12 pmBut if one or a few others weigh in and confirm your reading of the situation, I s'pose an upgrade to v.11 would be in my near future!
FYI... OT, but there's an issue with your user avatar. You can now upload a graphic in your user profile so you don't need to remotely host them anymore.
dix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 30, 2022 6:21 pm
Ha! Well, I'm as hoary as anyone! I can confirm that shift-option dragged automation points are 100% constrained (duplicated identically) regardless of track height in DP11.1 - even at "Mini". There's always some undocumented fixes in updates. I guess this was fixed in one of them.
Thanks. That would be sweet if true, though I'd think that if it were fixed in recent years, you would have heard hallelujahs from the rafters around here. But if one or a few others weigh in and confirm your reading of the situation, I s'pose an upgrade to v.11 would be in my near future!
Unfortunately, MOTU doesn't seem to be offering trials of DP11 so you can't test for yourself.
I can see this is an important part of your workflow, but it seems like a pretty specific and obscure operation to me. I'm actually a little surprised anyone noticed or missed this behavior, but I totally get that you want it work as you've become accustom to. ...don't get me started on constrain-dragging notes to adjacent MIDI tracks that DP10 broke. I used that function many times a day.
