• SONAR
  • PLEASE!!! BRING BACK THE COLORS TO ALL AUTOMATION ENVELOPES!!!...
2011/02/21 13:03:42
javahut
I miss the show/hide all envelopes. I miss being able to see what all envelopes are doing at any given time. It's tough to tweak envelopes in cases where multiple envelopes need to be tweaked relative to each other. Why do all other envelopes have to basically disappear color wise in order to highlight and bring forward the envelope being worked on? It makes no sense.
 
Example... I was trying to find the track and it's automation that was responsible for some cool delay effects so I could repeat and enhance it. The track was orignally created in 8.5, where I could "show all envelopes" and quickly find the source of the sound. In X1... I have yet to figure out how to see all the automation envelopes clearly at once. So I spent about 5-10 minutes trying to find the track and automation... only to have to give up so I could move on, and tell my musical partner I'd look for it later... because I couldn't find it among all the other tracks and the invisible automation envelopes.
 
Whomever thought of this new automation envelope scheme clearly doesn't extensively use automation envelopes. We need to be able to see all of them at once!!!
 
Simple fix... just leave all the envelopes in their specific colors... no need to make them a near invisible black when they're not selected for editing. Just bold the selected envelope for editing and bring it to the front of all the other envelopes. But don't make all the other envelopes basically invisible and mono toned!!!
 
Please, Cakewalk... make this one adjustment. Everything else about X1 I can live with or even like the new changes. This invisble automation envelope thing is almost a deal breaker... and entirely NOT USEFUL. Bring back the colors to all automation envelopes, along with the show/hide all envelopes, and even the ability to show/hide individual envelopes.
 
2011/02/21 13:48:48
ThomThom
X1 is my first Sonar, so I can't compare it to earlier versions.
But: the implementation of automation envelopes is just basic, not to say poor.

I can't understand that the current implementation is all, there must be something I'm missing.
Look at reaper, as one example, there is one lane for each automation envelope.
Each of these is clearly named, so you don't have to look into each fx, when looking for what envelope is assigned to what parameter. No problem, if you have a small number of "simple" fx. But if you use some more complex plugins (like ff twin) in one track, this can get into an annoying job.
I really would like to see that implemented professionally.
One lane for each individual automation envelope, that can be muted, soloed, copy&pasted, renamed, colored.
Also I'd like to create a new envelope related to the "last tweaked" parameter.
And having a quick search (like in the media browser) wouldn't be to bad.
All of theses handled as a folder, so you can hide what you don't want to see.


2011/02/22 18:06:29
javahut
I can't believe that no one cares that you basically can no longer see but one automation envelope at a time in any single track, and it doesn't affect your workflow. This just seems like so much less functionality than 8.5's automation envelopes. How can only seeing one envelope at a time improve workflow? It's so ridiculous as to be unbelievable that this is deemed to be better than being able to plainly see and grab any envelope you want because each envelope has it's own color that doesn't disappear! What a novel idea!!!
2011/02/22 18:11:31
LANEY
I only have worked with one at a time so it doesn't bother me.
2011/02/22 18:26:31
codamedia
EDIT: I misinterpreted the OP's problem/concern so I am replacing my original post.
 
I'm not sure I agree with going back to the old way, as it had it's own set of problems - however if that is the easiest fix then sure, it's better than what we have in X1!
 
I would much prefer automation lanes myself.
2011/02/22 18:36:35
Willy Jones [Cakewalk]
Noted - and if you have not done so please fill out this form here: http://www.cakewalk.com/s...ct/featurerequest.aspx

2011/02/22 20:19:32
guitartrek
javahut - I agree with you.  I've got "display ghosted data" on and if the envelope is not selected you can hardly see it.  the background of the track needs to be lighter or the intensity of the non selected envelope line needs to be brighter.
2011/02/22 21:11:40
Skarda
I TOTALLY agree with you about the problem with envelopes. And I love all these people that talk about how "relativley" easy it is to switch among them. "relatively" easy is like a 1000% harder than the next best way which is the way it has always been... a simple point and click. why oh why oh why!!!  It's so incredibly goofy I can't stand it. It is the one thing that may drive me away from Sonar. However, I plan on giving it a good year since I've been with them since Sonar 4. I am hoping that someone in development will all the sudden wake up and realize that, "Oops, we meant to make envelope isolation a mere option for those RARE times that lines overlap." I have stated this problem several times and have also had little support, and been lectured on how the new way is better. Those are the people I hate to drive behind. The ones that it makes NO difference on when they get there.. could be 5 minutes,,, could be 1 hour... Cause that is the time difference you will spend in a formal project clicking in and out of enevelope mode. not to mention if you have several tracks all in evelope mode while you tweak, they all look like the same grayed out, muted color. OK all, bash me again.
2011/02/23 06:17:42
B San
I am in full agreement with the OP... I've tried out X1 on my secondary DAW... the changes made in the automation turned me off big time...

I'm thankful that the OP has been able to succinctly put my frustration into words...

As I've said in other threads - I like having as much access to the highest amount of information possible when working on my projects...

Plus it looks cool when seeing every bit of automation displayed in all its multi-colored glory lol
2011/02/23 06:40:06
ThomThom
I placed a feature request, because I'm missing a more "pro" implementation.
It might make sense, if others place a FR too, to give it more priority.
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account