Add new comment

G3N-es, I am so impressed with what you are doing here and think you're exposing a whole new area of productivity. Full disclosure: I do not understand each element of what you've stitched together but am confident I'll understand more when I have a chance to evaluate this while reading whatever documentation/HOWTO/etc is forthcoming. That said, here are just a few observations I have (all good!)

1. The use of Carla Rack (or maybe it's Carla Patchbay, I'm not sure) does not incur the cost of heavy DSP Load. I figure this is worth mentioning as some of my older workflows which used Carla to host instruments, did end up showing quite high usage. Granted, this is surely due to the fact only the MIDI plugins are being loaded as opposed to instrument plugins. Very nice.

2. It does seem this workflow looks more and more like what Ardour does in terms of providing "Automation tracks". Regardless of lingo, I'm specifically talking about the practice of maintaining automation performance independent of instrument tracks. My instinct tells me this is quite manageable with a session like this which is made up of just a few tracks. However, it may end up becoming difficult to understand and/or work with as the number of things grows. All I mean to suggest with that is the possibility this stuff may be SO GOOD and useful as to justify some additional UX work. For example, even with this small data set, I see how nice it would be to have a "high level" means to collapse a track to its minimum height (and then toggle back to previous size). I'm not talking about what's currently available via right click, use the menu.... that's too burdensome. Dedicated automation tracks like these feel more like the kind of thing we spend some time focusing on when needed and then we want to kinda "get out of the way" easily. Imagine if each track had a Arrow icon (or something) in the Nr column which acted as a toggle. Upon clicking, it would minimize or reset the height of the track. Of course, I'm running with this thought under the assumption we'd (potentially) be talking about a workflow involving many of these automation tracks. Maybe I'm wrong. I'll know more as I learn more about this workflow.

Thinking about scaling, I also find myself wondering how easy (or difficult) it may be to associate a given automation lane with its target(s). Hopefully you know what I mean when I say that.... Right now, I get the impression the association is made clear by the text description "Drum and Bass" itself. Granted, that may be the best we can do but I feel compelled to point out how messy that may become over time.

So I think those are my only thoughts for now? The most important thing I can say is that it does look (and sound) like everything is working exactly as intended. I'm looking forward to looking at this again while reading more details about what it took to put this together. Great job!.