Rui, you were correct to suggest they're using the abstracted values of 0-1. They also don't appear to be interested in improving the end user experience. Figured I'd leave this here for future travelers.
My take-away here is I'll use the LSP bits to diagnose and "mess around" but when suitable, use the Calf equivalents once I know exactly what's needed for a given task. There are 2 reasons for this: First, the issue I mentioned in this thread as it relates to automation and the "readability" of the actual data being captured/represented and second, the Calf plugins appear to persist when copying/moving between tracks/buses whereas these (more interesting and fun to work with) LSP plugins tend to reinitialize themselves in odd ways. In short, the LSP bits are more powerful and easier to work with but the Calf bits lend themselves better when it comes to overall persistence and long-term health of the project.
Rui, you were correct to suggest they're using the abstracted values of 0-1. They also don't appear to be interested in improving the end user experience. Figured I'd leave this here for future travelers.
My take-away here is I'll use the LSP bits to diagnose and "mess around" but when suitable, use the Calf equivalents once I know exactly what's needed for a given task. There are 2 reasons for this: First, the issue I mentioned in this thread as it relates to automation and the "readability" of the actual data being captured/represented and second, the Calf plugins appear to persist when copying/moving between tracks/buses whereas these (more interesting and fun to work with) LSP plugins tend to reinitialize themselves in odd ways. In short, the LSP bits are more powerful and easier to work with but the Calf bits lend themselves better when it comes to overall persistence and long-term health of the project.
The right tool(s) for the right job kinda thing.