Skip to content

Conversation

@regulus79
Copy link
Member

When you record an automation clip with a logarithmic knob (for example, a freq knob in the equalizer) the recorded values in the automation editor are correct.....

....But, for whatever reason, lmms tries to scale the recorded values back to linear when playing the automation, which causes the recorded frequency to be much lower.

This pr does not fix the underlying issue, but instead just scales the recorded values so that everything works.

Imo, the whole automation system needs some reorganizing, but that will have to wait. Just one example of the choas caused by swithcing between scaled/unscaled values: The automation editor conflicts with itself when showing scaled parameters. The tooltip shows the scaled value, while the actual stored value which you can edit when double-clicking on a node is unscaled. But again, that's for another day.

Fixes #6954 and #6209 and maybe #6490

@regulus79
Copy link
Member Author

regulus79 commented May 9, 2025

I believe this is ready to merge

Copy link
Contributor

@allejok96 allejok96 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why isn't this merged yet?

@allejok96
Copy link
Contributor

The better solution would to give the automation editor a logarithmic Y axis when working with logarithmic models (possibly even an letting the user choose linear/log when drawing) and updating the draw code in AutomationClipView the same way. And then we'd need to do a update routine for older files...

But until then let's merge this.

@regulus79
Copy link
Member Author

Why isn't this merged yet?

I can't merge it until someone with write access approves.

@sakertooth
Copy link
Contributor

Pretty sure you have write access @allejok96? I haven't been able to test this, but if it fixed the issue it should be fine for now.

@sakertooth
Copy link
Contributor

Oh wait you aren't a member? Hm..

@sakertooth
Copy link
Contributor

@bratpeki can you help quickly test this for me? The PR code wise is fine, it isn't too invasive, but testing it never hurts. I think the TODO comment also explains the situation quite well.

Copy link
Contributor

@sakertooth sakertooth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Eh.. I would also be fine if @regulus79 is sure about the fix. Sorry for all the @'s lol.

@regulus79 regulus79 merged commit 00d5abc into LMMS:master Jul 4, 2025
10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Logarithmic vs linear, and automation, uncanny behavior

3 participants