ATOM Piano Roll update is coming soon

blueveek

@GrimLucky said:
I’d be quite happy without automation to begin with so would go for option 1. Plus there may be suggestions for the update based on initial user feedback.

Oh I'm super certain of this! It might make sense to do a bit of public iteration, at least while it's slightly easier to move things around.

Samu

I'll say #1 if it can already record, playback and edit CC's...
...if not then #2.

MisplacedDevelopment

I prefer little and often releases (agile/iterative/insert current buzzword here) which seems to have worked well with LK, for example. I do however recognise the downsides to this approach, e.g. more chance of functional regressions being introduced and perhaps some expectation of constant feature updates when you would rather stabilise the code.

My vote goes to (1) because I am impatient but either way it sounds like we will end up with something fab.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Halftone

@Samu said:
I'll say #1 if it can already record, playback and edit CC's...
...if not then #2.

Same here

Krupa

I’d lean #1 too, as long as it doesn’t lead to a slew of new feature requests that put you off your goals...

ALB

Option 2.

Svetlovska

I’d selfishly go for #1 because my principle use case for wanting Atom #2 is to be able to file export MIDI to go with the wavs I am already taking as whole cloth from my AUM sessions across into Ableton. Any automation I want to do can be done there on the ‘basic’ MIDI file if needed.

I’m also a ‘bird in the hand’ kind of a person. Having something now beats everything later. I think of the example of the great Piano Motifs app, which has grown in usefulness over time due to lots of little iterative improvements, fueled in part by user feedback. And just like that app, I’d be happy to pay for such additions down the line as IAP or ‘tip jar’ offerings.

0tolerance4silence

@blueveek
Middle ground option:
Expand beta pool with impatient volunteers. Fresh opinions for you, new toy for the users...
Everybody wins

enkaytee

I think option 1. At least you have the bulk of the app out there and can focus on automation in your own time - people will probably still hassle you for a release date but if the core of the app is as amazing as it appears from this thread you'll make a lot of people happy and get a bit of income as well...👍

Gavinski

I say release now and add automation later - what kind of automation are we talking here? Can’t we in the meantime use exposed parameters in hosts to automate?

dafrimpster

I would choose option #1. Let them eat cake!

espiegel123

@blueveek said:
Hi.

Help me out

I have this vision for how to properly do fully (and I mean fully) modular automation, and it's hard. There's quite a few moving parts, and I won't ship something that's incomplete: it needs curves, it needs transforms, it needs interpolation, it needs user programming, it needs accuracy, it needs performance, it needs to work standalone. It needs to be at the same polish and depth as the rest of the features in Atom.

As it stands, even after my crunch in February, it's still not there yet.

So, you decide:
1. Ship now, with no automation, but with all other features planned for 2.0 finished. It's pretty much 99% the December build.
or
2. Wait some more. I honestly don't know how much longer.

If we go with (1), I'll make the current build the final build. In store hopefully within a week or two after that, depending on Apple. Automation will ship later, once my life settles down a bit. If we go with (2), I'll keep working on the automation features until I get them the way I want to.

I'm happy with either approach. I'm not in a rush for income, I don't want to keep you waiting, and this doesn't really affect anything: in the long term we'll arrive at the same thing

Now, I really mean it when I say "you decide". I'd like to gather your thoughts for the next few days and whichever the outcome is by the end of the week, that's what's going to happen.

For me option 1. I won't be using automation daily but would be getting daily use out of having something that captures and plays back multichannel MIDI.

gusgranite

@blueveek I think option #2 but maybe set yourself a deadline for release and stick to it what ever.

If you release now then you are going to get swamped with support questions and feature requests and you may find it hard to focus on completing automation.

Jeezs

@Samu said:
I'll say #1 if it can already record, playback and edit CC's...
...if not then #2.

Same for me

Sergiu

+1 > @Halftone said:

@Samu said:
I'll say #1 if it can already record, playback and edit CC's...
...if not then #2.

Same here

eross

ship now is my vote. it’s always great to see the apps continue to improve and get new features in updates while already owning it.

Angie

I’d go for option #1, because as a creator - it’s a load lifted to say “ship it” and move into the next phase of development. And with the reality of what your app earnings are likely to be relative to the work invested, add more features as IAPs.

And then just accept that some people will be only partially happy and possibly negatively vocal. 😃

Gavinski

@espiegel123 so this will be MPE ready?

Eye0sStudios

@rs2000 said:
@blueveek
I know myself. Getting something new in my hands is exciting for the first few hours but without automation, I'll have no chance but to go back to LK.

So a it's clear 2 for me.

Me as well.

DarkAum3o

Kick it out🤪
For me it would be great to see the possibilities now in my current use.
As some mentioned, the version you can release now is a BIG improvement and useful in any case.
I also like very excited for every upcoming update. An later update will also bring it to people who join the iOS community later, because with an new update you get more attention to the app😎

Keyb

@Samu said:
I'll say #1 if it can already record, playback and edit CC's...
...if not then #2.

Exactly my view!

lukesleepwalker

I can wait so I have no need for option 1. As someone who has managed many software projects, I can assert that option 1 is the right one without question. As long as your first phase of AtomV2 meets a core "job to be done" for your users (and it clearly does based on the videos we've seen), it is far better to get that functionality out to users and have them give you feedback before you add more functionality in. In fact, if money isn't a big deal and you'd rather not "launch" then open up your beta so that you at least get a wider pool of people using the app and letting you know how it goes. If launching with phase 1 gives you a much-needed mental/emotional lift, then that's worth considering. Life is short... Two cents!

espiegel123

@Gavinski said:
@espiegel123 so this will be MPE ready?

If, like photon, it records and plays back all midi it receives (on the channel received), yes.

Toastedghost

Definately 1
You can then work at an easier pace on prefecting the automation.

Jumpercollins

Option 1 definitely. Get it out the door.

Jumpercollins

@blueveek You will probably be better to run a poll.

blueveek

@espiegel123 said:

@Gavinski said:
@espiegel123 so this will be MPE ready?

If, like photon, it records and plays back all midi it receives (on the channel received), yes.

No, Atom doesn't support MPE yet (it came up in this thread a few months ago, but demand was very low, so I deprioritized it).

brattcave

Option 1 - get the monkey off your back!
It sounds like there is plenty to dig in to with this release as it stands.
I'm also happy to pay for both as upgrades - your time should be financially rewarded!
Good luck with the release! Cheers for the update.

espiegel123

@blueveek said:

@espiegel123 said:

@Gavinski said:
@espiegel123 so this will be MPE ready?

If, like photon, it records and plays back all midi it receives (on the channel received), yes.

No, Atom doesn't support MPE yet (it came up in this thread a few months ago, but demand was very low, so I deprioritized it).

What midi info is atom not recording? CCs ? Channel info?