Post your great Auxy feature idea here!


That is a legitimate example. I will accept that. However, i’d just like to clarify that my reasoning and examples aren’t whether or not the sound exhibited a pluck behavior via a filter envelope or traditional amp-ADSR, but more about the actual ability to shape the sound through just the amp-ADSR envelope.

As for dividing up the shape macro to the parts it controls and potentially adding in additional controls for sounds that have static amp-ADSR, I believe it is a great solution and would be a step forward to more control over the sound, while also addressing the concerns of the multi-functionality of the Shape macro.


Hmm. Interesting idea. Kind of like Medly does I suppose… although with Auxy’s automation system it may be a bit clunky to have some automation in note loops and some in automation loops. I can actually see many more automation uses that would benefit from note overlays such as high pass, lowpass, shape, and volume just to name a few. This might make the note overlays more viable in the long term while keeping the streamlined automation loops system.


This is an epic thread but I think perhaps we should split out the feature discussions into separate topics that each respective area? This makes it easier for me to add my thoughts, as well as for new viewers to see if something has already been suggested and what’s been said about it. Perhaps not easy in practice to draw the line for each topic, but let’s close these massive threads and start over with specific requests in one post per topic, shall we?


Definitely … Go Ahead


New thread to discuss each feature request (rather than everything mixed in one huge thread)?

Makes sense from both ends. :+1:


AUXY 6.0 CONCEPT UI and Features Suggestions @lenberg @Fredrik

More images to arrive soon … Let me work on it


Some decent ideas in there. :+1:
Though, you might wanna switch to quick hand sketches, rather than put so much time and effort into proposals that might be dismissed or maybe go unnoticed.

I’d put Delay and Reverb together with Chorus, Phaser, etc… and call that panel ‘Effects’, as that’s how they’re more generally referred to in music production.
Add Tremolo and Vibrato (both with dedicated depth and rate sub-controls) for good measure. Maybe even throw in bot crush. Maybe Stereo Width* too.

In the two slots freed up by moving Delay and Reverb, I’d suggest Tune and Offset (as we have for Imports), which would give us access to some extra sound design tricks.

As for the Pluck, etc… presets…
I’d much rather see them put effort into getting some user-controllable ADSR, rather than limit users to their idea of preset envelopes.

Sound design benefits from much more variability than preset envelopes tend to offer. Some users might want something very specific, that’s halfway between pluck and pad, for instance.

Presets would be only a partial solution, a band-aid, unlikely to give many users the control they want. If it’s possible to create Pluck, Pad, etc… versions of sounds, surely it’s possible to make those ADSR dials available to users.

It’s frustrating that Auxy is only three or four (particular) major features (and a handful of smaller features) away from being the ideal distillation of power and UI on the mobile platform - and a genuine option for semi/pro music producers, imo.


The Reason I’ m putting so much effort is simple… I want to let the Developers @lenberg, @fredrik and Others know that whatever feature I requested or suggested is easily Feasible and can be implemented into Auxy without losing its simplicity and how it can be implemented I’ve already shown
Other Reason is that I love Auxy Studio alot and want to contribute as much as possible


I find that hard to believe.


I’m not sure where they call it ‘enhance’ in Auxy, but regardless, let’s take the opportunity to encourage them to use terms that align with industry standards. :slight_smile:

Re: time and effort. I doubt they really believe it can’t be done cleanly.
It’s great that you’re so invested, but it’s not a shortage of design ideas that’s stopping them from doing things like that. It’s more likely that they simply reject the idea of a multi-panel UI.

Still, it never hurts to have an extra reminder that these things matter to users, so crack on. :slight_smile:


Effects like Stereo Width, Tremolo and so on are not possible as of now in Auxy

They’re no less possible than the Chorus, Flange and Phaser you included. They’d be new controls, just like Tremolo and Vibrato. Vibrato is certainly already supported as evidenced by using the Shape co tool on instruments such as Bitty and Tonsil.

Besides, I wasn’t critiquing your choices, per se. Just throwing in my own 2 cents to the proposal - to remind them that Tremolo and Vibrato really should be on the list.


Just as well, as it’s flatly incorrect.

Shape is used on several Instruments to control vibrato.



Having seen pictures of ‘Toad’, I’d imagine they’d both be possible already.
If not, they’re only about a dozen lines of code each to implement.


I’m a great believer in sucking up a bit of short-term pain for the sake of a long-term gain. But that’s just me. :wink:

I’d like to think they want to get themselves out of the corner they painted themselves into. The current approach was, in retrospect, less than ideal.

The lack of ADSR control - or something to (very) similar effect - will continue to be a stumbling block for the app.
The benefits of getting it right should be obvious, as it opens up their library of presets/timbres to potentially infinite variation, making their library many, many times larger in practice without adding a single new sound.


Absolutely Right, But we can only hope right now


…and keep reminding them that it’s something many of us want. :+1: :wink:


To be able to see the exact notes on the piano roll, like in chromatic mode


Yeah I saw Toad too but he doesn’t seem like he’d sound too ohhhhh nm nm we’re on the same page now, my bad :relieved:


I meant Developers won’t be adding these in current form of Auxy having current form of sounds …
And Trust Me…
Developers has to refit all the existing sounds code to implement such effects
That’s what I meant


I think some sounds may have a stereo expander, but I’m not sure about true stereo width being such a thing. Also, it depends on what sort of definition you are using for tremolo xD


As much as I know that it may be wrong to say that this is wrong, it sort of is.

The reason why true ADSR controls cannot be currently added is because not all sounds behave the same way. Lenberg, in his response to me, specifically brought up how some plucks could be made from an envelope on the filter rather than the amplitude ADSR we normally refer to when discussing ADSR. However, from my testing and experimentation, what really is the case is that not all sounds function normally through their ADSR. Some sounds that are plucks do in fact work through the envelope on the filter, and no amount of amplitude-ADSR will address that. And due to the modular design of some sounds, which I have noted in the Auxy Sound Wiki, some sounds have a piece of ADSR-control in different functions, such as their lowpass filter and tone macro.

There are some solutions to this, one specifically mentioned by L himself, and one I proposed, as well as another than Shivam here has proposed, that would not cause sounds to become incompatable with previous versions.

  • Lenberg’s solution would be to divide up the shape macro to allow for more precise controls of the ADSR controls some sounds already feature in it. However, this would not solve the problem completely.
  • My solution would be to completely convert the Shape envelope into multiple divided controls that uniformly control ADSR and whatever additional function the Shape macro did. This wouldn’t help sounds that had, for example, their sustain within their lowpass filter, but it would be a more flexible solution in the long term.
  • Shivam’s solution (at least by appearance) seems to introduce the same sounds in different instrument presets that have differing functionality. This would effectively bypass the need to divide up the shape macro, as each sound would be a specific “type” by design and the shape macro could simply control the envelope in a pre-determined way.

None of these solutions solve all the problems proposed. As Akabil mentioned elsewhere, the way Auxy’s macros are designed currently are currently limiting its growth into newer and better things. Perhaps one of these solutions could be something that would be ideal and simple to implement.

Well, that was quite a mouthful, I’ve had that on my mind all throughout work today xD glad to finally clarify what knowledge I actually have of the way Auxy appears to work, and can hopefully pinpoint where the issues lie and ways around them. Don’t get me wrong, I love the fact that it’s simple and expressive, but additional control in the long term can also be just as simple without compromising the principles behind Auxy’s design.