Extract the section that is problematic, and post that. line works, so there must be a bug somewhere.

Hi Chris Thanks for your answer. Here is an extract. I've tried to document it the best I could so you could have a look at it.

hi coralie, you don't stop [line]s in 'return301' subpatcher, so two [line]s send messages to one gain~. imho generally it's better to have one [line] for a destination.

Hi Andrzej,

thanks for your answer. I don't quite understand. The subpatcher stops the line and resets the gain~ level to it's original value. It is triggered only after the metro is started. But I guess you pointed out a recursion problem. Any way, even if I suppress the link in the sbpatch, the line object keeps on jumping. It does so even if you trigger it manually from the main patch, or from the subpatch.

Well, I found a solution, but I'll have to replace all my subpatches :-( In case you're interested, I'll post it.

Line always needs a start value when it doesn't start from 0, from what I understood. I didn't want to do it that way, but I had no other choice.

Thanks for your help anyway.

That's what I thought looking at your patch but I didn't have time to investigate it. So you introduced a starting point as a variable ?

open this patcher in parallel with your project, wave your 'conduite' slider and look at gain~ in my patcher. Is this what you are after?

BTW. Edit -> Copy compressed. Way faster for both sides.

@ Stephane Yes, I thought I had to do that yesterday, but I acutally have many many cycles, so I thought there would be a quicker solution. I just don't understand this special feature of the line object... So you have to "tell" it : first, you go from the start value to the next value, then you go up and down and do use the first ramp until you're not "told" it's done... But it's an important complication... @ Andrzej, yes, it actually works ! There's objects I don't know, so I should have a look at this more deeply. Meanwhile, I'll see what solution, yours or mine is easier to integrate.... Thanks a lot !

My solution is just your original one minus some redundancy. :-)