Conquistador.
sam cI am not sure I really miss it but I was wondering why you chose not to?
Just cusious!
ZynewaveIt’s tricky to make a sensible numbering due to the hierarchic organisation of the tracks.
Personally I dislike using numbers to identify tracks, but I know some prefer to have numbered tracks. I’d rather organize tracks under group tracks to get a better overview in arrangements with a large number of tracks.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
It’s tricky to make a sensible numbering due to the hierarchic organisation of the tracks.
“Sensible” in what way?
Personally I dislike using numbers to identify tracks, but I know some prefer to have numbered tracks.
I would be one of the “some” then. 🙂
I’d rather organize tracks under group tracks to get a better overview in arrangements with a large number of tracks
That statement shows how one way of doing something does not necessarily mean “better”. To illustrate further… I like to work exactly the way you described but with track numbers. Software packages that are very flexible are usually used in ways very different to how the developer originally intended.
This is a good thing, not bad as it showcases the power and flexibiltiy of a package like Podium.
While Podium of course is your product (we are licensed to use it but do not actually own it in the way you do) surely what users want is more important than your personal preference, unless…our requests complicate your development of it.
You described numbering in Podium as “tricky”
Could not a simple option be provided (probably global) that allows a user to work with numbered tracks if they want to?
If you personally find it that difficult to work with numbered tracks from a personal standpoint, that is entirely reasonable as we are all different but why deny users and customers who would prefer that option?
If you dislike it so much Frits, you can have the option switched of by default LOL!
Podium clearly knows how many tracks have been created in any arrangement. One glance at the information available at the bottom of the Arrangement and Sounds column makes that clear…Tracks:
So if Podium knows the number of tracks that are created as they are created, then could that information not be made more transparent by a simple process of numbering on each track in Podium?
I think Podium is the only host that does not have track numbering. Podiums delivery of track structures and audio signal paths is unique (in a very good way) but I don’t see how it is “tricky” to implement track numbering. Seriously.
If you start a project and an arrangement with say 3 or 4 “Efffect per Audio tracks” and 4 “Audio Tracks” you do get some form of track numbering but if you try and add any more tracks that process disappears. 🙁
I dont necessarily want to start projects with 30 tracks to begin with either! I like to create as many tracks as I need as I work. There are more than enough tracks to deal with in Podium as it is at times.
How might track numbering work then…?
Creating a new arrangement and choosing your Audio tracks and Effects per Audio track numbers will be followed by some form of numbered tracks but only the audio tracks will be numbered not the effect tracks currently in Podium.
This makes sense but why not extend that already existing functionality to any new created track?
New tracks: are automatically given the name “New Track” why not give them a number automatically as well? Podium already knows how many tracks are created but that includes FX tracks, so perhaps this time Podium can use an additional track numbering method (when creating new tracks in an arrangement) based on tracks that are not “wrapped”.
The way you cleverly set up track management for new arrangements is almost there already. FX tracks are not numbered. Could not the same process be used for new tracks in the arrangement as they are created?
So how about…numbering Group tracks and Group bounce tracks?
These are effectively different types of parent tracks and I think should automatically be given the number of the very first track in the family they are “parenting” or the number of the first child track.
For instance a track with an Instrument mapping or FX mapping (with audio data on the track) would be the first track and as a result once a group track is created, will become the the “first child track”.
So if the number of that first child track is 7 , any number of group tracks that are created around that track would be 7 also for consistency, or for even better clarity 7a, 7b, 7c or 7d depending on what group level they are created on.
Thoughts?
PiginiI must say, I don’t miss track numbers in podium, though I’m completely relying on them in another app, but that is because that app would just not work without them.
If track numbers were to be implemented into podium, it would best fit podiums hierarchic approach if the tracks were not numbered initially.
Better have a button or point in the menu for starting the numbering/renumbering everytime you want to have your tracks (re)numbered. That way the track numbers would actually mirror the hierachy(track numbers/subtrack numbers/ sub-sub…and so on) without the hazzle of doing a decent numbering initially in the middle of the working process.
The option of not renaming them with the new numbers, but putting the number like an index in front of the tracks name could be practical too, that way one could have Custom names and track numbers at the same time.
Zynewave“Sensible” in what way?
You describe some of the problems in your post. I’m guessing that what you really want numbers for, is track lanes and not tracks in general. Since you can show/hide the track lane with a shortcut, how should this affect the numbering of the tracks? Should the track numbers be assigned to a track when created, or should it automatically adjust according to changes in the track hierarchy?
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
You describe some of the problems in your post. I’m guessing that what you really want numbers for, is track lanes and not tracks in general.
Well to be honest I would prefer if each track (any type) is numbered as tracks can add up in Podium and having them all numbered would really help manage what track belongs where, feeds into what, but at a glance. Of course one can see this already but having them numbered would definitely help.
There would be no need to come out of the arrangement to check one’s track count.
CPU usage could be better monitored by easily seeing how many tracks are cooking at the same time e.t.c.
Since you can show/hide the track lane with a shortcut, how should this affect the numbering of the tracks? Should the track numbers be assigned to a track when created,
Yes IMO but…the numbering process would work differently (slightly) for New tracks (with no parents) and another way for Group or parent tracks when they are created.
We have four track types in Podium at the moment (that can be created with the right click menu)
New Tracks
New Child Tracks
Group Tracks
Group Bounce Tracks
New Tracks:
The text “New track” already appears on every New track created by default. Creating a new track could now have a number added to the track header, vertical track strip or the track name (before the New Track name text) the track header might be a better option though.
New Child tracks:
Again the text “New track” already appears on every New child track created by default.
If inserting a child track anywhere above the first track:… in a family or above the first track created in a family i.e a track with an instrument mapping on it… then numbering could be kept very simple by assigning the same number of the first track in the family or first child track no. (say 7 for instance) to the new child track created anywhere above it.
But for clarity a letter could also be added based on how far up the tree in this group the child track is created.
So if a Stylus mapping is placed on track 7 and a group track wrapped around it then if a child track is created just above the Stylus mapped track it would have the following number and letter 7a. 7 to identify it as a track belonging to that group and “a” to signify it is the first track above the main or key track being processed.
Group tracks:
Once inserted they would be assigned the same number as the first child track, or the tracks being processed i.e. an instrument track with number 7 on it’s track header that then has group tracks assigned or wrapped around it, those that tracks would now have 7a, 7b and 7c on their vertical track strips or Track headers.
To further clarify…
Every other group track created above the first group track would be given the next letter in the alphabet. The first group track would have 7a as it’s number (and letter) if another is created above that group track it would be assigned the letter and number 7b.
Group Bounce tracks:
The numbering process for group bounce tracks would be similar to group tracks.
Numbering process when Inserting tracks:
Child tracks being inserted below another track.
If a Child track is created below the very last track in a group (so it now feeds into another above it) for instance then the new child track would have the number 7.
And the former child track (now a group track) would have the number 7a, all other tracks above would adjust their letters automatically to fit or keep the numbering process accurate.
So if 3 group tracks in the example above had 7a,7b, and 7c in their track headers or vertical strip (before inserting the new child track) they would now be changed to 7b, 7c and 7d after the new child track is inserted at the bottom of the group. So that is now the first track in the group with 4 tracks above it.
What about Parameter tracks?
These might not necessarily have any numbers. If they do (for consistency) then P1, P2 or P3 accordingly I think would be sufficient.
What happens when tracks are deleted?
Any tracks deleted should as you put it “automatically adjust according to changes in the track hierarchy” to maintain a correct numbering process.
or should it automatically adjust according to changes in the track hierarchy?
See above. 😉
Track numbers could also appear in the Track Panel and Group panel. I think track numbering IMO will actually help manage the track hierarchy especially when things get busy.
However I do think track numbering should be a global option so as not to change things for those who prefer to work without it.