Conquistador's Forum Page

@Zynewave wrote:

@Conquistador wrote:

Ok I can simplify the point further…

I think you’re talking about something like the Rack feature of Ableton Live, where you can group together effects and save them as a rack file (or so I gather from the info on the Ableton website).

Ableton have different ways to do this, none of which I am suggesting here. 😉

My interpretation of racks of any sort in Podium is already documented here..

http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=958

That suggestion is purely for instruments.

I have a simpler goal with track templates. Consider the “track templates” arrangement as a clipboard. To edit it, you just go back to the start page, into the template arrangement, drag stuff around, and then back to your song arrangement.

Frits…by all means keep the current implementation. I have no problem understanding what you mean. It’s very simple. I simply do not agree with it, at all.

The first reason I gave is quite clear as is the second about how to manage large numbers of track templates. Even your idea for simplicty fails here when trying to sort through very large numbers of Track templates. Remember we still have no track numbers.

Furthermore, track templates will also copy any sounds and sequences on the tracks, so you really need to use the arrangement editor to organize the track templates. A file browser list is not enough.

Yes you need an arranger totally agree! But two arrangers? Totally disagree.

This suggestion might merge our ideas together though… 😉

A track template needs an arrangement for editing. We agree on this.
It’s the added complication of shuffling between two arrangers that is my issue. Not there as of now, will be post 1.69.

So…

How about…direct access to the Track Template arranger from within the current ‘working’ arranger. So if you are producing a song in any arranger the track template would be accessible from within it.

I am thinking of the way you click on a midi file or audio file and Podium automatically makes the relevant editor available by simply dragging up the horizontal splitter bar to show an embedded editor. One of my favourite features in Podium

Why not add the track template arranger as a docked view that can be accessed in this way? If a user does not want such access, a global option can change this. Make the default not visible if you want. Of course I could then simply set it to show and save it as a project template 😉

Surely you agree with this suggestion. This way you keep the dual arranger idea but allow access to it from a docked view. It merges our ideas into one feature. The current access of track templates from the start page can be the default. At least this way I can choose it as a docked view within an arranger. Everyone gets what they want.

How could this be triggered or accessed?

a. A track level button on the track Inspector or Track itself could enable or disable the docked view of the track template arranger.

b. Global option within the Preferences > Graphics tab. (It is graphic related)

c. Clicking on the track header of a Track template.

d. Adding a View button (as is already available in the mixer header) with options to Show / Hide Track Template Arranger

e. We can currently drag the track inspector to the right, but how about another button or splitter than enables us to drag to the right to reveal the track Template arranger? Effectively moving the current arranger (used for current production) to the right as we drag the splitter to the right to reveal the track template arranger ‘underneath’ it?

Of course the Track Inspector will be on the left. It could be hidden first of course then a small Track template label or button could be used to activate the dragging of the splitter bar to reveal the track template as you drag to the right.

2.
Keep the current two dual arranger approach but add an option that allows editing of a track template within the same arranger being used for actual music production. No need to open a second arranger (the dedicated track template arranger).This is what I have been asking for all along. Is this not possible to implement?

Are any of these 2 ideas possible? 😉

@darcyb62 wrote:

By ading different file types you start adding complexity which at times can make things more difficult to work with not easier.

Just 1 extra file type? 🙂 Please see my post below… 😉

Both, I think. I didn’t fully understand what you wanted to achieve with having separate files, but it sounded complicated.

Ok I can simplify the point further… 8)

1. Eliminate the need to leave the arranger to make adjustments to the layout of a track template.

In what way is this complicated? Leaving the arranger to make changes to a track template takes longer than making changes at track level. Hopefully this makes it much clearer. 😉

Put another way…

Track level changes to a Track Template. It is called a Track Template because it operates at Track level. It is surely not complicated to want to work quicker. Or am I missing something?

2. Track template management
The number of track templates of course will rise and rise over time so… I have 50 track templates for example …if these were stored as a separate file type I could simply browse at track level either through the List view or even Windows explorer which would let me search by…

Name

Or …when they were modified.

Simple, logical, quick and easy.

A Track Template ‘Arrangement’ (if it will look like a current arrangement) will not even have any track numbers. I am definitely not looking forward to sorting out one Track template from another just to rearrange a few tracks…as you have already said

“There is only going to be one template arrangement, and it is named Track Templates”

My main purpose with track templates is ease of use, at the expense of some flexibility.

If ease of use is the goal. How will making track level changes to Track templates not be easier than having to open another arrangment first? Is this not obvious? Seriously?

The .PTT filetype suggestion was made because it is quite obvious that the ‘arrangement’ delivery of the Track Template feature forces changes to be made in another Arranger which from my usage of Podium is strictly for producing and arranging songs.

Having an entire arrangement store Track templates IMO will simply add comlpexity to Track template management as I will now have to negotiate two arrangers instead of one.

So many aspects of Podium are accessible from the Arranger but 1.69 introduced the new menu options in the Devices: list (fine) but outside of the Arranger very strange.

Now another feature draws the user out of the arranger.

I am just a bit concerned that the ease of use achieved by the start page implementation is slowly slipping back to complexity again.

Sorry Frits but sometimes what may be glaringly simple for you or even comfortable for you when using Podium is not always for others.

A new user will likely first think of other track template implementations elsewhere and think “right let me make these changes at track level…” of course they will now have to open another arrangement to make a simple change that should be done at Track Level.

If you really cannot change your current implementation of Track Templates at this time then fair enough. 😉 You are the developer you surely will know more than anyone what will work or not in Podium whatever suggestions we come up with on this forum. 🙂

If you are however happy to consider separating Track Template management from their dependency on an Arrangement for editing, you can always implement the ideas at a later time. 😉 What is complicated about that?

@Zynewave wrote:

Could you rephrase that ❓

Yes… 😉 I was trying to find out if a Track Template is the same as a Track Arrangement. I think you shed some light on this below…

If you have a chain of tracks with effect plugins that you want to reuse elsewhere, you select the topmost track in the chain, collapse the group, and “Copy to template”. Then the name of the topmost track is shown in the “new track” submenus, and selecting it will insert the entire chain.

Brilliant.

I’m considering adding a dialog that allows you to enter a name for the track template once you have selected the “copy to template”. This name would then be used in the submenus instead of the name of the topmost track in the chain

As I read through that last comment I thought, an option to rename it would be very useful! Please Frits let your consideration evolve into an implementation 😆

I would much rather rename the templates. Your idea is a very good one 😉

The “Track Templates” arrangement will be placed in the main project folder, so you will see the template arrangement in the list on the start page. Here you can enter the arrangement and edit it like any other arrangement.

Ok…I think what you mean here is the Arrangements and Sounds List?

If that is the case then….

Suggestion1
.. could you either split the list horizontally not vertically (otherwise the width will be too narrow) and show the Track templates created on the bottom half of the list?

I ask this because I really want to avoid scrolling through my list of arrangements when looking for a Track Template arrangement. I would much prefer to go to a list that is only showing Track Template arrangements within the Arrangement and Sounds folder.

Suggestion2
Another idea is to have an option added to the Arrangement and Sounds button to Show only Track templates in the list. This would save you having to add a splitter bar into the Arrangements and sounds list.

Track Template arrangements:

The template track menu layout can be organized by entering the editor for the “Track Templates” arrangement and drag-reordering the tracks. Sub menus can be created by moving the template tracks into group tracks.

Hmmmmm….Frits I am not really in favour of this idea after thinking it through. To clarify…I love the Track Template idea but not the Track Template Arrangement idea you used to deliver it. If the only way to edit a track template is to open another arrangement (Track Template arrangement) then that is another window to open which is really needless IMHO.

Editing a track template in another arrangement seems very strange. A good idea in theory but a long way round to something that really should be done at track level as in other hosts.

I get the feeling that the format you have used for track templates (arrangements) is dictating how it gets edited (as an arrangement)?

You cannot make track level changes to the layout of a Track template (dragging tracks up or down for instance) without opening another (track template) arrangement.

I suspect the only way my suggestion below will work is if you change the format (or make it optional) Track templates are saved in.

Currently a Track template is effectively an arrangement that can be recalled into another arrangement that a user is working on, within the same project. (I think this is just about right)

How about this idea…?

Some hosts use a different file type for their track templates. For instance instead of using an arrangement as a Track template file type or save format, why not use another file type .PTT (Podium Track template), that way we could save the track template using your method described in your first post, and Podium automatically saves this in the main folder as you suggested, so that it shows up in the Arrangments and Sounds folder?:)

Also I would think that a .PTT file should be visible in the List view so that we can browse to our new PTT files and drag them into whichever Podium Arrangement we are working on. This would either recreate the track template exactly as it was saved on a new track or replace any existing track it is dragged to. 😉

Hopefully saving the Track template as a different file type from an arrangement will enable us as users, to rearrange the tracks or FX within a track template right there on the track without opening another arrangement.

Simple drag an drop of .PTT files. 😉 Is this not possible?

Looks great 🙂 …some suggestions / questons…. 😉

Using the “Copy to template” menu will copy the selected track (or track group if collapsed)

Does this include

1. Sends
2. Automation

If not can they be added to a track template? 😉

to a “Track Templates” arrangement in the project.

An additional arrangement within the current arrangement? 😐 I guess that is not what you mean but.. ❓

Once you have created a track template, the “New Track” etc. menus will become sub menus listing the tracks in the template arrangement.

Trying to visualise this, but is a track arrangement simply the sum of whatever is included in a track template? Actually a track group not an arrangement (terms are a bit confusing)?

The template track menu layout can be organized by entering the editor for the “Track Templates” arrangement and drag-reordering the tracks. Sub menus can be created by moving the template tracks into group tracks.

Sounds like great flexibility, 🙂 but I will need to see it perhaps a screen grab?

Your Recall Track image shows one choice for FX. Suppose you want to create a track template with several FX mappings?

Creating track group templates allows you to create an effect chain or a group of global plugin tracks using a single menu in the template list.

So it sounds like a track arrangement is a track group template?

The “Recall track” submenu will replace the current track with the selected template track.

I like the idea of replacing. Very nice. 8)

@Zynewave wrote:

@darcyb62 wrote:

When deleting a parent track, it would be nice if the child track(s) slid back to the left to fill in the gap left by the parent…

This will be implemented as part of the new track template feature:
http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=981

@Podianer wrote:

Take “confusing” for cluttering. In my opinion the less options you have to achieve one thing, the less it can confuse newcomers. I like right click context menus, but there are always two sides to the medal.

In any case the six (four new options plus the other two… “Delete” and “Move to a new folder”) are just that…6 options. 🙂

As a product grows in features it is inevitable that once basic features that everyone wants are out of the way, the more precise, granular user related features are more unique to each persons workflow.

My suggestions are not made to change things for everyone. Frits could surely make this optional. Options are simply the way sequencers operate in many areas. That way everyone can see what they want. No need to settle for someone else’s suggestion.

For instance under Peferences > Graphics a simple collection of six right click options could be placed there. Un tick whichever right click options you do not want to see.

There is even space in the Preference box for a dedicated Track tab. So options can exist there even. 8)

Very nice new features Frits

@acousmod wrote:

The “tracks region properties” in the editor profile.

Oh, weird…
I thought that it will be a track option basis, not a global option for the whole profile.
In this case, I wonder if it is really interesting…

Could it be a track option in the future ?

Totally agree. I thought that was where I would find it too. Please Frits consider adding this as a simple right click option. I would much prefer to find it there and would make far more use of it. I thought that was actually the original idea. In any case a right click option is far easier to access and use quickly IMHO. 😉

Currently I would have to go to View scroll down to Editor Profiles, find Tracks click on that, then click on the Properties button, find the Show audio meters option, then tick or untick the box, click OK to come out of the Track Region Properties box, then click OK again to come out of the Editor Profile Region properties menu.

Way too long. Can you see what I mean?

Imagine having just a simple right click option…one click. 😉 By all means leave the current option where it is, if need be. But..please do add a right click option at track level. For instance right clicking on any meter. 😉

Another area which seems slightly odd at the moment is the Device Mapping Panel *within* an arrangement.

What do I mean? Well these lovely options can now be seen when right clicking on an Instrument. Sweeeet…

“New Copy”
“New Instance”
“New Insert Mapping”
“Importing global instrument plugins”

So…after seeing these I went back to the arrangement opened up the Device Mapping Panel and right clicked on the same mapping… none of the options above are there. 🙁 Only…

“Assign To Track”

AND

“Properties”

I understand why the four new options are in the Devices: section, on the start page instrument right click menu. They should remain there. But surely now Podium is just one step away from allowing the complete management of all plugins from the Device Mapping Panel (within the arranger).

I think there are very few if any hosts that work this way from a simple right click option! 8)

Why browse to the start page (that is where you ‘started’) just to “Import a new instance”, make a “New Copy” import a “New Import Mapping” or “Import global Instrument Mappings”?

By simply adding the four new options to the right click menu of Instruments in the Device Mapping Panel (in the arranger) one could start working on a project and do almost every single thing they need to do without ever leaving the Arrangement window! A very powerful workflow feature indeed.:mrgreen:

Move to a new folder and Delete should also be added to right click menus for FX and instruments in the Device Mapping Panel in the Arrangement page, to complete the set of options used to manage all aspects of plugins. 🙂 🙂 8)

It’s very much like a mini version of the new Soundframe Browser in Cubase 4 that lets you manage all sorts of things in Cubase. What I am suggesting here is simply adding options that exist elsewhere in Podium to right click menus for Instruments and / or FX when right clicked in the Arrangement page, within the Device Mapping Panel.

Just to clarify…

I think the Devices: area on the start page is essential. It should remain there but while it does duplicate aspects of the Device Mapping Panel it provides an essential overview when combined with the Arrangement & Sounds and Project areas on the start page. I think Podiums implementation of a start page is probably the best I seen anywhere yet. 🙂

So my suggestions are not leading to removing the Devices area…just adding the four new options plus Move to a new folder and Delete to the right click options for FX and Instruments in the Device Mapping Panel in any Arrangment page. 😉