Workaround for lack of crossfade

[pdxindy]

I think bitwig team is entitled to decide how the program will devolope

Sure... In fact, I figure what I say in the forum has basically zero effect on the future choices Bitwig makes. We are just a few users having some conversation. It is okay we disagree on some things. There is no problem

[ceasless]

Until then the FR requesters come across as not even bothering to try the program as it is designed.

Wow wow... Sure why even bother with new features at all then
you right, i gona download bitwig 1.0 just because that how the software was initially from start and i shouldnt bother using 1.3.6 just because it has features that the software didnt have from design perspective from start. So i will now stop using new updates because that FR requesters that not even bother to try the program as it was designed as it is written in the ten commitments. Cheers

I'm sorry to poke a hole in an argument I'm sure you thought was iron clad, but the design of the program and the implementation are rarely, if ever, a perfect match for one another.

Bitwig is designed to be a totally modular DAW where users have access to the implementations of all their instruments and devices. The implementation of this feature is not ready yet.

Bitwig is designed to have a completely dedicated view for dealing with zoomed in audio and MIDI data.

You have already refused to comment on what the actual problems with Edit are WRT arrangement. So in my opinion you are ignoring the design of the software and asking for features which are contrary to that design.

[ceasless]

It's simply unintuitive - why would i go to a separate window just to cut up and rearrange some audio when i can just do it right there on the timeline, where i can do those tasks in the context of the song?

There is absolutely nothing stopping you from doing this on the arranger, just like there is absolutely nothing stopping you from arranging in the

I KNOW there can be more than one track in the audio editor but then i have to first select all the tracks i want to see, then press the "layered editing" button on my second screen (i use a 2-monitor setup with clip/arranger on the left and edit window on the right) and even then the tracks are in a different order than on the timeline most of the time for some strange reason. This is cumbersome as f*** and not even remotely as easy as editing directly in the arranger.

Funny thing is, the arranger can already do almost everything the editor can do (except timestretching) - it's just too small to see anything.

And resizable track heights. And modification of individual audio events within a clip. And access to clip settings (gain, pitch, etc).

So let's just port them all, because who has time to bind a key command to switch windows?

Playing devil's advocate:

Where was the need for the new popup browser? Browsing was perfectly doable before, still it got a massive overhaul.

Their controller API did not support browsing, so they needed to add support. They seem to have decided that the side browser was not going to work well and designed the popup browser as a second system that would interact with the API better.

Where is the need for a native graphic spectrum analyser device? There are a LOT of good, free VST ones, still it's one of the most demanded FRs for some reason.

Asking for track height in arrangement is not in the same category of FR. One is asking for something new, the other is asking for something that already exists. It would be more similar if there was a working graphic spectrum analyzer device and people were FR'ing a different one because the existing one only worked in the device view. But instead of asking for the analyzer to be changed, they are asking for a brand new one. That would be a closer match to adjustable track height in arrangement in FRs.

Where was the need for graphic representation in LFO devices and others? I was perfectly able to modulate stuff without it.

These were added as a proof of concept that their rendering stack can handle animations at audio rate, a necessary precondition for spectrum analyzers.

Also, not a single other DAW includes stock dynamics processors which show you the actual impact on the waveforms. So they took the opportunity to become market leaders in that regard.

Same with project templates - you could simply save your favourite "blank" project and manually load it after every start of Bitwig.
Where group tracks really necessary for making music? Absolutely not.

The list could go on forever - besides multi-outs for VSTs in 1.1 there were no "crucial" features anymore as you can do pretty much everything you want to do with Bitwig as it is now. The rest (track heights, piano roll improvements, MPE support, comping,...) are just workflow improvements. But these are important, too.

And there will always be disagreement. Other people who have used Edit view feel that it is a serious workflow enhancer and would rather have FRs focused on making it even better.

Other people say that it's the most important thing still missing. But those same people tend to just brush off the Edit view, which implies that they are not really engaging with the software as it is designed. This is why you get debates on the topic. And people who like the way Bitwig works tend to not want to see the devs caving to demands from users who aren't using the program on its own terms.

To be honest, I'd be happy if they added a 2x/4x size toggle to arrangement just so I don't have to hear about it anymore. Except I'm positive it will not be the last functionality that people want duplicated from Edit to Arrange.

[takaii]

You have already refused to comment on what the actual problems with Edit are WRT arrangement. So in my opinion you are ignoring the design of the software and asking for features which are contrary to that design.

So i dont use the software as it was intended lol?
I use bitwig as it is currently designed and any ways that will work better for my workflow i ofc will feature request. Why wouldnt i use the editor for everything now that we dont have track heights? its the only option and saying i dont use it as intended is wrong as there is no other possible way of using bitwig than the way it is currently designed and therefore rather blunt to say that. I even helped on this thread showing gif when i use the editor if you havent missed. I am very familiar with its ways and it does not replace track heights for me. The way you wrote it is just a defensive way to try shut me up and actually have no real fonduation.

I never once said that the edit are a problem and i can only say i feature request about track height because it fit my workflow better. I have used several softwares of daw before. I like bitwig most but i still miss track heights as it was a nice workflow touch for me.

Is there wrong with current editor? No. Why would i want track heights? Because it fit my workflow better? Do i not use editor just because i want track height? I use editor because there are no track heights. Do track height delete need for an editor? no it doesnt. Why? Because editor you can still editor content within clip and can also fine adjust small things. But if i can do that what is it with track heights you like? Well i like the ability to quick zoom in and have two waveforms against eachother and check phase or move clips.
But you can do it in clip editor right? Well basically yes. Why you want track height then? Like i said i like it better. You didnt reply to my question what is wrong with editor? Nothing. Oh nothing problem then why have track height? becuase i like it better.

This argue lol is what this conversation feels like lol*

banana or oranges??

[pdxindy]

Is there wrong with current editor? No. Why would i want track heights? Because it fit my workflow better?

How does it fit your workflow better? That is what ceasless asked... and it is not answered.

Okay, you have the current track height, what do you do to make the track you want to see bigger? drag it to a new size? double click on it? use a key command? Then you have already done as much as it takes to open the editor... so no faster or even slower. Constantly adjusting track heights is annoying.

Do you leave all the track heights big all the time? Then you have lots more vertical scrolling.

When someone just says 'it fits my workflow better' with no explanation of specifics of why something would be better, it sounds to me like the person is stuck in a habit rather than thinking of a creative way to make the software as it is better.

[takaii]

Is there wrong with current editor? No. Why would i want track heights? Because it fit my workflow better?

How does it fit your workflow better? That is what ceasless asked... and it is not answered.

this is soo pointless. You know why? because its a matter of taste. No one is right and no one is wrong. Suit my workflow means that i like to work that way better.I actually anwsered why i like track height better, because i like to zoom into waveshape so i can see how they align better directly in the arranger and i dont like using editor for that. Do you understand what liking something different means? Track height to track is something id like to use while working. Get it in your thick scull. I should in no possible way have to explain my needs to you and why i like something. In the end of day this is just an argument on what color we like better. And then i have to explain myself just because you differ. I have never seen anyone care so much in other peoples needs and liking before at kvr.

Instead of arguing against peoples need and wishes, ignore those and show support on the areas that fit your needs. Ignoring is the same thing as not showing support. We all have the right to want something, to like something different way of working etc etc and no one should have to defend themselves because liking alternative stuff. This argument is all about you dont want bitwig to take time devoloping something you wont use. I get it. But we all have to deal with some things more or less that we wont use that will be devoloped. Get over it and respect people wanting different. Im so done with this conversation because its endless and nothing valuble will ever come from it. Id like to call this a day if its not to much to ask. bye

[pdxindy]

this is soo pointless. You know why? because its a matter of taste. No one is right and no one is wrong. Suit my workflow means that i like to work that way better.I actually anwsered why i like track height better, because i like to zoom into waveshape so i can see how they align better directly in the arranger and i dont like using editor for that. Do you understand what liking something different means? Track height to track is something id like to use while working. Get it in your thick scull. I should in no possible way have to explain my needs to you and why i like something. In the end of day this is just an argument on what color we like better. And then i have to explain myself just because you differ. I have never seen anyone care so much in other peoples needs and liking before at kvr.

Of course you don't have to explain anything... it is all voluntary

But there have been plenty of times when I did not think a feature was a good idea and I asked and the person explained why they felt one way worked better and I was convinced by their vision of how it can be improved.

That is why I don't find such discussion pointless. I've seen lots of good ideas coming out of discussions over what works better... including a synthesis that was better than any of the initial ideas being discussed/argued.

[u-u-u]

That is why I don't find such discussion pointless. I've seen lots of good ideas coming out of discussions over what works better... including a synthesis that was better than any of the initial ideas being discussed/argued.

Good point! Yes, takai, let's face it and give us some simple pros (and maybe even cons or details) of your idea how you imagine it to be.
I also don't see the point of just resizing the track height. As I understand it correctly you actually want to edit everything in the arranger? Would you also like to edit notes in the arranger? You of Course don't have but maybe can give just a short list of the Things you'd expect from a track height resizing and the benefits of such a concept. Sry, that I ask again and you probably have written it already but it's a lot of text here also about general feature request stuff I really don't want to read I just hope it might lead to a more fruitful discussion.

I also think that currently some detail editing jobs are a bit too hard to achieve and probably somehow could be improved.
For me that would be for example:
- aligning samples (e.g. for correcting phasing issues) - just moving Audio Events/clips in time sometimes seems to be very coarse. Also having the clip borders snapping to off-grid audio event start/end isn't possible ATM.
- cutting audio on zero crossings
- getting single audio events out of audio clips (e.g. when I want to bounce out an audio event from a clip I cannot "extract" the Audio event selection to be an arranger selection that I need to cut the audio clip exactly at the audio event borders)

[nsq]

i do like this but this gif is just to show so dont complain if its not aligment lol =)

fades.gif

When editor is in the timeline mode I can't drag clips to another track. Another nasty bug?