When phrases are clue together, the variations are simply discarded, but not rendered.You also have the glue phrase action in the phrase inspector too..
v3 Beta Feedback And Discussion (Bugs, Features, Suggestions)
-
- KVRAF
- 1857 posts since 15 May, 2017
hmm, yea, oops, forgot to mention that.. which brings up a great idea for a new request..
usually, if I remember to do so, I try and do an incremental save of the project I am working on. Ok, so, when I am in a DAW, also do a duplicate copy of a track as a back up when I am about to do a major edit, just in case..
RC doesn't have a duplicate track action..
-
- KVRAF
- 1782 posts since 10 Mar, 2004
^^
Hmm..
is it something else than the " * " Command/Action : duplicate track?
Hmm..
is it something else than the " * " Command/Action : duplicate track?
-
- KVRAF
- 1782 posts since 10 Mar, 2004
i got a problem with opening project in the latest RC Standalone 3.9b47 x64
b45 seems fine (i don't have b46)
tracks
-MIDI:General MIDI,
-No Patch Change (all uses default name)
-assigned to separate midi channels 1 to 5
(just in case .. project in the attachment)
b45 seems fine (i don't have b46)
tracks
-MIDI:General MIDI,
-No Patch Change (all uses default name)
-assigned to separate midi channels 1 to 5
(just in case .. project in the attachment)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- KVRist
- 52 posts since 9 Dec, 2015
I have the same problem on the standalone , only the first track loads on a multi track project.I use folders and get a single empty track with an empty folder.
Beta 46 was fine this problem only started for me with Beta 47.
Beta 46 was fine this problem only started for me with Beta 47.
-
- KVRAF
- 1857 posts since 15 May, 2017
oops.. I stand corrected.. thanks!
-
- KVRAF
- 1857 posts since 15 May, 2017
-
- KVRist
- 52 posts since 9 Dec, 2015
I understood from Attila's answer that from version 4 , projects that were created using version 3 would not open in version 4.I can't believe that a version 3 beta eating version 3 projects is by design.
-
- KVRAF
- 1857 posts since 15 May, 2017
For all practical purposes, the 3.9 beta is version 4.. There won't be any more releases of version 3..secondstep wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:47 pm I understood from Attila's answer that from version 4 , projects that were created using version 3 would not open in version 4.I can't believe that a version 3 beta eating version 3 projects is by design.
-
- KVRAF
- 1782 posts since 10 Mar, 2004
Ah OK!
seems the b45 is my final for v3 then,
Thank you BluGenes
seems the b45 is my final for v3 then,
Thank you BluGenes
-
- KVRian
- 995 posts since 13 Mar, 2017
Maybe it would make sense to be labeling it as RC 4.0 alpha/beta1 etc. from this point on.BluGenes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:18 amFor all practical purposes, the 3.9 beta is version 4.. There won't be any more releases of version 3..secondstep wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:47 pm I understood from Attila's answer that from version 4 , projects that were created using version 3 would not open in version 4.I can't believe that a version 3 beta eating version 3 projects is by design.
And if we are at that point (because the needed breaking of backward compatibility has now started to happen), I also suggest wrapping up the v3 Beta topic (this current topic) and creating a new topic for v4 Beta.
Last edited by sj1 on Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRian
- 995 posts since 13 Mar, 2017
I'd also like to suggest that a new locked topic be created to contain only the new release announcements themselves.
IOW, the same release announcement posts from MusicDevelopments as currently appear here, copied over at creation time, but nothing else in that topic (no other discussion).
This would make the release announcements (and only the release announcements) practically searchable (which they are not now - try it if your impulse is to think opposite!) to answer questions such as "When did feature ABC arrive?", "When did feature XYZ change?" and so forth.
It would also allow for the progress over time to be easily seen and appreciated en masse.
It would be a moment's extra effort for Attila at each release point, but I think the benefits to all over time would more than justify that.
IOW, the same release announcement posts from MusicDevelopments as currently appear here, copied over at creation time, but nothing else in that topic (no other discussion).
This would make the release announcements (and only the release announcements) practically searchable (which they are not now - try it if your impulse is to think opposite!) to answer questions such as "When did feature ABC arrive?", "When did feature XYZ change?" and so forth.
It would also allow for the progress over time to be easily seen and appreciated en masse.
It would be a moment's extra effort for Attila at each release point, but I think the benefits to all over time would more than justify that.
-
- KVRist
- 52 posts since 9 Dec, 2015
Excellent suggestions in my opinion sj1.
Of course it will be for Attila to decide the way forward.
Of course it will be for Attila to decide the way forward.
