[BR] multi-channel audio parts

[jens]

In the 'big bugs' thread I wrote:

2.:When you copy and drag an audio-part in the sequencer
and you have (say) four channels from which one is soloed all channels are getting played back in this ghosted part (the bug was already there when there haven't been audio-part ghosts though) while the solo-button of the one soloed track is still 'lighting'

Now it got worse:

the soloing doesn't work anymore whenever you close the project and re-load it.

This means you have to open each part which fits the criteria un-solo the channel(s) and solo it again whenever you re-load the song.


Jorgen, while you're at fixing the bug could you maybe please also fix the related one?


Damned - it seems I better stay away from betas after
1.30 if I want to be able to finish my songs...

[plastique]

sounds like a tricky one .
i won't try to reproduce it now since it's quite late at night , but will do some testing in the next days .

[jorgen]

Hi, Id really like to make the channels a property of the audio track instead of the audio part. This way I could show the mute/solo/volume buttons on the track panel when in-track editing (like inside the audio editor)

As an alternative to muting channels in different parts I could add "mute clip" option instead.

"Track channels" also would make easier sub mixing if you have a drum samples with bd on first channel, sd on second channel because changing volume on channel 1 will updates bd's in ALL parts. You could solo the hats etc...

This also opens up for new features like send routing per channel and maby insert fx to...

I think it is a PITA to not be able to submix on the track level...

What you think?

cheers
jorgen

[DarkStar]

Sounds interesting but I need to give it some thought (and so will jens!)

I am sure you won't forget the Audio Part comps though.

[waveriderarts]

I am sure you won't forget the Audio Part comps though.

Yeah Jorgen, audio parts are important to me too.

[jens]

uhm... first of all I'm not sure if my bug-report was clear enough...


I'll give an example:


1: create an audio-part

2. on the first channel load a drum-loop

3. add a second channel

4. load a guitar-loop to this second-channel

5. solo the guitar


- Bug #1: you still hear the guitar. You have to close the editor and re-open it before you can solo any channel!


6. close the editor and re-open it and solo the first channel (the drum-loop)

7. close the editor

8. copy the part which contains the two channel somewhere on the same track.


- Bug #2: You hear the guitar again. Open the editor of the copied part and you will see that the solo-led is still active but the solo nonetheless doesn't work!


9. Solo the first channel once again save as 'buggybuggybuggy.ext' and close eXT.

10. Re-open eXT and load 'buggybuggybuggy'


- Bug #3: You hear the guitar again for both parts (the original and the copied one)!


Bug #1&2 are there for ages. Bug #3 is a new one.

[jorgen]

I do understand the BR, "the solo/mute system doesn't work properly" on audio tracks in sequencer.

Thing is, each part in a track has its own solo/mute system. This is something Id like to change so that the sub channels are on the "track level" and not the "part level" in the sequencer. (In the audio part, they can be on the part level)

Having it on the track level is much better in my opinion as it gives you controll over the track.

Just trying to save some time here by not fixing something that has to be re-written.

What is it that I shouldn't forget about the audio part comp? Wasnt this thread about audio parts in the sequencer comp?

jorgen

[DarkStar]

What is it that I shouldn't forget about the audio part comp? Wasnt this thread about audio parts in the sequencer comp?

jorgen

True, My apologies.
Just wanted to make sure that the changes to the Seq Audio Part don't impact the Audio part ocmps

[jens]

I do understand the BR, "the solo/mute system doesn't work properly" on audio tracks in sequencer.

Thing is, each part in a track has its own solo/mute system. This is something Id like to change so that the sub channels are on the "track level" and not the "part level" in the sequencer. (In the audio part, they can be on the part level)

Having it on the track level is much better in my opinion as it gives you controll over the track.

Just trying to save some time here by not fixing something that has to be re-written.

What is it that I shouldn't forget about the audio part comp? Wasnt this thread about audio parts in the sequencer comp?

jorgen

ah o.k. I see where you're coming from
But making it just on a per-track basis would imo be a step back if I understood your idea correctly.

Let me explain:

e.g. I record ten takes of thythm-guitar so that makes ten channels. Now I listen to the and want to be able to solo one or two good takes.

Maybe later I decide to copy the part somewhere else and to solo another take/channel there because I played it a bit differently or for more live feel.

Maybe my timing wasn't the best so I want to 'comp' one good take out of several takes. Anyway I want to be able to solo each channel independently on a per-part basis.

The same goes for gain. As I love and am used object-orientated working I rather lower the gain of its channel instead of using automation if I want the same guitar more silent on a different section of the song (I do it all the time this way).

does that make any sense?

[DarkStar]

On reflection, I like the idea of audio track channels.
... I hope that the controls for more than three channels will be visible in the in-track view.
... "Mute clip" will be quicker than dropping the volume of the clip to 0 which you can do at the moment
... Per channel Sends and Inserts would be good.

To use the track channels properly you may need to juggle the channels in the audio parts. (see my comment on Jens's issue, below)

Could the track channel controls be automatable by CC?

Standing back a bit, it seems to me that track channels within a track are similar to tracks within a folder??
- - - - - - -

Maybe later I decide to copy the part somewhere else and to solo another take/channel there because I played it a bit differently or for more live feel. Maybe my timing wasn't the best so I want to 'comp' one good take out of several takes. Anyway I want to be able to solo each channel independently on a per-part basis.

I see the problem. It might help a bit if there could be an "Add channel at top" function in the Audio Part, then drag the take you want to play into the first channel?

The same goes for gain. As I love and am used object-orientated working I rather lower the gain of its channel instead of using automation if I want the same guitar more silent on a different section of the song (I do it all the time this way).

Here's a thought - keep the controls in the audio part (and add a "Mute Clip" button to the clip controls area),
AND
provides track channel controls on the in-track header.

Best of both worlds?

PS I can confirm all of the bugs that Jens listed.

[Edit: typos]

[jens]

Maybe later I decide to copy the part somewhere else and to solo another take/channel there because I played it a bit differently or for more live feel. Maybe my timing wasn't the best so I want to 'comp' one good take out of several takes. Anyway I want to be able to solo each channel independently on a per-part basis.

I see the problem. It might help a bit if there could be an "Add channel at top" function in the Audio Part, then drag the take you want to play into the first channel?

good idea! That one brings me to another idea:

being able to change the channel it is routed to for every take (currently channel) in the editor

[jorgen]

Yeah I dont have to remove the solo/mute on per-part basis even if I add sub channels on the track. We can have both.

Right now the audio track has a master channnel which all audio events in the track is routed to. What would be cool is optional sub channnels (add sub-channel on popup menu per track) with inserts/send/mute/solo that audio clips can be routed thru before the signal goes to the track master chanel.

Since audio tracks now can be frozen, doing more mixing inside the track would help a lot on the cpu. Like when programing drums, you could stuff the track with lots of fx...and of course, fx per clip...

cheers
jorgen

[jens]

Yeah I dont have to remove the solo/mute on per-part basis even if I add sub channels on the track. We can have both.

Right now the audio track has a master channnel which all audio events in the track is routed to. What would be cool is optional sub channnels (add sub-channel on popup menu per track) with inserts/send/mute/solo that audio clips can be routed thru before the signal goes to the track master chanel.

Since audio tracks now can be frozen, doing more mixing inside the track would help a lot on the cpu. Like when programing drums, you could stuff the track with lots of fx...and of course, fx per clip...

cheers
jorgen

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!



PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!!

[DarkStar]

Yeah I dont have to remove the solo/mute on per-part basis even if I add sub channels on the track. We can have both.

Right now the audio track has a master channnel which all audio events in the track is routed to. What would be cool is optional sub channnels (add sub-channel on popup menu per track) with inserts/send/mute/solo that audio clips can be routed thru before the signal goes to the track master channel.

Isn't a sub-channel on the track the same as a channel inside the audio part?

Since audio tracks now can be frozen, doing more mixing inside the track would help a lot on the cpu. Like when programing drums, you could stuff the track with lots of fx...and of course, fx per clip...

look out T, we'll have your ass

PS I think Jens quite likes these suggestions

[jorgen]

Isn't a sub-channel on the track the same as a channel inside the audio part?

track sub-channel would be like an extra output for the audio track, like you can add more audio outputs for the audio part comp and route part channels to different outputs.

At the moment there is only one output on each audio track but adding sub-channels would change that.

Instead of having multiple outputs on the track, there will be one master + sub-channels that goes thru the master so that you still can control the overall volume of all audio clips in the track

part channels are "virtual" channels for controlling volume/pan

cheers
jorgen