Why no loop support in T2?

[Hypertone]

I'm suprised that this day and age Tracktion 2 doesnt support any kind of tempo locked audio loop support. What's up with that?

[Lunch Money]

Simply hasn't arrived yet. On the list for a possible 2.x release, and Mackie/RMS are aware that lots of us would like it, but nobody's made any promises yet.

I'd like to see this, too.

[Hypertone]

I think this should be standard on any modern sequencer.

[Lunch Money]

<shrug>

Yup.

But there's only so much time in the day. It'll get here eventually. Not all sequencers develop the same features at the same rate. Tracktion had a working freeze function before anyone else, and certainly long before Cubase. Other hosts (Live) don't have it yet, and it could be argued that freeze should be standard on any modern sequencer. From what Live users tell me, it's wanted in that camp, but they're doing OK without it. Likewise, loop support is wanted in this camp, but we're all getting by without it.

Greg

[braj]

<shrug>

From what Live users tell me, it's wanted in that camp, but they're doing OK without it. Likewise, loop support is wanted in this camp, but we're all getting by without it.

Greg

Actually, Live does have it if you consider you can route any track to an audio track and record it, then disable the source track. It is sort of like T2's per-track freeze workaround (render and mute).

But regarding loop support, T doesn't have a great workaround without another app or plug. I'm planning on using Live rewired to T2 personally.

Something native may show up in T2.1, I hope.

[pHz]

Actually, Live does have it if you consider you can route any track to an audio track and record it, then disable the source track. It is sort of like T2's per-track freeze workaround (render and mute).

sort of like it ... but only works in realtime and usually still needs manual adjustment of the in / out points of the resulting clip ...

slainte rob

[braj]

Actually, Live does have it if you consider you can route any track to an audio track and record it, then disable the source track. It is sort of like T2's per-track freeze workaround (render and mute).

sort of like it ... but only works in realtime and usually still needs manual adjustment of the in / out points of the resulting clip ...

slainte rob

Yep, that's why I said sort of. But considering that T's freeze isn't very useful to me and I'll end up rendering and muting, T's freeze may as well not exist I do believe T has an edge on Live here regarding muting as well, ie Live I think you need to disable all plugs not just mute the track (to get your CPU cycles back).

[Lunch Money]

My point was simply that Live doesn't have freeze. I wasn't knocking it. I find render more useful than freeze anyhow. Recording in realtime, though... is that what you need to do in Live? Ugh.

I've been using the free Plasma Express 2003 I got on a CM coverdisc for my drum loops. I don't use other kinds of loops. I've also been using more MIDI "loops" lately, which pretty much negates the need for audio loops.

Like I said, I'd love to see it implemented. I'm just not crippled without the functionality.

[headquest]

I find render more useful than freeze anyhow.

In Tracktion it is more useful, because if you freeze tracks in Tracktion you simply can't mix them anymore. There's really no point in maxing out on CPU, freezing tracks to free up CPU, recording more tracks, and then discovering you can't mix their levels Tracktion may have got their first, but few would argue this system is ideal!

Recording in realtime, though... is that what you need to do in Live? Ugh.

As I understand it though, in Live when you bounce a clip like this, the software doesn't take it upon itself to arbitrarily downscale the audio bit-depth without dithering, as Tracktion does

Also useful in Live, is that you can drag and drop a VST synth onto a track (or for that matter a device from within a Rewire slave application) and record it directly into audio, entirely missing out the MIDI stage. Now THAT really is a timesaver

Workflow, workflow, workflow...

[Lunch Money]

headquest, other people have other ways of working.

I find render more useful in general, but the freeze IS useful. You have to use the tools the way they were designed, not expect the tools to do a job they weren't made to do. We've had the freeze debate before, though... some people find it useful (myself included) the way it is, some people don't. But that's just 2 different ways of working.

Not sure what you're talking about with the arbitrary bit-depth downscaling....

And that last paragraph isn't making any sense to me. Recording something in audio in realtime doesn't save time, and I can't imagine it being a workflow improvement. I've tried Live. I find the workflow, workflow, workflow superior in Tracktion.

Greg

[braj]

You can also timestretch the audio you render in Live, which is nice. Doing it in realtime doesn't take much more effort than rendering in T anyway. Luckily, trimming is quick and easy in Live as well.

The real downside with Live is that even with rendering to audio, some VSTi just take too much CPU cycles to even get to that point, at least on my Powerbook. I also would rather keep everything in midi as much as I can. Live forces me to bounce down to audio much more than I'd like. T is much nicer on the CPU.

[headquest]

headquest, other people have other ways of working. I find render more useful in general, but the freeze IS useful... some people find it useful (myself included) the way it is, some people don't. But that's just 2 different ways of working.

Hmmm... I must be missing something. Can you explain to me when it is useful to freeze tracks and not be able to mix them?

You have to use the tools the way they were designed, not expect the tools to do a job they weren't made to do.

What was Tracktion's freeze designed to do? I though the purpose was to free up CPU... does it have another purpose?

Not sure what you're talking about with the arbitrary bit-depth downscaling....

Well, in Tracktion you can have an audio or MIDI track handled at 32-bit floating point. When you choose to render (either as a new file, or "render in place", then Tracktion will magically downscale to the default setting of your sound card, which for most of us is 24-bit (and for some is just 16-bit). From what I have learnt on previous threads about this, no dithering is applied, meaning that artefacts can be added.

The point I really don't understand here (perhaps somebody can explain, because it's probably my lack of scientific knowledge at work again!) is why Mackie should make a fuss about adding a 64-bit mixing capability when your bounced clips have already been unecessarily reduced to 24 or 16 bit sound against your will?

And that last paragraph isn't making any sense to me. Recording something in audio in realtime doesn't save time, and I can't imagine it being a workflow improvement. I've tried Live. I find the workflow, workflow, workflow superior in Tracktion.

Greg

Nope, I think you may be misunderstanding my point. I was trying (obviously failing!) to point out that in Live you *can* record a MIDI track and then route it to a second track and record it in realtime as audio (that part I think is what you already got), you can alternately miss out the first step altogether and record VSTs as audio in the first place.

In Tracktion 2 you can hook in your MIDI keyboard, drag in a VST instrument and record... MIDI. Which you subsequently have to render if you want to make it an audio clip. If you basically want this as an audio clip, Live 4 makes it quicker for you by bypassing the MIDI recording stage altogether.

(But note, in my case Tracktion 2 can't do any of this anyway, because my M-Audio keyboard has been confirmed as incompatible with the software. Hence my decision that there's no point in me buying T2 at this time )

[headquest]

You can also timestretch the audio you render in Live, which is nice. Doing it in realtime doesn't take much more effort than rendering in T anyway. Luckily, trimming is quick and easy in Live as well.

Very true. I think that the implementation of this in Live 4 is very well done. Being able to tempo-ramp audio is outstanding and very useful .

The real downside with Live is that even with rendering to audio, some VSTi just take too much CPU cycles to even get to that point, at least on my Powerbook. I also would rather keep everything in midi as much as I can. Live forces me to bounce down to audio much more than I'd like. T is much nicer on the CPU.

I had that exact problem on my Windows laptop, as you know.

Frank Hoffman of Ableton gave me some good help on this. We both did some benchmark tests using Ambience and Triangle II, as is often done.

In the first round of tests, before 4.1.1, I found that Tracktion 1.6 showed a 40% better CPU handling that Live 4.

In the second round, I found that Live 4.1.1 was more CPU efficient than Tracktion 1.6 by around 30%. The 4.1.1 bugfix made such a significant difference that it effectively turned around the results.

I repeated a third test using T2 demo. This time Live 4.1.1 simply trampled all over Tracktion in terms of CPU efficiency. It seems to me that T2 is using more CPU than T1.6 did. (The reviewer in CM magazine found this too, but it may be different on your Mac?)

By the way, Frank was doing the tests using an Apple G5. In his tests, Live 4 had the edge right from the start! But this didn;t prevent Ableton from responding to the issues that I and others had raised, and working on providing a speedy solution for Live 4 users.

If you are still having problems and have already installed 4.1.1, I suggest you do a similar rigorous test and contact Ableton with your results

[braj]

I'm running 4.1.1, it's better than before but I really can say with certainty that it isn't as efficient as T on my Mac That's OK, I want to use T2 as my main sequencer because if the loop recording, and the fact that I can write midi right next to audio tracks and match beats etc. I'm not explaining this well, I know.

I'm just resigned to using multiple tools at this point, and will leverage the strengths of each when needed. The good news is I have a good understanding of T, Live and Reason and feel comfortable using them all together. They are all cross platform and stable from my experience, which is what I'm after. If T introduces a good timestretch at some point, I'll likely drop Live. Not because I don't think it's capable or anything, just it will be redundant.

Now, if Live let me edit midi directly in the arrange track, then I may feel completely opposite.

[headquest]

Now, if Live let me edit midi directly in the arrange track, then I may feel completely opposite.

erm... it does.