Freeze, Tracktion v2.

[Aleatoric]

I remeber reading a long time ago that there was going to be a better freeze in Tracktion v2 that will free up even more cpu resourses than the current freeze. If I remeber correctly someone figured out that freeze could be more efficient and Jules said it would go on the list for v2. Just thinking, that will be cool, I love making music on my laptop.

[Alive In Chernobyl]

How can you make freeze better than making it a basic track?

This could be maybe to make freeze doing freezing faster? I do not see this happening with cpu resources.

[Lunch Money]

There are a bazillion ways to make freezing better. Last time I tried to describe one, though, people missed the point. That method DID NOT reduce CPU load, though. Depending on how it would be implemented, CPU would be either the same or a bit WORSE (as a trade-off).

If I'm not mistaken, when multiple tracks are frozen, the way things are right now, they're not actually frozen "individually". It looks that way on paper, but each time you add another frozen track, it's actually re-rendering EACH track that gets sent to the destination outputs.

This is the most efficient way to do it to save recources, otherwise you'd be playing back 5 .wav files instead of 1, a huge difference. On the other hand, you still get savings by playing back a .wav instead of a raw track through a bunch of plugins; so I'd like to have the option for less efficiency but quicker render times.

I could be mistaken here, but this is how it struck me as working.

Greg

[AD80]

The way it works right now is not very fast but its good with resources. I rather have it that way. If I need more speed and options I'll just use the "render and add" feature. It rocks.

[Lunch Money]

Render and add?

Crap, I didn't know about that one... I'll have to look into it.

[jens]

yes, 'render and add' works like a charm - I only wished Tracktion would be able to hide tracks just as Sonar does

[haydxn]

yeah i have to say, i'd like a way of hiding all my 'source' tracks. my edits end up full of tracks and my computer really starts to struggle, but i guess i am a bit messy with my working. for now i just move them all to the top and RIGHTMOUSEsquash them up (from the lowest one) to squash them all as small as possible. that's the only way round it i can think of

[jens]

you could use the 'shrink'-command as well - the tracks get really small at the push of a button - the only problem is that this function gets next to useless when you use the 'rescale all tracks to fit on screen'-command regularly, like I do

a 'don't rescale shrunken tracks'-option would do the trick

Jules?

[haydxn]

yeah that's the same problem that i get. didn't see the shrink button, that's the same thing! d'oh.

that's right jens - a button that says
"RESCALE ALL TRACKS TO FIT SCREEN EXCEPT THOSE ONES THAT ARE SMALL, AS IF THEY WERE FROZEN BECAUSE THEY'D STAY SMALL IF THEY WERE FROZEN"

or a shortcut key?

[jens]

yeah that's the same problem that i get. didn't see the shrink button, that's the same thing! d'oh.

that's right jens - a button that says
"RESCALE ALL TRACKS TO FIT SCREEN EXCEPT THOSE ONES THAT ARE SMALL, AS IF THEY WERE FROZEN BECAUSE THEY'D STAY SMALL IF THEY WERE FROZEN"

or a shortcut key?

I seem to notice a bit of irony in your post

the point is that the tracks which are shrunken by use of the shrink command are that small that you arent able to edit anything about them which again means that if you shrink them by use of the shrink command you don't want to edit anything about them, else you wouldn't use the command. You use it solely for getting them out of your way, that's what the command is for.

So I think it is indeed cumbersome that they get rescaled just like any other track when you use the 'rescale..'-command, because it means that they get in your way again whereas you only want to get an overview of the tracks you are currently using.

In other words:

Those two commands 'shrink' and 'rescale' work against each other, not together.

[haydxn]

yeah jens i think we have crossed wires somewhere, because i was agreeing exactly with you. when you shrink them so small the clips disappear its the same as when a track is frozen, super small.

i understand you exactly and i'm with you there

[AD80]

yeah that's the same problem that i get. didn't see the shrink button, that's the same thing! d'oh.

that's right jens - a button that says
"RESCALE ALL TRACKS TO FIT SCREEN EXCEPT THOSE ONES THAT ARE SMALL, AS IF THEY WERE FROZEN BECAUSE THEY'D STAY SMALL IF THEY WERE FROZEN"

or a shortcut key?

Tracktion needs lockable track sizes very badly. And I still want to be able to fit all tracks on the screen and leave the locked ones locked. I remember being surprised when the little "lock" icon on each track didnt lock the size too . I hope it made the T2 cut!

[valley]

Tracktion needs "groupable" tracks. End of story.

What I would like to see is something like this:

whenever tracks are fed into other tracks, those tracks automatically become "grouped".

When a group is collapsed, only the master track, ie the one the others feed into, is left showing.

Consider a percussion mix. You could have all of your perc tracks feeding into a master mixer track, so that the perc level can be metered and adjusted as a whole. When you select "collapse" on this master track, the individual tracks that feed it, IE your individual percussive parts, are hidden.

By using the existing track destination option, you get no new UI, a natural logical association between bussed tracks and grouping, and the possibility to have hierarchical grouping[1].



[1] Consider: track and 1 and 2 are kick and snare. They are fed into track 3 for dual compression.
Track 4 and 5 are hi-hats and tambourine. They are fed into track 6 for eq and reverb. Tracks 3 and 6 are fed into 7, which provides a master level control for the entire percussive part.

You can now collapse kick/snare into track 3. Independently of this you can collapse hihat/tamb into track 6. Finally you can collapse the whole lot inclusively into track 7.

[jens]

yeah jens i think we have crossed wires somewhere, because i was agreeing exactly with you. when you shrink them so small the clips disappear its the same as when a track is frozen, super small.

i understand you exactly and i'm with you there

[jens]

Tracktion needs "groupable" tracks. End of story.

What I would like to see is something like this:

whenever tracks are fed into other tracks, those tracks automatically become "grouped".

When a group is collapsed, only the master track, ie the one the others feed into, is left showing.

Consider a percussion mix. You could have all of your perc tracks feeding into a master mixer track, so that the perc level can be metered and adjusted as a whole. When you select "collapse" on this master track, the individual tracks that feed it, IE your individual percussive parts, are hidden.

By using the existing track destination option, you get no new UI, a natural logical association between bussed tracks and grouping, and the possibility to have hierarchical grouping[1].



[1] Consider: track and 1 and 2 are kick and snare. They are fed into track 3 for dual compression.
Track 4 and 5 are hi-hats and tambourine. They are fed into track 6 for eq and reverb. Tracks 3 and 6 are fed into 7, which provides a master level control for the entire percussive part.

You can now collapse kick/snare into track 3. Independently of this you can collapse hihat/tamb into track 6. Finally you can collapse the whole lot inclusively into track 7.

cheers, Valley - nice idea, but actually a bit of a different story than what we were after