Q: Why use different track types?

[jorgen]

without tracks, how do you record a specific VSTi, when there are no clips there already? Thast what I like a bout tracks, you can save a default song with midi and audio tracks. then use arrow keys to navigate tracks and record.

jorgen

[djsubject]

thats what i like about tracks too!!

[plastique]

about the multimode tracks:

it would probably reduce a bit of code but not make eXT more userfriendly (IMO)

[jorgen]

xt2 is kind of multiclip mode though, as you can have both midi and automation or audio and automation in single clips...

jorgen

[robenestobenz]

xt2 is kind of multiclip mode though, as you can have both midi and automation or audio and automation in single clips...

jorgen

This is such a useful feature. I can't wait.

[D-Fusion]

xt2 is kind of multiclip mode though, as you can have both midi and automation or audio and automation in single clips...

jorgen

Excellent done Jorgen

[fandango]

Absolutely FAB.

[flippya2000]

Sounds gd & makes sense

[spacefox]

Thanks for the answers people. Especially Jorgen. The automation in clips sounds excellent.

[spacefox]

Just so I understand better, is Traction able to have Midi, Audio, and automation data all in the same track? And if that's the case, does the Midi, Audio, and automation data only go to the set of plugins (insert effects, midi effects, instruments) loaded onto that track?

Basically yes.
MIDI and audio are contained in clip, and those can be on any tracks. You can mix, even overlap, MIDI and audio clips in one track.
Automation in Tracktion isn't contained in clips (though it's a commonly requested feature) but is tied to the plugin. Automation graphs can be displayed on any track, regardless where the automated plugin is.

All data on the track is sent to a (fully modular) chain of plugins (filters in Trackionese) at the end of the track. This includes audio and MIDI (automation is tied to the plugin)


Plugins can be dropped on audio clips to, and the audio in the clip is processed before being sent to the track's chain. For some obscure reason you cannot drop plugin on MIDI clips. Oh well, nobody's perfect.

[silicon/silicium]

Jorgen, is the drumtrack scrennshotable???
I m really looking for this one...

[Lunch Money]

without tracks, how do you record a specific VSTi, when there are no clips there already? Thast what I like a bout tracks, you can save a default song with midi and audio tracks. then use arrow keys to navigate tracks and record.

jorgen

Huh? You arm it with a MIDI device, which can be just as quick and just as template-able as your subsequent post a bit further down from the one I quote here.

There's no clip there already, but it's armed with MIDI device, you press record and it starts creating a MIDI clip.

There's no clip there already, but it's armed with Audio device, you press record and it starts creating an Audio clip.

Simultaneously, if you're 'recording' automation, an automation part is also created, using whatever visual method you prefer.

Heck, if you have the track armed with an audio AND a midi device, why not just allow both to be recorded in the same track? Once they're clips, they can always be moved around.

Using plug-ins that accept MIDI and Audio information couldn't be easier than in a host that has any "clip type" within its track.

---

Or in a more basic way of looking at it: in your operating system, you don't need to make a "pictures" folder, even if the folder happens to contain only pictures. Why make a track (the "container"/folder) HAVE to accept only one type of input or clip? It doesn't make sense and has no benefits.

The benefits of universal track types:

1. Overlaying clips of different types. Put your MIDI over your Audio in order to align notes, etc., with visual cues.

2. Easy use of plug-ins that accept both MIDI and Audio data to perform their function (ie. GVST's GSnap in MIDI mode, or BetabugsAudio's Getablitch Jr.)

3. No need to assing type and THEN arm the track. Arming the track simultaneously permits creation of the appropriate kind of clip. On a related note, why not allow multiple-arm to the same track? I wouldn't use it, but it'd sure be flexible and some people might end up using it.

4. No need to make the 'templates' that you mention in the same way. Why set up a project with 4 MIDI and 4 Audio, when you can just have "8 Tracks" and fill them with whatever you want?

4b. I DO understand templates to a certain extent, though, so just allow for default audio/midi device arming

---

It seems so obvious once you've used a program like Samplitude or Tracktion that doesn't bother with the artifical assignment of "track types". "clip types" does that job and more!

Greg

[origami]

Every time I see a new feature from XT2 I get a new reason why I did well when I bought XT. XT as it is now is good, very good. XT2 with all those features sounds simply wonderful. Thanks.

[Charlie]

I agree a lot with what Greg has said about clips but I wonder how much of this debate is about workflow and presentation. For me it would certainly be logical if I could put my midi, audio, envelopes, etc wherever I wanted.

Sometimes I like to think of my midi clips (or parts!) as audio clips and would like to treat them that way.


Some ideas that I have about clips.

- Include routing information within the clip instead of the track. As an example, I could have a one bar midiclip which is set to output to one VST then without using a new track the next instance of the clip could be set to output to a different VST or even many VSTs. (Also, automate the inputs and outputs of a clip.?)

- Encapsulated Midi Clip - A self contained midi clip with its own sounds or VSTis. It could be used for midi or audio output. (An advanced type of freeze maybe?)

- Dropping a midi part onto an audio track gives you the option to freeze it as a wav.

[soma]

Good points Greg.