Layer Label req for 4.0

[Carl G.]

Bob,
Suuuuuure would be nice if Labels in MT layers could change name with Layer!
(So we could describe various takes on diff Layers without having to create new regions new tracks to signify different versions).
(Of course it would nice to be reflected in the Full Mixer View too as Layers changed).

Now I put all script variations for approval on one layer... but have no way of knowing which script I'm pulling up when I switch layers... other than it's "VO SCRIPT" for all layers.

Thanks in advance :)

[spiritman]

Last night I was thinking this...... Please Bob. In your spare time?:eek:

[TotalSonic]

Well - there were a number of requests (including from myself) back when there was a lot of talk of feature requests on this board a bit ago for a "Layers View" where all layers for a single track could be displayed simultaneously & edited between them the same way you would view tracks in the Multitrack View.

I don't know whether this is in Bob's plans to do though - but it would definitely be a welcomed new feature for me.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Bob L]

All nice ideas... however... resource intensive... just adding the names for each layer would adds extra storage for each of the 72 tracks and to each edl save and undo... this may start slowing things down as well as increasing the sizes of the files... and as I am about to try to up the track count... it impacts even more... so there are some things to consider before simply adding name changes for each layer. :)

The layer view is on the 4.0 todo list... also track notes, which might also be handly to keep your notes on what's on each layer.

Bob L

[Carl G.]

All nice ideas... however... resource intensive... just adding the names for each layer would adds extra storage for each of the...
The layer view is on the 4.0 todo list... also track notes, which might also be handly to keep your notes on what's on each layer.
Bob L
Track Notes - Perfect alternative!

[Tim Miskimon]

All nice ideas... however... resource intensive... just adding the names for each layer would adds extra storage for each of the 72 tracks and to each edl save and undo... this may start slowing things down as well as increasing the sizes of the files... and as I am about to try to up the track count... it impacts even more... so there are some things to consider before simply adding name changes for each layer. :)

The layer view is on the 4.0 todo list... also track notes, which might also be handly to keep your notes on what's on each layer.

Bob L


Track notes would be awesome!!!
I try to keep notes on a pad but I'm always losing them...:eek:

[Dave Labrecque]

and as I am about to try to up the track count...

Is this the first we hear of this? :eek:

[Pedro Itriago]

I was waiting to see how many replies it took until someone noticed that

[Tim Miskimon]

Track count really isn't that big of a deal to me anymore. After 36 how many more do I really need? (Although I wouldn't mind having a few more output tracks...)
With digital there are unlimited tracks available already if you plan your production well.
I'm more interested in new features that make the job easier. More tracks only complicate things more - it already takes too long now a days to mix all these tracks and after a while the song just gets cluttered and over-produced sounding.
I find myself liking the projects with less tracks more & more.
The recording sounds more airy and open and the music has more room to breathe - oh well my opinion is my opinion...;)

[spiritman]

I agree Tim. In fact I would like the option to pick how many tracks are on each edl. Sometimes less is more!!


Sometimes.....:eek:

[Sam C]

I third that Tim. More tracks are really not at the top of my list. 72 tracks x 8 layers. C'mon!

[Bob L]

You already have the option to pick how many tracfks there are in an edl... the number of tracks that you use... all empty tracks are completely removed from the mix loop and do not slow the engine down at all... if you don't want to see them, then simply move the returns and out tracks that you need up where you like... if that's the way you want to work always... simply save the default mix template... SS is very configurable. :)

Bob L

[Cary B. Cornett]

All nice ideas... however... resource intensive... just adding the names for each layer would adds extra storage for each of the 72 tracks and to each edl save and undo... this may start slowing things down as well as increasing the sizes of the files... and as I am about to try to up the track count...

Although I have yet to run out of tracks on a session, I am interested in knowing whether SS Lite will also have "more tracks added". Will it continue to be "half of what 'full' is"? Will this also extend to the number of output tracks? Will there also be more sends/returns?

All of these things affect what we can do with a mix... even if there are not more "source" tracks to deal with.

[Bob L]

I'm not sure where this will settle out... nothing has been etched in stone yet... its just an idea I am toying with since basic machine and hard drive speeds have come up a bit since SAWStudio was first released.

Bob L

[Sean McCoy]

I'd love to see a layer naming scheme, as well. I'd be happy if there were an option to automatically append the layer number to the file name, or, more importantly, the region name, to reflect the take---or layer---numbers. As it is, I have to manually rename the track before moving to a new take, or manually rename the region before starting to edit or comp it, which in my case leaves much room for error.

[TotalSonic]

It's very rare that I ever need more than 30 tracks - but I can see where increasing track limits in all the versions would make a lot of users feel like they just got an extra stocking stuffer - and there certainly have been a number of Basic users who have requested an upping to 32 tracks.

The other thing I think upping track count would help in would possibly be in marketing - which usually always operates on the "more is more" principal.

As you said - computer speed has indeed come along way since Studio was first introduced - so as long as the engine functions with the same zippiness I don't see why the track count shouldn't be increased in order to give more options to endusers.

How about 32 tracks for Basic, 48 for Lite, and 96 for full?

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Bob L]

We'll see. :)

Bob L

[Dingo]

How about the ability to hide unused tracks? It would be awfully convenient...

[Dave Labrecque]

How about the ability to hide unused tracks? It would be awfully convenient...

I think bob's saying as long as you can put tracks wherever you want, you can effectively hide any tracks you (don't) want. Like, put 'em below everything else and then don't go there. :)

[Dingo]

but if you can't see them then everything is there isn't it?

[RobertV]

How about the ability to hide unused tracks? It would be awfully convenient...

That's been a secret wish for me as well, Less is more!!

Another Feature I've been wishing for, is the the ability to have 2 multitrack windows displayed at the same time, so that I can show 1 or 2 tracks on one, and lots of tracks on the other window to me this would make things lots quicker to locate / find things.

BTW. Bob; please, please, the "show all (used) layers in a track option would be absolutely gobsmacking magic!

Thanks Bob! SS's just getting better and better!

Cheers....Robert V. :D

[Shawn]

I think bob's saying as long as you can put tracks wherever you want, you can effectively hide any tracks you (don't) want. Like, put 'em below everything else and then don't go there. :)

That's what I do, I have my default mixer template setup with 16 input tracks, 4 aux returns, then all of the outputs, followed by the 2 unused auxes, then the rest of the inputs, it's the same as hiding all of the tracks that I don't normally need.

:)

[Dave Labrecque]

but if you can't see them then everything is there isn't it?

Is it? ;)

[Dave Labrecque]

That's what I do, I have my default mixer template setup with 16 input tracks, 4 aux returns, then all of the outputs, followed by the 2 unused auxes, then the rest of the inputs, it's the same as hiding all of the tracks that I don't normally need.

:)

I'm even more extreme. I do mostly voice-over oriented stuff. My default mix template has four input tracks, a return track and an output track. Sure wish we could get the control track to stay put at the top in mix templates, but that's another (already well-worn) thread... :)

[Dingo]

This amp goes up to 11. :D

[Dave Labrecque]

This amp goes up to 11. :D

Maybe I shoulda said "I'm even less extreme". :) My amp only goes to 9!

[bcorkery]

but if you can't see them then everything is there isn't it?If a track falls under the screen and nobody is there to see it ... is it really there? Whooooaa ... :)

[Carl G.]

I'm even more extreme. I do mostly voice-over oriented stuff. My default mix template has four input tracks, a return track and an output track. Sure wish we could get the control track to stay put at the top in mix templates, but that's another (already well-worn) thread... :)
Dave,
Simply: Menu>File>Save Session As
Control Track placement is saved with EDL info.

[Dave Labrecque]

Dave,
Simply: Menu>File>Save Session As
Control Track placement is saved with EDL info.

Yeah... haven't we been here before? :) (It's deja vu all over again.)

Unfortunately, we can't bring an EDL's control track placement into an existing session like we could if it (the CT placement) was saved with a mix template. And, otherwise, opening a "template EDL" at the start of a session is about as easy as moving the control track to where I want it (if I should have the forsight to do that at the start of a project that will need it at some point).

Everybody... "It's the end of the world as we know it..." :p :)

[Carl G.]

Yeah... haven't we been here before? :) (It's deja vu all over again.)

Unfortunately, we can't bring an EDL's control track placement into an existing session like we could if it (the CT placement) was saved with a mix template. And, otherwise, opening a "template EDL" at the start of a session is about as easy as moving the control track to where I want it (if I should have the forsight to do that at the start of a project that will need it at some point).

Everybody... "It's the end of the world as we know it..." :p :)
Like I tell my kids - "Remember!! or you'll always forget!"
(But I repeatedly bring new experiences to the Deja Vu table!)

I'd request independent ControlTrack placement and VideoTrack placement as part of the MixTemplate in 4.0, if easy coding/speed would allow it.
(gee.... why didn't somebody request that before? :) :) )

[Bob L]

Possibly because its already doable... simply save your template as a blank edl and start each session with it... and in the cases where you forgot... then you simply select the video and control track and then go up to track 1 and shift-left-click to snap both tracks up to the top... done.

Video and Control Track data is not part of the console which is what a MIX template is all about.

Bob L

[spiritman]

Can SS move more than one track at a time in the MT order? I selected several tracks (really all the aux's). Tried shift dragging. No go. I must be missing something....

[Shawn]

First, select the channels you want to move in the MT by left clicking on their track numbers, then shift+left click on the first one, then navigate to where you want to put them, and then shift+left click to drop 'em.

be careful not to control+left click, this resets the track layout back to it's default state.

:)

[MMP]

Instead of dragging after making your selection, shift+left click on the MT number where you would like the topmost track to go.

Regards,

MM

Edit: Too slow!

[spiritman]

You got it Michael!!! That works. Sorry Shawn, I couldn't make you way work.:eek:

[Carl G.]

Possibly because its already doable... simply save your template as a blank edl and start each session with it... and in the cases where you forgot... then you simply select the video and control track and then go up to track 1 and shift-left-click to snap both tracks up to the top... done.

Video and Control Track data is not part of the console which is what a MIX template is all about.

Bob L
Thanks for the clarification, Bob.

[Shawn]

I just tried it the way Michael said, and it's easier than how I was doing it..

Ya learn something new here every day..

:)

[spiritman]

Shawn, I couldn't make your way work at all.

[MMP]

And here I thought we said the same thing! http://www.sawstudiouser.net/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

Regards,

MM

[Shawn]

And here I thought we said the same thing! http://www.sawstudiouser.net/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

Regards,

MM
LOL! we pretty much did, except for some reason I thought that you had to shift+left click on the selected tracks BEFORE moving them to their new location as well.

:)

[spiritman]

OK, maybe I was missing the point (again). I thought Shawn was saying to shift left click - drag and drop. To where you wanted them to be. But Michael was saying to not drag but to just shift+left click.

OK then????

[Dave Labrecque]

OK, maybe I was missing the point (again). I thought Shawn was saying to shift left click - drag and drop. To where you wanted them to be. But Michael was saying to not drag but to just shift+left click.

OK then????
The draggy way to do it is to simply shift-drag a single track number to where you want it (no selecting). Though I often can't be sure where it's going to drop. I never did figure out Bob's rules about that. This is limited to a track at a time.

I use the select-and-shift-click method almost exclusively these days. It's a miracle-worker on groups of tracks. They don't even have to be contiguous tracks. Pretty cool.

[Bob L]

Dave... pretty straightforward really... the drop inserts and pushes the rest of the tracks towards the direction you came from to make room for the insert.

If you come from the bottom of the MT towards the top, the insert pushes the tracks toward the bottom (filling the whole you left behind) to make room... if you come from the top of the MT, the insert pushes the tracks toward the top (filling the whole you left behind) to make room.

Bob L

[Dave Labrecque]

...the drop inserts and pushes the rest of the tracks towards the direction you came from...

Hmmm... I'm not at the studio right now, but my recollection is that I could never predict between which two tracks my moved track would drop.

Example: I'd grab track 1 and drop it between tracks 5 and 6 and wouldn't know for sure if it would actually go there. But it might. :)

I'll try to be more specific when I get back in the studio...

[Bob L]

It all depends on which direction you are coming from.

Bob L

[Jay Q]

Hmmm... I'm not at the studio right now, but my recollection is that I could never predict between which two tracks my moved track would drop.

Example: I'd grab track 1 and drop it between tracks 5 and 6 and wouldn't know for sure if it would actually go there. But it might. :)

I'll try to be more specific when I get back in the studio...Dave, the way to do it is to drag to where your selected track is on top of the track you want to go above/below. So, if your tracks are in sequential order and you want, say, track 2 between tracks 5 and 6, you'd shift-drag 2 and release on top of 5 which places it below 5 since you're coming from above. If you wanted to, say, place track 8 between tracks 3 and 4, you'd shift-drag 8 and release on top of 4 which places it above 4 since you're coming from below.

I hope that made sense.

Jay

[Dave Labrecque]

It all depends on which direction you are coming from.

Bob L

OK, then that's what throws me. I tend to think of "between" as having a fixed definition. Is it that SAW doesn't sense a "between" drop, but only "on" which channel you're dropping? That would explain it.

So... it's like coming from above and dropping on a channel moves that channel up and coming from below and dropping on a channel moves that channel down? Or perhaps the opposite.