After 12 years I’m SICK of re-explaining this poop.
Just like with the current marker track, there should be a way to place markers VERTICALLY… ie. on tracks. This would give the user instant 1 key access to the important tracks.
Think about it: your piece has 200+ tracks. Moving up and down is as involved as scrolling left/right. You need to be able to INSTANTLY jump between tracks no matter -how- large the CPR.
Great idea again. Not sure the word vertical is helpful in explaining it. Something like a “Go to track” setting.
With the render in place in cubase 8 plopping new tracks under every midi track in a way that can’t be changed, apparently (other than render all to one track), it makes this vertical marker or go to track feature even more appealing.
Thanks.
My problem with calling them ‘Track’ markers is a distinctly Germanic predilection for overly-complicated nomenclature. They looooooves having 20 slightly different variations on the same theme. Maybe it’s a Bach deal.
VERTICAL is what it is. Up and down. vs. Side to side.
That’s how -I- think of the project. It’s a giant piano roll… or spreadsheet. The cols are notes, the rows are tracks.
—JC
well, when I read the post, re “vertical” I initially understood you to mean a long vertical line extending a marker (at the top) down through all the tracks. I do understand what you mean, and like the idea, just saying the communication did not immediately work for me.
I agree with ^ vertical jump would sound more ‘correct’ than vertical marker, for me a marker seems to indicate a linear division.
Even though (of course this is pedantic) horizontal marker does not really make sense, I would have immediately understood your meaning. I would have thought of the horizon.
But +1. I’m really just kidding with the semantic discussion.
Pedantic gets a bad rap these days.
If it uses the same -mechanism- as ‘Markers’ it needs to be called ‘markers’. But it also has to have a name that is UNIQUE enough that people don’t get confused with all the subtle variations. The latter is what I called the ‘Germanic problem’… you end up with endless variations of ‘Warp’ or ‘Tabs’… which makes one have to crack the manual like a 1040 form every time one wants to do -any- task related to time/pitch/hitpoints.
In short, a good name -is- important.
Although I admit I might be so overjoyed, as not to care if it was called Susan With The Big Blouse===so long as it worked as advertised.
–JC
Vertical Marker Track. Yes. Great idea.
You have the visibility configurations to quickly be able to see just your “important” tracks.
You could also use the PLE and some cleverness to accomplish this already.
So I don’t quite get this request.
Track Visibility is great, but it’s a Swiss Army Knife… not -optimised- for this task at all.
Too much pre-planning. You have to set up the configurations you think you’ll need or that doesn’t work.
Markers are one button. Boom, you’re there.
When yer working, you want to maintain focus as much as possible. Stopping to set up macros and visibility groups is a focus-killer.
How about calling it “Track Marker”, or “Track Milepost” or “Jumptrack Label”? I fully agree it’s a good idea, and “Go to Track #X” would not be nearly as good, since, imagining it used:
Who knows what track number it is or how far I need to scroll or what folders I need to open, I know that I marked the first Trombone Track as ‘bone’. And I want to get there fast.
I like “TrackJump”
But, whatever, its a great idea anyway… for really big projects anything that achieves quick (I mean quick…!) navigation would help. ‘Track Visibility’ is not the answer here - that’s another (nice and welcome) facet of project management/screen real-estate IMO.
+1