POLL: Would you like "old" style lane editing, as an option?

Would you like the “old” lane editing back, as an option?

  • Yes, I would like to switch to the “old” C5 lane behaviour, for MIDI / Audio tracks that I choose
  • No, I am happy with the “new” C6 lane behaviour, I don’t need the old C5 behaviour

0 voters

EDIT: for an explanation of the problem, please see this thread: http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3232

The new “comping” system of MIDI and audio lanes is very powerful.
However, it is not suitable for all types of recording, editing and composition

So I propose that the “old” / “new” behaviour be a user-selectable option on each track’s control panel.

That way, we can have C6-style linked cutting / sizing / muting on the tracks where that is appropriate,
and where it is not appropriate, we can switch back to the old C5-style of independent editing / sizing / muting events.

I feel it is important that we are given the choice of behaviours ourselves.

Please add your voice!

Peace and funkiness!

FD

or a compromise… being able to cut anywhere on midi tracks…

I do believe that something needs to be done. Dunno what the ideal solution would be though. Could be something like, a new “Comping Mode button” in order to invoke this new Cubase 6 behavior, or a more global option in Preferences, or, some variant on the idea of having this available per track (although I fear that might get rather confusing, in practice, if there are many tracks in the Project, each with several lanes, and a different “mode” for each track).

I said yes, I’d like some sort of option to move between pure comping, and lane editing.

I love the new comping lanes for comping, but for cycle recording/lane editing there needs to be a more flexible solution

+1

For the ignorati (moi!), could you maybe please explain the differences between the two?

I’ve got SX3, but I’ll try to extrapolate to C5 …

Thanks!

This thread explains the problem :

http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3232

Hi

I’ve voted to have choice.
My reasoning is in the other thread


FunkyDrummer - thanks for putting it to the poll
:slight_smile:

The need for independent part/event behavior isn’t a common use for lanes in my particular workflow, so the current way of working would rarely affect me. However, after experimenting a bit, I found a possible workaround (for the time being) while the debate continues whether to incorporate a choice into a new update/release,

For audio or MIDI: locking the parts/events on the lanes you don’t want to cut, allows them to be unaffected by the snip tool and/or the select tool modifier.

For audio only: “events to part” then working inside the part editor with the snip tool (not the select tool modifier) only clips the intended event.

I know this may slow the process considerably, but at least we can keep working in the meantime?

+1
Yes it would be GREAT to have the choice to use EITHER method!

Thanks for the suggestion. If I lock them, they are unaffected by cutting and sizing,
but not from unmuting !! :frowning: :frowning:

If I lock a muted MIDI / audio event, then click on it with arrow tool, the event unmutes itself !!!
Even though it was supposed to be locked (on “Size + Position + Other” setting) :-/

So, I now need to find a workaround, for this part of the workaround. :open_mouth:

The workaround that I’m using is : Create a key command for “split at cursor”.
Select the audio event that you want to cut & position the SongPositionPointer where you want the cut.
Use the key command.
Only the selected event(s) will get cut -> other lanes are unaffected.
Only marginally slower than using the scissors, and, if you normally zoom in before cutting, by dragging down from the ruler, then the SPP will already be in the right place…

+1

All Steiny need to do is give us the option of cutting the lanes separately. The current method only works if every take has exactly the same timing, otherwise it’s a nightmare…

Bump

Exactly and I don’t always work in exact segments…Please Please Please

bump

what chrisyking said.

I must point out to everyone that this affects MIDI and AUDIO tracks.

In C6 Steinberg have effectively stopped us using MIDI lanes as a creative, compositional tool.
(or at least made it very very hard)

Steinberg says that from now on, we must treat our MIDI parts just like audio.

Don’t they know, they are not the same???

For a start, multiple MIDI parts on the same track WILL play back simultaneously, but audio will not (of course)
But C6 insists on muting other MIDI parts when I click one of them, as if I were comping an audio take!!
It doesn’t make sense.

It is a complete pain in the asp for MIDI composition !!


I suspect that those who voted “NO” to the poll, are people who do not use much MIDI!!!

Well it seems that 66% of users (who expressed a preference) are unhappy with this …

Any comment from the moderators?

Polls often reflect the question. Those that voted no could have meant two things: ‘No, I do not want them to include that preference … I am against people having it;’ or, ‘No, I do not care one way or another because I’m OK with it the way it is now.’

Were the question this: “Do you think Steinberg should include the preference option to revert to the former behavior of lane editing through C5 some people prefer?” … I think you would have got 100% “Yes.”

Como