Teksonik wrote:No, it's you who don't understand what a mess your idea would create and have obviously not thought it through properly.......and you're simply not seeing anything.....if you did this idea would have died on the Beta forums....
Why? I keep asking you and Lance and all I get is this rubbish. Give me some cogent reasons, nothing you've said so far makes me think there will be any issues at all.
Ironically that was exactly what I was going to say about you......
Lucky you didn't because in the face of about 10 pages of explanation now, you'd look pretty stupid.
you've left too many unanswered questions and made too many assumptions that your idea is even possible or practical to implement.
I've answered every single question and addressed every single point as comprehensively as I possibly can. I've spent at least 4 hours a day, every day this week, trying to explain things and answer questions. No-one has ever put this much into any feature request, here or anywhere else.
If he decides to implement such a system I'm willing to beta test it on my laptop but will not install it on my main music computer. I'll simply keep using 8.5 and it's wonderful Pattern Per Generator workflow......
There is no "patterns per generator" workflow, it is simply a feature of Orion's pattern-based workflow that confuses many new users and can be restrictive for all of us. You've just learned to live with it over the years, as have we all. That doesn't mean there is no room for improvement. Even when I suggested an implementation that would leave things exactly as they are now, you still couldn't see any merit in it. The problem is not with global patterns, it is in your head.
Teksonik wrote:I'm simply defending Orion's workflow as we've all seen Bones do time after time over the years......In my opinion Global patterns are a bad idea as presented no matter who presented it.......
Again, this should be your first clue that you are on the wrong track with your understanding of the idea.
ccarrieres wrote:i prefer to use receive midi from or copy paste and transpose method
Why? It is far less flexible, you're just used to all the restrictions it brings. Copy/paste removes automation, so you will always have to recreate that manually, and "Receive MIDI from..." takes over everything when you might want to use some patterns from the original instrument and some from the other. If anything, using these methods just shows how restrictive the current system is as they all have severe limitations that someone coming from another host application or hardware sequencer would see as ludicrous. And the advantages of the current system over this proposal is practically nothing at all, it just happens to be what you are used to, rather than what is best.
Lance wrote:It shows some really cannot think through how many little and cardinal things it would change from the pattern selector to the way of finding, selecting and putting patterns into the Playlist.
That's because it wouldn't change anything significantly and you have not been able to show that it might. e.g. If the first pattern you want to use on the 4th instrument you've added happens to be B4, for example, you have to navigate to it by one of the 4 methods available. You like to click-drag, I usually use my scroll wheel, but in this situation either clicking and selecting from the pop-up or typing "b" and "4" is probably more efficient. With global patterns you would select that pattern in exactly the same way. Yes, the first pattern might require more scrolling or a longer drag but, assuming you aren't randomly creating patterns all over the place, all the other patterns you need for that instrument are likely to be near the first one and will just require the same small drags or scrolls as they do now.
I'll give you an example of how I would work, assuming that no organisational tools at all were implemented. i.e. That every generator is inserted, ready to play Pattern 000 (also assuming that a 3-digit naming convention would be employed). We usually need just two banks, A & B, for drums and almost never use more than 8 patterns anywhere else. So, in my head, I'd decide that I'll always put drum patterns into the first 20 patterns, 000-019. Then for each new instrument, I'd move up 10 patterns. That would keep everything nice and compact. I always have drums as the first generator so I add a DrumRack and create a basic kick/snare pattern exactly as I would now. Then I add an instrument, lets say a Wasp. Now, I want to reserve the first 20 patterns for drums, so I press the FF button twice to take me to pattern 020 or click and select it from the list. Either way, it's just two mouse clicks.
Now I am ready to start playing around with ideas. When I get something working, I'll want to add another instrument, lets say a Screamer, to expand on it or because I realise that Wasp is not the best synth to work with the idea I've come up with. Whichever it is, 9 times out of 10 the first pattern I will want Screamer to play is one that I've already made for Wasp. Let's say that its pattern 023, just for the sake of argument. To get my new instrument to pattern 023, I just click and select it from a list, the same list you see now when you click on a pattern in the playlist. It's simple and it's done, again with just two clicks and I'm able to play a pattern that I created in Wasp without having to copy/paste or anything else. It just works. I can keep adding instruments and clicking my mouse twice to select patterns all day. The sky doesn't fall in, my computer doesn't spontaneously burst into flames, I just get on with what I'm doing in the simple and efficient manner that is the hallmark of Orion's workflow. No copy/paste, no Cloning, no Merging, no Receiving MIDI from somewhere else, just creating patterns wherever I like and using them wherever I need to. And that's
WITHOUT any extra tools to help me organise things. Any number of things could be added to make organisation easier, like auto-naming patterns or auto-creating folders or automatically inserting instruments with an empty pattern ready to go. Any of these things would make life easier but even without them, the system would be incredibly easy to use, easier than the current system by far.
OK, so that's Pattern Mode, what about Song Mode and arrangements? Here nothing at all will change, you will continue to add patterns just as you always have. In fact, there is a tool that was in Orion for ages that would be very useful here. It was removed in favour of full-screen mode but F11 used to add all the current patterns to the Playlist. That would be very handy for quickly getting each channel to the first pattern. Maybe that tool just got moved to a new shortcut but, if not, it would be good to get it back (I'm surprised no-one has bitched about it being gone). Even without it, adding patterns to the Playlist would be the same as it is now.
The smart thing would probably be to start beta testing it without any organisational tools and work out exactly where issues arise and how best to deal with them. After all, I understand that a lot of you use many more patterns than I do (my band-mate sure as hell does) so what is not an issue for me could easily be a nightmare for others, but there are plenty of options for dealing with it.
Lance wrote:Let it be instead a floating window or onside (on/off optional) media pool/browser to drag and drop stuff from and into it. Then it could be used even as a global pattern pool via e.g. dropping patterns into the Playlist. That would be something, and it wouldn't be only for MIDI/patterns but for audio, loops, presets, templates, mixer settings, automation patterns etc.
That is a massive change to everything and would require 10 times the development effort. It would also be clunky and unintuitive. e.g. It would give new users the idea that they can D'n'D a Wasp preset onto Wavefusion or a MIDI file into an Audio Track. That's what I hate about D'n'D, it is completely unintuitive. It would be a huge mess that would require more exclusions than inclusions. OTOH, global patterns is a simple, achievable idea that would improve Orion for absolutely everyone (even you, Lance).
Teksonik wrote:No nothing to worry about I just don't want to test a private beta of this concept on my studio computer.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. We've got a song with an Automation Track in it which still opens just fine in the current release version. Rich is pretty good at looking after our hard work.
by Teksonik » Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:02 pm 
<-This is a general point and not directed at you personally Tek
