Kylotan
Beepster
If they want "Layers" style recording/editing (to bypass the auto splits) they can use Sound On Sound with or without "Mute Previous Take" engaged (which I used just like layers until I learned I studied the Comping mode). AFAIK the Mute Tool still exists and works as it used to as well (which I think was the old way and was ridonculous IMO/IME).
1) There are a bunch of places where the Take Lanes are harder to work with than Layers. It seems to arbitrarily create more of them, cleaning them up after they're created is harder, etc. In the project I have open now, one track has 15 take lanes, but nowhere do I have more than 2 clips that overlap, and nor have I ever recorded 15 separate takes for 1 section in that track.
2) If you know how to find the magical menu option that lets you remove empty take lanes (hint to all: you have to right-click on a clip in the parent/composite lane to see 'Remove Empty Take Lanes'... why the hell it's so hidden and doesn't appear when you right click (a) the track, (b) a take lane, I don't know), that doesn't help much because most of your take lanes do have something in them, maybe just 1 clip. So now I'm down to 12 lanes for 1 track. Still a mess that Sonar made and which I'm expected to clean up.
3) In an ideal world, the clips would only create as many layers/lanes as you need, usually 2, except where you've explicitly been recording multiple takes. But no. Back in the layers days you could say 'Rebuild Layers' and it would collapse everything down into 2 lanes and things would be clean again. But now you can't even do that. That option no longer seems to exist.
4) So most of us could get by with 2 lanes but instead we're given 10 or 20 and asked to manage them ourselves, which is crap, frankly. And a lot of the MIDI people just don't want to have layered clips at all. They want everything bounced into the same clip, which is reasonable, because they don't need crossfades. Instead, they get a ton of unwanted take lanes too.
I think at least 95% of the complaints about "Lanes" are actually complaints about the "Comping" record mode.
I half agree, half disagree. Sonar's basically looked at the comping workflow, optimised things for that, and given the rest of us a harder time in the process. Take Lanes make sense in the context of takes and the way Sonar expects you to make them. You record your different takes of a song, make a composite take, then maybe flatten it and continue, or just hide the lanes, and you're done with that track.
5) - Unless you record section by section, in which case 10 sections and 5 takes per second means up to 50 take lanes if you're unlucky.
6) - Or unless you arrange with copy and paste, in which case you get an arbitrary number of take lanes based on how it decides to resolve any overlaps.
7) - Or unless you record MIDI part by part (eg. kicks, snares, hi-hats in different passes) in which case you get at least 1 lane per pass, which you have to bounce down before you can move or copy anything useful.
Etc. It's actively hostile towards anyone who doesn't just record through a whole song, comp some takes, and move on.
8) One of the arguments against simplifying the system is "Oh, but we can't just put everything in 2 lanes because you want separate mute/solo options for each lane, so that when you Flatten Comp you get your soloed lane with everything else muted... but those of us who don't comp like this don't benefit from this feature. We just suffer from all the downsides. It's a mess.
Hi, Kylo. I totally get how one could be frustrated with the things mentioned however a lot of that can be mitigated/avoided with some workflow tweaks. I've numbered segments of your comment to reply to each issue directly with how I'd navigate around those issues and maybe explain a bit more the logic as to why certain things are happening. Again this is a case of Lanes and Comping not really being explained well by Cakewalk and to be perfectly honest I don't think some of the things I'm about to mention were even considered when they were designed. Some of the stuff you mention, to me, are just general deficiencies with the program that IMO would be better solved with a couple new workflow features added to the program (some of which I've requested already).
1) Actually I did find that in X2 there was a bit of arbitrary Take Lane creation and maybe even in X3 but they seem to do what I expect them to now. Maybe it's different on your system but for me essentially with each new record into a track (using Comp record mode) a new lane is created UNLESS you record further down the timeline where there is no other data on the same track (so if there is no overlap). When you do that it will record THAT clip (and only that clip) in the same lane as the last take. This actually annoys the hell out of me because I am one who actually does NOT want more than one clip in one lane (its screws up my "notes" and editing schemes). After that one clip then it will go back to creating a new lane each time until you move further down the timeline again (and again only the newest clip will populate the last lane instead of creating a new one).
Any time that happens I actually have to create a new empty Lane (or lanes) and drag those clips into then so it goes back to one clip per lane.
For you, and I am not 100% certain on this, I think if you want to force your new take into the same lane (or a desired target lane) you can use the Record Arm button on the target Lane. I recall that worked a little wonky in X2 and as noted I don't work like that but give that a try when you move down the timeline. I do TONS of takes so that would be impractical for me but if you are only doing one or a few should be pretty easy to manage the Lane Record buttons. Layers of course did not even have that option and I found the way they handled new incoming data really bizarre and unpredictable. I had a bugger of a time trying to find the takes I was looking for or they'd appear in inconvenient spots for editing. Often times when I tried to move them where I wanted so it made more sense I would get hangs, crashes and/or corrupted projects. There was some weird selection bug too in X1 that would select completely unrelated data elswhere in the project without me being aware thus destroying other work which I would not notice until the session was ruined. Very annoying.
2) I'd imagine the reason they put that in the Parent Track context menu is because it's tied directly to the Comping workflow. I guess it could be tucked into the Track Context menu but maybe they felt that one was getting a little too bloated as it is. I don't think I've ever used that option because as you say... unless you remove something manually or create a new lane manually, there is always going to be data in an auto generated Take Lanes. Even Flatten Comp doesn't remove data from lanes (like Flatten Layers did) so essentially "Remove Empty Lanes/Layers" has become mostly obsolete. It wasn't included at first and this is probably why but a lot of users demanded it be brought back. Not sure whether they were actually finding a use for it or if it was one of those "CHANGE IS SCARY!!" type things. Either way I'd rather have it than not because it of course can be used after deleting a bunch of stuff but it doesn't exactly fit into the comping workflow like Remove Empty Layers used to (which of course worked in conjunction with Flatten Layers).
3) Again, that would actually severely screw up my workflow. Flatten Layers totally doesn't exist anymore (and maybe it should for your style of workflow) but what you CAN do (and I do this often) is just use Flatten Comp then delete the original Lanes (well I do it a little different than that but the principle is the same). So let's say you have your desired one to two Lanes except they're scattered across a whole pile of lanes because you recorded 5 sections with 1-2 takes at each section. Your last recordings will be the ones in the Parent Track (unless you changed something) so flatten that first set of takes, go through and promote the next set of takes and again flatten. If you have another set of straggler takes left over just select those and flatten them to (you can flatten individual sections if they are disconnected from other sections). Now all your takes are in the top 2 or 3 Lanes and are now in a single clip across the whole song. Delete the rest of the Lanes, Unlock the comped clips and now you can Comp using those 2-3 clips/Lanes instead of a bunch of clips scattered across a ton of lanes.
But that probably isn't the most desirable workflow for what I think you want and perhaps a little more convoluted (it makes more sense when you have LOTS of takes for each section like I do).
So alternatively just go through section by section and Lasso Select your stacks of clips, Hold Shift then drag the lot of them down to very bottom lanes (which should be where your 1st set of takes are recorded). Once you've got all the takes/clips in the track jammed into the bottom lanes use the Remove Empty Lanes option to get rid of the empty lanes you just created. Not ideal and of course a Flatten Layers type option would be faster but I think they are nudging people away from that workflow and as noted Flatten Layers tended to be really unpredictable and buggy for me (and based on a lot of reports back when I first joined I was not alone).
Also, and this isn't going to help you, but I've actually started recording distinct sections into their own tracks. Like for my guitar leads instead of recording them all into the same track I'll create "Solo1, 2, 3, etc" then use Track/PC/FX presets to keep the tone consistent. This a) keeps the amount of lanes I have to look at at one time down (seriously... I do a LOT of takes) and b) helps me avoid using automation for basic track stuff (I hate automation in Sonar).
Not what you're looking for but just what I do and may help you or others navigate the issue. Maybe not.
4) As I said earlier I personally don't have or see a great need for single clip MIDI recording because the parent track works fine for this during tracking but sure... a special MIDI Loop Record/Single Clip mode would be cool... especially if that's what people want. I just don't want it disrupting existing workflows/methods. An independent feature/toolset seems like it would work better and fit in easier.
5) I actually do record section by section (especially when I'm writing... I usually rerecord full takes afterward in new tracks) and I record WAY more than 5 takes per section. Seriously I don't even think about it until after I've built up the part and am done tracking. At that point I create a few different comps (different versions of the tune or exact doubles but different performances which I can copy to other tracks for panning or whatever). After the comps are flatten I can totally ignore the original Lanes (I usually drag the comps to a new track and archive the original or clone the original, delete all the lanes except the Comps then archive the original). From there I might even sometimes create NEW comps from the comps I created (unlock the clips and comp them together). I find this is way better/more logical/faster than layers but that's subjective.
6) Arrangement is simply awkward in Sonar in general (thus the persistent cries for an arranger scheme). Craig wrote a good tut on how to do this effectively and it's very similar to how I do it but what I would prefer is a "Timeline" based arranger. Like a popup where you can define time blocks, right click to exclude tracks from selections/moves, define what happens upon a drag (fill hole, move over, overwrite, etc). Then you just drag those handles around. Biggest problem I though I see with arrangment is the fact Sonar gets FAR too cranky splitting and moving lots of data at once (which doesn't make a lot of sense because it's just a visual representation of the project but I guess it MUST keep itself ready for all the insane commands at ALL times... so in this Arrangement mode maybe a bunch of options should get suspended until the user clicks "Set Arrangement" or something... whatever). These were issues with Layers too AFAICT but Lanes and Comping do seem to get confused a little easier especially with a lot of data flying around. This is why IF I decide to go into "arranger" mode I try to work with as few clips as possible. So I'll record/program all the elements (just rough takes of everything), make sure everything is flattened/bounced so I'm starting with ONLY the bare minimum of clips required (no overlapping material/overdubs) all the "record" tracks are archived (or completely purged of extra lanes/clips) and THEN I do my arrangement. After the tune is flowing how I like I lock myself into that structure and retrack the finals and polish up any MIDI programming.
That of course is not desireable for those who want to arrange their FINAL versions that way but really Sonar simply just isn't very good at this stuff Layers/Lanes or otherwise.
7) Again I don't see the big deal about bouncing after the record part and I'm not even sure how layers would be better. They used to do some stupid/confusing crap to me when recording MIDI but I moved on to X2 before really doing an insane amount of MIDI with Layers. As far as the "sections" aspect... I'm not seeing how that makes it worse. You just record your followup sections then bounce them in with the previous bounced clip. Kind of like just adding to it section by section. Not really the type of workflow I go for. I just record my sections and wait until the end to bounce but I also don't really do MIDI Loop Record (but may start soon for some stuff I've been planning... I don't foresee any big problems though). But for sure. If Cake adds some new (but separate) features for these workflows I ain't gonna complain (as long as it doesn't break other stuff).
8) I'm not sure what you're saying here. That doesn't actually make sense. Having multiple sections of clips in a lane would not affect the soloed comps or the comping function at all. If someone said that either they don't understand what's up or it was misconstrued. I literally don't know how to respond to that.
In fact the Lanes Solo button thing is a bit of an annoyance to me because you can only solo one Lane at a time (I requested that be changed). That's because I DO actually work in sections sometimes within the same track so I'll record and comp a section at the start of the song and that goes into a lane then I'll create and comp another section, flatten that (without including the first section), that goes in another lane and so on. By only being able to solo one lane at a time I either have to a) Move the Comps all on the same Lane (I don't like that for multiple reasons), b) UnSolo the soloed Lane and mute all the "Promoted clips" in the original comps (which I don't like doing because I like to see what was used for what and if I do that I have to make a bunch of elaborate notes) or c) Go and mute ALL the lanes with active/audible clips in them (which in a track with DOZENS of lanes is a PITA because you can't just select them all, hold Ctrl and click a single mute button... you have to mute each independently). This is part of the reason why I clone and archive the original (to preserve the original takes/comps) then delete everything but the comps in the clone or drag the comps into a new track and archive the original (or leave it active to create new comps from the source material). But the other reason is doing that stuff saves sytem resources and cleans up the screen.
But whatever... that's not even really related I guess (or maybe is... because I really don't know why people would say that). With minimal takes though and if one doesn't care about not seeing which clips were used in the comp(s) you can just unsolo the comp lane then mute all the clips that were used in the comp (so you don't have the original clips AND the comp playing at the same time). Really though I wish they worked on that Solo Lane thing. I get the logic behind it but not allowing multiple Lanes to be soloed ignores some of the more complex workflows. Easily manageable (relatively) but still could solve a LOT of the technical problems people have. Also I think that action causes a buttload of extra confusion about the process too.
Anyhoo... as always that's not me telling you what to do or trying to be a smartypants. You, as always, made a very clear case in general and describe your issues. I just wanted to point out some of the ways around these things, some of the logic behind it (which really isn't all that apparent oft times) and acknowledge where some of the REAL problems exist where there ARE no Baked in "as designed" workflows or workarounds.
That's the thing... there ARE problems with Lanes and with Comping and they need to be addressed. Problem is there is SOOO much confusion as to what is doing what that those problems are severely obscured by said confusion. It's a delicate workflow/technique that takes a while to master so in the meantime people get frustrated then think the GOOD design features are bugs or outright crap and don't recognize the real problems.
I gotta say (and I said it at the start when they first realised Comp Mode) it's all extraordinarily clever BUT perhaps just a little TOO clever for folks used to the more traditional methods. It REALLY needs to be driven home that the workflow has to be studied and Cake needs to create some much more comprehensive educational material for it all.
A huge part of my knowledge about Lanes and Comping comes from brute force experimentation and a need to get tracks off to collaborators. When they were first introduced I had to simply turn them off until I had time to give myself a crash course and I am STILL learning new tricks all the time.
Meh... hopefully some of this will help someone somewhere.
Cheers.