SONAR Reconsideration 1.2 TRACK VIEW - clips, grooves, linking

The first part on Track view is here: http://forum.cakewalk.com/SONAR-Reconsideration-11-TRACK-VIEW-Colors-m3026804.aspx
 
1.2.1 MIDI Groove clips.
 
First of all, to be consistent, looping must work on midi clips, like it does on audio-clips and step-sequencer clips in Sonar and on midi clips in other DAWs. In other words, stretching midi groove clip must be a quick way to create LINKED repetitions. Because now, if you want to get the 8-times repeated linked fragment, you must copy it 8 times with “copy as linked” option enabled, instead of just stretching in to the point you need. On the other hand, if you want to create UNLINKED repeated fragments (that is how midi-groove looping works now) you can easily stretch it while being linked and then bounce them in one click to unlink. Having groove clips unlinked is illogical and just brings a mess to the workflow – they look different, but in fact they are just like simple MIDI clips and behave different that looped step-sequencer and audioclips. Moreover, midi groove-clip looping must be enabled on each new clip by default (a la Reaper). Default slip-editing of existing none-groove clip is almost useless, especially stretching it out - it just yields an empty area. On the other hand, many of us work in patterns, so making a fragment and then repeating it several times is the way to go. There also should be a loop repetition line indicator inside piano roll to give us full control of loop (look like it’s done in Reaper)
 
 

 1.2.4  A desirable option for me - to be able to completely hide all muted clips from track view, not only in inline piano roll mode (e.g., useful when you don’t want to see them cause you don’t use them in your current arrangement, but want to keep them in place just in case you want to change something)
 
1.2.5.   Midi clips snap offset. Audio clips have it, why midi don’t? For example, I have a humanized midi piece that starts slightly before the measure line, but I want it to snap to measure to more easily arrange them.
 
1.2.6.  A little underregulated is creation of new MIDI clip. What if I already have an existing clip, but want the new note to be a part of new clip? If I get it right, Sonar creates a new clip, if new note is more than a one beat wide from previous. But what if I want clips to contact or even partially overlap? Of cause, I can data-lock already existing clip, like I used to do it in Sonar 8.5.3, create new clip and then unlock the old one, but this definitely doesn't seem like the most elegant way to do it.
 
1.2.7.   Step sequencer clips. I guess, if midi clips are now at last unified between PR and SS view (i.e. you can select in which view to open them and they are automatically converted), “Convert Midi clips to Step Sequencer” entry can be removed from the clip’s context menu.
 

1.2.9. Midi Clip FX bouncing
- Say, I have an FX in several clips' bins on track and want to apply them to clips. If they were in the track bin, I'd go to “Process - apply effect”, but in case with clip FX bins this option is inactive! Why?
If I select them all at once and use “bounce to clip”, I will bounce everything to single clip and lose my clip structure. Therefore, the only way I can apply FX is to select each clip separately and bounce it. And, anyway, there’s no way to apply FX to clips and keep them as grooves!
- Also, when bouncing groove midi clips, they also lose their pitch information without corresponding transposition.  
 
1.2.10. When bouncing / applying audio effects to clip, resulting new clip must inherit its name from predecessor. Why must I rename it every time I perform such operation? 
 
1.2.11. FX bins of linked clips should be also linked. The idea is to keep them synchronized, isn’t it? So, if I want to apply FX, why must I do it separately for each repetition? I should be able to apply FX to one of the linked clips and others must follow the changes, preserving "linked" state after it. In case I want to apply FX separately, I can first unlink the clip I need, that's all. It seems more logical to me. At least we could have such option in .ini file.  
 
1.2.12. In SonarX, you can bypass clip’s FX bin (audio/midi), but there’s no any indication of is FX bin active or bypassed! – “FX” mark looks the same in both cases. In Sonar 8.5.3 bypassed status was clearly visible. 
 
1.2.13.- BUG? When applying audio effects from track FX into linked audio clips, it actually applies to only one of them, and this clip loses link with others. Others remain unchanged. For comparison: when doing the same for midi clips, applying FX affects all linked clips on track and they remain linked after this = proper behavior. Don't know if it is a bug or it's conceived to work this way, which is rather weird in my opinion.
 

Jekyll Vance
The first part on Track view is here: http://forum.cakewalk.com/SONAR-Reconsideration-11-TRACK-VIEW-Colors-m3026804.aspx
 
1.2.1 MIDI Groove clips.
 
First of all, to be consistent, looping must work on midi clips, like it does on audio-clips and step-sequencer clips in Sonar and on midi clips in other DAWs. In other words, stretching midi clip must be a quick way to create LINKED repetitions. Because now, if you want to get the 8-times repeated linked fragment, you must copy it 8 times with “copy as linked” option enabled, instead of just stretching in to the point you need. On the other hand, if you want to create UNLINKED repeated fragments (that is how midi-groove looping works now) you can easily stretch it while being linked and then bounce them in one click to unlink. Having groove clips unlinked is illogical and just brings a mess to the workflow – they look different, but in fact they are just like simple MIDI clips and behave different that looped step-sequencer and audioclips. Moreover, midi groove-clip looping must be enabled on each new clip by default (a la Reaper). Default slip-editing of existing none-groove clip is almost useless, especially stretching it out - it just yields an empty area. On the other hand, many of us work in patterns, so making a fragment and then repeating it several times is the way to go. There also should be a loop repetition line indicator inside piano roll to give us full control of loop (look like it’s done in Reaper)
 
 

You need to make the clip a grove clip and then you can stretch it out for looping. 

Jekyll Vance

John
You need to make the clip a grove clip and then you can stretch it out for looping. 

John, I know it. Please pay attention - the point is that I cannot create linked repetitions this way. When stretching audio loop, for example, every repetition is linked with other (editing one repetition affects all the others). Midi grooves in Sonar behave differently and that's misleading and unconvenient, as I described above. Moreover, making grooves from clips each time I need it is time-consuming, grooves must be enabled by defaut, because there's a liitle use in stretching regular midi clips anyway. Agreed?

Its hard to follow you. And I don't have to pay attention. I have no idea what you are asking or why. Nor am I going to read everything you wrote. Simplify it and you may get more responses. 

Jlien X
 
I've read some of your posts here and in the other thread, and you seem to make good points. It's a shame you decided to put all these together to make two (or more) long threads.

I have done this also. But we must (please) remember, he told us from the beginning that English is not his native language. So let us give him the benefit of the doubt here, and allow him to go into detail so that he knows he's getting his point across.
 
Now here is the kicker, we all know who frequent these threads. I am willing to bet they have read it too. And they may have come to the same conclusions as Jlien and I have. Jekyll has some good points, ideas, suggestions.
 
As to the long threads, I'm ok with it. He's giving a lot of info in them. And I am interested to hear what he has to say. He's has evidently spent a lot of time to try and explain his position.
 
@ Jekyll: Good info your giving here. I'm listening!!

Again about Groove MIDI Clips in other words, John made me a little desperate that noone understands what I'm talking about. Now with steps to follow.
My goal (quite simple and usual in my workflow): to make a short synth bass sequence, repeated eight times. Repeats must be linked with each other, in the way that if I change my mind later and decide that second note in sequence must be G, and not D, I will only have to change it in first repeat and other will follow automatically.
 
The best way to do it (like it works in Reaper):
1. I make up some note sequence.
2. I stretch the end of midi-clip to the point I want the sequence to last. Linked repeats are automatically produced up to this point. That's all. There's also loop repeat line indicator in piano roll view that determines repeats' length, that can be adjusted this way even after the stretching is done.

 
Step-sequencer clips in Sonar work similar to Reaper. But piano-roll midi clips behave different.
 
The way I have to do it in Sonar with piano-roll clips:
1. I make up some note sequence in piano roll
2. I stretch the end of midi clip to the desired length.
3. I copy my clip.
4. I paste my clip eight times in a row, each time confirming "create linked clips" option. I have to be careful  when pasting to align everything properly with grid.
5. I create a selection group for them to behave as a whole.
As a result, I have eight linked clips at last. That's the only way to do it and far more tedious than it could be.
 
It seems like groove clips were invented exactly for that purpose, but I cannot do it with groove midi clips in Sonar, let's see what happens if I try:
1. I make up some note sequence in piano roll,
2. I right-click my clip and enable groove-clip looping.
3. I stretch the end of midi clip to the point I want the sequence to last...
4. I end up with several repeats of my sequence, but they are not linked, i.e. when I change note in repeat 1, repeat 2 and others remain unchanged.  In this sense, groove midi clips make no difference with simple midi clips. And that's just illogical, because both step sequencer and audio groove clips show linked repeats behaviour (try to stretch audio groove clip, then apply some audio FX only to one region of it and see for yourself - every repeat will change accordingly).
 
So, in my opinion groove midi clips should be enabled by default on midi clips and must produce linked repeats.
I hope I made myself clear this time.
Peace!
 

I too have rolled out a groove clip and wanted to change the odd note here and there. I thought that there must be an easy way of doing this and I just hadn't found help files on how to do it. If this really is the case, that you cannot edit a single note within rolled out groove clips without affecting the other clips, then I think it might be a good feature to have and I'm surprised it's not there.
Could someone please post if this is possible, this is not my strong point and I would like to know (now that someone else has raised the issue).
KPerry, does this workaround not affect all the notes you have rolled out, or can you just alter one note within the x number of bars you have created?
 
I do agree with Jlien, please just post one issue at a time. For someone who has to really concentrate in order to understand and work through what you are trying to accomplish, it just makes it easier to work with you on these issues.

Ok, thanks Kevin. I thought it must be available I just hadn't worked it out yet.

Jekyll Vance
4. I end up with several repeats of my sequence, but they are not linked,i.e. when I change note in repeat 1, repeat 2 and others remain unchanged.  In this sense, groove midi clips make no difference with simple midi clips. And that's just illogical, because both step sequencer and audio groove clips show linked repeats behaviour

 
Ah, now I remember why I stopped using groove-clip looping. You're right, the repeat portions should be linked to the original (but I wouldn't say groove-clip looping should be enabled by default). Maybe it's a bug. Report to CW and if they say it's an intended behavior, they normally forward it to the feature request department on your behalf.
 

Jekyll Vance
I have to be careful  when pasting to align everything properly with grid.

 
I suggest you set "Measure" for secondary Snap to Grid resolution and hold down the N key when you copy the clip (I, in contrast, use "Measure" for grobal snap resolution and "1/16" for secondary snap resolution).
http://www.cakewalk.com/Documentation/default.aspx?Doc=SONAR+X2&Lang=EN&Req=Arranging.28.html
 

Jlien X was simply stating the best way of managing your time and energies within the forum, and while everyone who is interested may contribute or not, just remember that Feature Request is the vehicle for change, not this forum :)
 
On the topic of midi groove clip looping, IMO there is no right answer.
 
What Sonar does right now makes perfect sense to me since you create the groove clip at the time you CTRL L. Everything afterwards is in line editing. 
 
There are many ways to work. I understand how Sonar does midi groove clip looping and use it to advantage. My most typical use is to execute groove clip looping then edit inline for variation across multiple repeats. So this WORKS for me.
 
If i wish to change the fundamental pattern, rolling back, CTL L, edit, CTL L, and roll out is really not a big deal at all.
 
So, 
1. Making changes in the first pattern affect all other instances by default, or always, is certainly NOT a good idea. 2. Adding the capability option to do so is a fine idea,
3. Given that typical use can easily be the requirement to do both types of editing, then be aware that this may require an extra popup dialog of "do you wish to replace all instances of this groove clip" when you press CTL L to recreate the new groove clip. This then would slow down ALL groove clip looping by one click...since we are really just discussing a couple of clicks and drags here anyway :)
 
regards.
 
 

Jlien X
Hello again. My advice is...
 

• if you simply want to make a request to add, modify or remove a feature, submit a feature request from here: http://www.cakewalk.com/support/contact/featurerequest.aspx
• if you are wondering if the issue you've found is a bug or not, submit a bug report from here and if you want to share the info with us, start a new thread about it:
  http://www.cakewalk.com/support/contact/problemreport.aspx
• if you want to discuss the current implementation of a certain feature or need advice, workarounds, etc., start a new thread only with that particular topic (I recommend one or two topics a day at most)