I did not do enough with layers in the past to recall their functionality well. What "features" of the layers are desired? I am not clear on this, so reading this thread confuses me more than helps me understand.
 
I agree 100% with Sylvan's point in that takes are takes... they get comped to a track, and the track is then edited. I am confused how/why this is not sufficient?
 
Edit: Brian's post came up after I submitted this, so understand the FX bin point. I guess I am still confused with the "take comment"... if things are "that diverse," trying to 'splice them' just makes no sense to me. A "take" should be repetitions of "damn near" the same content (to me anyway, perhaps I am naïve).

Clips are not always different takes of the same content.  They might be a bunch of weird sound effects, for example.  Clip effects can be interesting. 
 
A take is a take, but the clips in a given track might not be takes.
 
At any rate, all I am trying to get across is that the new take lanes with comping mode paradigm is much more efficient for specific uses, but less efficient for many unforeseen uses. 
 
As a tool, the new paradigm is more like a "nail gun", while the old paradigm was a "hammer".  A nail gun is far better at fastening things with nails, but a hammer can be used as a weapon, a lever, firewood, for juggling, a fire prod, a general bashing tool, etc etc.

Something I used to use the layers for was creating many layers of a single "part" of a multi-part harmony or even several layers for each of a number of these vocals.  This way I was able to use the one bus, the one EQ, the one comp - whatever and collapse the whole thing so I didn't have to look at it if I didn't want to.  I sometimes would use layers to comp a part together, but at least as often use a number of layers to create and overall single/multi part, whether layering a bunch of guitar notes to create a harmony Brian May style or a vocal stack or whatever.  It sure beat having 16 individual tracks in a folder - unless folders were nest-able, which would accomplish a similarfeat, I suppose.
 
I think this is one of the points that I miss in the new comping model.  I haven't even really gotten a chance to use the new model yet, but I know that I will wish that I had a good way to stack a bunch of parts again without having to create a bunch of separate tracks.
 
That said, from what I've seen, the new comping methods look pretty cool so far.

Blades
Something I used to use the layers for was creating many layers of a single "part" of a multi-part harmony or even several layers for each of a number of these vocals.  This way I was able to use the one bus, the one EQ, the one comp - whatever and collapse the whole thing so I didn't have to look at it if I didn't want to.  I sometimes would use layers to comp a part together, but at least as often use a number of layers to create and overall single/multi part, whether layering a bunch of guitar notes to create a harmony Brian May style or a vocal stack or whatever.

I must be missing something. What about the current structure doesn't allow you to do this? You can record clips directly into lanes, or bring clips from tracks into the different lanes for processing by a single effect/bus. Clips within a lane can be slip-edited, have fades added, be split, you can insert effects into individual clips, etc. If multiple clips are selected, you can do things like add a fade to one of them and that fade will be added to all selected tracks. The only real limitations I'm seeing are:
 
1. If clips overlap on the same lane, only the top one is audible. However, you can add another lane and move the overlapping clip into it if you want to hear that clip and the clip it overlapped.
2. The composite waveform shown in the main track is the sum of all clips that play simultaneously, which means it looks like it's clipping. (When you hide the take lanes, as far as I can tell the display gives priority to whatever clips are selected, and if no clips are selected, it shows the lowest take that's not muted.)
3. You cannot create a folder and put the Lanes in it, but as you can fold/hide the Lanes into the main track, this doesn't seem particularly useful anyway as the main track is already a "folder track" of sorts.
 
What am I not seeing? I realize pretty much everyone understands the benefits of the current structure for comping, but I am genuinely confused about what makes Take Lanes unusable for the kind of functionality you describe.

I will need to open up one of the files that I was doing this with and see what it looks like when the layers are turned into whatever-they-are-turned-into.  I don't really have a current example of what I want to do, so I'm not sure that the new method won't do what I'm describing.  I asked in another thread when X3 first appeared, but the query wasn't answered so I still don't really know if it will work "my way".
 
Short version: I want to be able to easily collapse a number of vocal takes that are designed to be a stack.  Let's say I have a three part harmony and I want 5 voices (mine) on each of the 3 parts.  In my method, I'd have 3 tracks with 5 layers each or possible 1 track with 15 layers.  What would I have today?  The same?  Or would have I have to have 15 separate tracks to get the overlapping thing going?  Again - easily.  I'm not sure because I haven't had the time to play with it this way yet.
 
My old way, I'd just EQ each of the three vocal parts with 1 EQ.  If I wanted to automate something like panning for the whole background stack, I just did the automation on one or maybe up to three tracks - not 15 tracks of automation (can you do an automation envelope on a folder?).  I'd send all three tracks to a bus where I could add the right verb or whatever (same in today's version, I suppose).  I'd have all three tracks in a folder called backup vocals. 
 
Neat, clean, simple, fast, efficient on CPU, etc.
 
Does the new way accommodate this workflow/layout?

mike_mccue
Thanks Keni,
 I just logged a feature request for the same thing.
 
 Best regards and happy holidays,
mike
 
 
 
 
spelling

 

Good Goin MIKE...
 
Maybe if enough of us really dig in they will yield! ;-)
 
Keni

brian brock
at first I disliked the edit filter, but I've come to use it quite a bit now.  I don't always actually click on it, but I shift-click automation envelopes and clips to bring them to the front all the time.  I use the edit filter drop-down to make clip automation (I still think doing it this way is a mixing-up of the clip/track hierarchy, but at least it works), and to switch between notes/clips on midi tracks.
 
Using it to show layers would make sense, as the layers can be thought of as simply another way of looking at the audio on the track.  One problem would actually be with clip automation, which couldn't be shown on layered clips.  Ideally, the layers filter would be a check-box in the Edit Filter drop down list, so that it could be turned on and off independently from the other parameters.

I still dislike it... I've learned to use it and the various shortcuts because I must...
 
But if they bring back layers and make it work through there, I'll learn to love the edit filter! ;-)
 
Keni
 

Anderton

brian brock
at first I disliked the edit filter, but I've come to use it quite a bit now.

I really got into the Edit Filter when I discovered you could quick group the setting. So I could have a mess of some clips with clip automation, some showing transients, some clips, some automation, etc. and return them to a consistent setting with a single ctrl-click. This is a HUGE time-saver (although if you do this during playback, the audio will glitch momentarily).

Yes... this is a benefit... there are a few, but the overall methodology has slowed me down... Too bad they didn't take the approach they did with envelopes giving us both the old (well, not so old, I'm not thrilled with the changes they made to it's appearance when not using envelope lanes) and the new...
 
Keni
 

Anderton

Sylvan
I guess I am the odd man out. Take lanes is working fantastic for me. I am comping loads of vocals for a local artist in my area and am zipping through with no problems.

I will mention that when I use Take Lanes that I make a distinction in my mind that Take Lanes are not Tracks and and don't treat them like Tracks. With that mind set, it has allowed me to really be productive which using this feature.

For me, speed comping is a fantastic feature. I think the problem people have is that with Layers, you could sorta comp, and sorta edit. With Take Layers, you can comp really, really well...edit, not so much. You are 100% correct that these are Take Lanes and not Edit Lanes.
 
As to whether there could be an option for both, I don't do coding. However, my gut tells me that lanes and layers are fundamental areas of the program, so messing with them could be opening a Pandora's box...

There are some aspects of it that work well for certain jobs, but the comping method doesn't work well for most of my needs... and yes, editing is a royal pain!
 
I'm sure having both must be difficult or they probably would have left it there...
 
But no one ever said this work was gonna be easy! ;-)
 
I can burn through my editing and comping (not discussing multi-track comping as I don't have much need for that) fast as lightning with layers... Lanes fight me at every turn...
 
Yes, I understand their' use... It's not that I don't know how to use them, it's that it doesn't work for me in my situations...
 
I'm sure I can learn more about them, but that's not gonna please me as their basic working right now gets in the way for me....
 
Keni
 
Keni
 

Sylvan
I too feel that bringing back layers would be a huge backward step. The key to moving forward with lanes is knowing that they are not individual tracks, but the the sum of several lanes make a single track. This makes all the difference in benefitting from this awesome feature. Lets keep moving forward.

Having extra tools is never a step backwards... I'm glad you're happy with Lanes and I'm not asking for them to be replaced... I did not ask for Layers to be replaced...
 
I don't use them as tracks... If I wanted tracks I could record to separate tracks... I understand the work model but it (currently) doesn't work for me and giving up an extra year or more of my life waiting for them to maybe come up with a solution to use Lanes the way I need Layers has been attrocuious for me... Making me give up tools that worked for me and replacing them with tools that don't is a BIG step backwards for me!
 
Keni