Beepster

Edit:  To avoid the sense of "hit and run" and leaving it at the glib "+!", here are some things I liked before with layers: - screen real estate:  using the track space with all the layers - screen real estate:  being able to see multiple tracks with layers at one time - workflow:  rebuild function  - workflow:  cross-fading clips between layers was easier - workflow:  quick toggle for layer display without tracks shifting to accommodate - and others that I can't think of off-hand

Okay... I'll give this a shot.

- screen real estate:  using the track space with all the layers

Not sure what you mean by that.

screen real estate:  being able to see multiple tracks with layers at one time

You can but you have to disable Auto Zoom. This can be done with Shift + Z to avoid having to go into the Track View menus every time.

workflow:  rebuild function

Yeah that should be reintroduced but selecting and bouncing to clips works or just holding Shift and dragging the clips into the lane you want isn't THAT much of a pain.

workflow:  cross-fading clips between layers was easier

I don't see how. It works almost exactly the same as before with manual fades as far as I can tell and the auto crossfade feature (which I never used before X2 admittedly) is just a matter of enabling it/choosing the desired X-Fade in the Track View Options Menu.

workflow:  quick toggle for layer display without tracks shifting to accommodate - and others that I can't think of off-hand

Again I think this is solved by turning off Auto Zoom (if I'm understanding the issue correctly).

Auto Zoom is kind of a pain in the Bleeples in many situations. Toggling it is something I've gotten into the habit of doing. However I find I leave it off most of the time. We didn't even have that feature in X1 so it's no big loss but it is nice to have when I want to use it.

Cheers.

Thanks Beepster, I know you are trying to be helpful, and in some of your responses you needed clarification.  SO here it is:


- screen real estate:  using the track space with all the layers 

Previously, when you toggled a track's view to display layers, the space that the track occupied exactly equalled the space allocated to layers.  A bit like what you experience now with envelopes when you toggle the view for display within the track (as opposed to across several lanes, which you can also do with envelope lanes).  Those two options for viewing you have with envelopes each have their uses.  One provides a quick-edit convenience without changing track heights, and the other offers greater clarity on an individual envelope basis.  I like both, and most often I want my track heights to stay as is as I quickly toggle views from track to track.



screen real estate:  being able to see multiple tracks with layers at one time 

When I'm composing an idea, I may use several takes for (say) guitar on one track, and then on another track several takes for bass, and maybe several keyboard takes on another.  With layers I can view all three tracks easily on one screen at the SAME TIME.  I can then toggle their respective layer views and my selection of takes on one track might be influenced by what I select on another track.  In X1 layers this was easily possible.  In X2 this is pretty much impossible to do.



workflow:  rebuild function 

Quoting your response here: "Yeah that should be reintroduced but selecting and bouncing to clips works or just holding Shift and dragging the clips into the lane you want isn't THAT much of a pain."

Actually, if you are quickly jumping across layers and making fast edits on a long song, then the rebuild function is supremely convenient.  But I agree that this could/should be added as a feature for the new lanes paradigm and is not something that is predicated on the existence of layers.


workflow:  cross-fading clips between layers was easier 

Quoting you:   "I don't see how. It works almost exactly the same as before with manual fades as far as I can tell and the auto crossfade feature (which I never used before X2 admittedly) is just a matter of enabling it/choosing the desired X-Fade in the Track View Options Menu."

I'm not so sure I agree that it is the same but it is entirely possible that I have missed an option to enable this feature.  Note that I already have auto-crossfades turned on.  My issue is that I used to be able to drag the edges of two separate clips that existed on two different layers in one go.  I'd love to be able to do that again and I have to believe it's there somewhere still because surely more people would complain about it.

workflow:  quick toggle for layer display without tracks shifting to accommodate


See my first point above.  When I toggle between layers and non-layers view in X1, all the tracks stay exactly where they are on the screen.  I can no longer do this with take lanes and it slows down MY workflow.  Maybe no one else's, but it's been a nuisance for me.

Basically, what stratman70 said above. My problem is with the poor implementation. The GLARING bugs that I'm somewhat baffled made it through to the official release and now even into the update. Quirky bugs like dragging a clip to an empty lane causing overlapping clips in another lane to drop down to the same lane w/ the clip that you just moved. Then that problem becomes more convoluted due to ANOTHER bug that causes overlapping clips to be destructive to each other.  So you can't just simply drag the clip back to the original lane it was in b/c now it's taking the piece of the other overlapping clip along w/ it.  So you then have to start cropping clips to avoid the mess.  That's just one example. There's more. And yes, I've reported the bug.
 
@beepster I understand you're happy w/ Take Lanes and that's great for you, but saying stuff like "Everything works" is just not accurate. I appreciate your willingness to offer workarounds but I've pretty much figured out workarounds for most of the issues I have w/ Take Lanes. The fact that you need workarounds IS the very problem. Workarounds are inconvenient and counterproductive to workflow.

Beepster


I think the current incarnation is just a launchpad for future versions. Yeah, they got a way to go but I gotta say as an outsider coming in the layers thing was pretty wacky and not very professional. Something needed to be done and it seems they decided to rip off the band aid real quick. Sadly I think we're stuck with them more or less as they are until X3 comes out.

Cheers.

That's the problem there are too many "launchpads" in the X series.  Waiting 2 or 3+ version's for various things to be brought up to par or just too get back to what we had, is simply too long especially now that development times are up to 18 months between versions.
 
Dan

stratman70


The whole point that a few folks here seem to keep missing is "you do not completely remove a feature that many liked and replace it with a half baked-almost there version of the same thing.
 
If your going to replace it-do it right. It's not a matter of "someone showing us how" I know how, I don't like it as it exists today.
Simple again.
 
Yes, I vote go forward-not backwards - But IMHO they went sideways-That's all-not trying to start a rumble here. Jsut the facts.
 

Totally agree.
 
Dan

Thanks Beepster, I know you are trying to be helpful, and in some of your responses you needed clarification.  SO here it is:

Right on. I do try. I'm having a bit of a hard time visualizing your workflow so I don't think I can be of much more use (if I was at all). IDK... I really do prefer them but as I said as a relative newcomer to Sonar and having spent approx. equal time with both I never got too entrenched into the Layers method. At first I really liked them coming from an ancient version of Nuendo which didn't have any kind of layers or lanes but once I dug into Layers it just turned into a mess. I think a lot of the problem is it is such a drastic change for guys like yourself it's too much of a radical change all at once. Add to that the bugs and quirky behavior and I can definitely see it being a huge hassle. I hope eventually they get fixed up to a point you find them useable. Cheers.

@beepster I understand you're happy w/ Take Lanes and that's great for you, but saying stuff like "Everything works" is just not accurate. I appreciate your willingness to offer workarounds but I've pretty much figured out workarounds for most of the issues I have w/ Take Lanes. The fact that you need workarounds IS the very problem. Workarounds are inconvenient and counterproductive to workflow.

See that's the thing... for me personally they aren't workarounds. They are more of a natural workflow. I was just using the term workaround for those having problems. Aside from the bugs (which I bloody well hope are gonna get patched soon) and the odd design flaws (minimum height, no option to hide without deleting, etc...) it's really smooth going here. Again though that can be attributed to me not having used layers for years as many others have. I wonder what a survey on lanes of newish users vs. old school users would show in regards to preferences. Cheers. 

> The whole point that a few folks here seem to keep missing is "you do not completely remove a feature that many liked and replace it with a half baked-almost there version of the same thing.
 
I agree but it's fruitless complaining about it. What is done is done. Even companies like Apple do it (replaced google maps with their own half baked version, and apologised afterwards when people couldn't reinstall google maps at the time). So now we have to live with this (tempting, but there is no point in moaning).

I feel take lanes could be great... but sadly the feature needs to go much further for it to be truly useful.

Cake I hope you are listening. I hope by X2B or X2C you will have this in the bag. You've got the right idea but it needs to be developed further.
 
(and PS PLEASE give me the ability to QUICKLY rename a project within the UI).

I keep thinking that if the Lanes at least looked drastically different from Tracks, that would be a start. Then, fix auto-zoom weirdness, Mute weirdness, editing weirdness, Gain automation weirdness and anything else I missed. How did anyone at Cakewalk not spend some time here and hold up the release a bit longer to fix these issues? Or, how did they not find these issues? These are some very seriously easy bugs/issues weirdnesses to catch, and bad enough not to move forward with Lanes or to hold up X2's release until they were better prepared. 

X2 feels so rushed to the market. Personally, I don't want to see an X2b patch until some of the most basic bugs and weirdnesses are FIXED, or at least addressed. I go through the lists of bug-fixes and such for each patch, and the only detailed fixes are very obscure bugs that were fixed, but the most major things were stated as "Fixes and enhancements". I would honestly like to see that list. 

That's the problem there are too many "launchpads" in the X series.  Waiting 2 or 3+ version's for various things to be brought up to par or just too get back to what we had, is simply too long especially now that development times are up to 18 months between versions.   Dan

That is definitely a problem. I like X1/2 but I seem to have stumbled into the Sonar world at a rather hectic period of it's life. I've heard many here talk about the 8.whatever versions and I think I would have liked it very much... but I wanted something modern so that's what I got.

They really need to get the next patch going though. I've been working through the manual and an alarming amount of features detailed in it just simply do not work. It's rather frustrating spending so much time learning stuff only to have it do absolutely nothing. Fortunately most of the meat and potatoes stuff does what I need it to. Kind of want a notation patch though even if it is paid and comes from a third party. I was hoping that feature would help me hone my traditional theory skills but from my limited experience with it and the numerous complaints I decided to just bypass it entirely.

Cheers. 

These are some very seriously easy bugs/issues weirdnesses to catch

What they should have done is had a couple guys on a couple different systems do what I've been doing. Work through every single step of the manual (not just the tuts) and weeded out all the quirks. Why this type of alpha testing was not done I have no idea. I got through a full third of the manual in a couple weeks and I'm a beginner so I was taking my time and taking notes along the way. One of those smart Baker dudes could have just burned through it in a week. I was gonna take notes of every bug I found and report them but that would have slowed me down even further. I don't have time to for that. I've got music to make.