Always interesting to see different working methods.

Steve, do you understand the way the rebuild function worked? Whenever I used it it always seemed to jumble the layers into some sort of order usually not how I wanted it. I could never see a logic. If I could that may have helped - I think it might have been clip length based?

I got so I daren't use it. I'd love to see a user configurable rebuild function though. One that would sort them into order perhaps using a 'flagging' method where a user could flag a clip or layer's priority. Or based on recording order perhaps.

I can see how the rebuild function would work well for you in the method you've described but for me where I had full length takes it always just jumbled them up. When you need as many takes as I do that's a real pain.

FastBikerBoy


Always interesting to see different working methods.

Steve, do you understand the way the rebuild function worked? Whenever I used it it always seemed to jumble the layers into some sort of order usually not how I wanted it. I could never see a logic. If I could that may have helped - I think it might have been clip length based?

I got so I daren't use it. I'd love to see a user configurable rebuild function though. One that would sort them into order perhaps using a 'flagging' method where a user could flag a clip or layer's priority. Or based on recording order perhaps.

I can see how the rebuild function would work well for you in the method you've described but for me where I had full length takes it always just jumbled them up. When you need as many takes as I do that's a real pain.

 
Karl, I understand what you're saying, but all I want to be left with are the clips that are going into the final mixdown.
 
I'll generally make a copy of the project that's completely unedited and uncomped in case I do make a rick somewhere and delete off the wrong bit. But I like to have each track at mixdown in the 'live' version of a project only containing the audio I want - and as far as keeping the project tidy but still editable, that means the only step I don't perform is to bounce each track to one clip.
 
Using X1 Rebuild in my method, and even with overlapping clips, I am generally left with a maximum of just two Layers per track.
 
To do this in Lanes, I would need to do a lot of dragging - in fact, my workflow (apart from the initial set up) would probably be much quicker if I used completely separate tracks and bounced them all together at the end of the process.
 
 

While I appreciate your comments FBB, as someone who has made extensive use of layers and now lanes, I have to respectfully disagree with a few points:
 

• They have gained
  
  
  1. Improved Solo mute buttons  My workflow was much better when I could swipe over all (or any combination of) mute or solo buttons in layers and engage/disengage with one button press.  The one button press solo lane is nice, but it is limiting compared to the way layers behaved. Layers also allowed me to solo more than one track.  This functionality made it convenient to designate one layer as the "master comp" layer and listen to the comped sections while auditioning other layers with another solo button engaged.  Another advantage with multiple solos (or multiple mutes) was the ability to compare takes for sake of creating a second comp.  You could get a second "background vocal" take to use for some nice phase/chorus effects by comparing other takes that were similar in timing.  With lanes, I have to move the audio data to a new track (which becomes a workflow issue if there isn't much screen real estate left due to the fact that lanes don't rebuild).
  2. Ability to display different data types in each take ie. clips in one transients in another or inline PRV and clips If "Take Lanes" by definition is for capturing takes and comping, then displaying different data types using edit filters is not necessary.  Edit filters can be used on the final comped track.  Why would anyone need to display prv and clips in a take lane?  As a frequent user of layers/lanes, I've never once needed this feature.  Has anyone else?
  3. Ability to drag re-order This was easily done with layers by "Shift+dragging".  No advantage for lanes here.
  4. Ability to rename a take It was easy to rename the clip in the layer by going into the clip properties. Not a big advantage for lanes here either.
  5. Ability to include notes about a take. This is nice, but I had no problem using the track description space in X1 and previos to keep all my notes in one place.
  6. Ability to record into a chosen lane This is a taste factor.  I can see how someone might like this, but I preferred simply pressing record and rebuilding the layers.  It saved screen real estate, and by not "knowing" where the new take was, it required me to "listen" for the best take and not assume the new one was best.

@Steve,
 
Thanks for your descriptive use of layers.  I also used the rebuild function for this and my "master comp" layer would be the final "rebuild". 
 
On another note, it seems that people didn't like rebuilding because it often changed the order of the takes.  This was not an issue for me... if anything it was a feature.  Let me explain:
 
(This is simply my preferred method of being creative, I understand many others don't do this). When soloing, I almost never write out my solos.  Instead, I prefer to just "jam" to the song and allow some spontanaeity to creep in.  Any of the solo takes might be good enough as a single "take", but I like to take it one step further and pick different parts out of different solos that create something bigger than just "another wanking solo".  By taking different parts from different solos, I get to "write" a solo that is more musical and melodic, with crescendos and resolves that "taste better" than a totally improvised solo but retain the live spontanaeity of an improvised performance.  Using the rebuild function to randomly organize parts after I have cut out parts I don't want is a "feature" in that I can't assume anything, and I have to "listen" for the best part again.  If I want to keep a specific part, then I can shift+drag that part into the top layer since the top layer never seemed to get re-ordered!!!

FastBikerBoy


Always interesting to see different working methods.

Steve, do you understand the way the rebuild function worked? Whenever I used it it always seemed to jumble the layers into some sort of order usually not how I wanted it. I could never see a logic. If I could that may have helped - I think it might have been clip length based?

I got so I daren't use it. I'd love to see a user configurable rebuild function though. One that would sort them into order perhaps using a 'flagging' method where a user could flag a clip or layer's priority. Or based on recording order perhaps.

I can see how the rebuild function would work well for you in the method you've described but for me where I had full length takes it always just jumbled them up. When you need as many takes as I do that's a real pain.

One thing to note about the ordering when rebuilding was that the top layer would not move when rebuilt.  Knowing this, you could take advantage of it.  I sometimes used the top layer as my "master comp" layer, so any parts I wanted to keep always stayed where I expected them to be.

Nothing wrong with a bit of healthy disagreement. I can appreciate it must be frustrating for those that did prefer layers.

I for example prefer the edit filter method over the automation lanes and fortunately I'm left with that option. If automation lanes had been forced on me as the only way of working I'd probably be miffed, although I do use them from time to time.

I think it just goes to show how differently everyone works and the different thought processes. The mute/solo buttons I could barely see in layers never mind use. I even used to use "click lock" as I got so frustrated trying to hit them quickly.

Ah yes, the mute/solo buttons in layers were very small.    Actually, with all the info you get just in Track View, everything is a bit "small".  I "upgraded" to a 37 in. LCD TV screen and now everything is fantastic! Lol

Beepster


I seem to be having a hard time finding Mr. Mccue's Cakewalk approved tutorials in the Cake store.

Funny that.

 
LOL!
 
 
Beep, that could be a contender for 'Post of the Year'
 
 

hth

:D

I think it unfair to compare the bugs of layers and the bugs of lanes.

Layers:  The point for me: similar audio clips that are processed and routed together

Lanes: the new track folder: more control over each clip, and its related function: automation,...

Currently the Lanes implementation is flawed: (as others have itemized)
   hidden expansion button
   drag and drop is erratic
    cannot move lane to another track (??)
   etc.

Even with all of lanes bugletts fixed the amount of screen consumed interferes with their use for me. 8.5.3 allows me to use 3-5 tracks expanded enough to actually see layers in action.

Too bad the layers bugs were never addressed.

And I find 8.5.3's smart tool for editing layers is faster and less demanding of my attention to the interface.  The X smart tool filters are another multiclick menu, born of the de-cluttering hysteria.  The options should be arranged as a set of SMALL buttons that change color to indication state. Quick, informative. Menus are stupid for this stuff.