Am 07/20/2017 um 08:24 PM schrieb Robert Jonsson: > But it still just comes close. If we think in terms of arrangements and > arrangement-versions, then an arrangement > contains (or can contain) multiple arrangement-versions. An > arrangement-version contains multiple tracks and a track can > be part of multiple-arrangement versions. So there is an n:m relationship > between arrangement-version and track. > However, Folder-tracks implement a 1:n relationship. > > If you implement a true n:m relationship, you can still get the same > clarity as with folder tracks. You might even no > longer need those "show midi tracks" buttons, because they serve the same > purpose (clarity) and can be emulated. > > Admittedly this will require some more thinking before it becomes ripe > for discussion. Like: is "arrangement version" a > good name? What if I additionally what to focus on - say - the rhythm > section and hide everything else? Will I need to > create things like "rhythm secion - arrangement version 1", i.e. one for > each version? But then, how do I play the > entire "version 1"? I would also have to activate all the other sections > of that arrangement, so I'll need at least > multiple-selection. Do we need separate concepts for visibility and > audibility? I assume folder-tacks just deal with > visibility, don't they? > > It makes my head hurt a little bit, trying to understand the implications of > such a system. ;) It's an interesting idea > but it seems hard to realize. But I saw Tim had some ideas so maybe it is > doable. > > /Robert >
I don't think it is *much* more difficult than folder tracks. The only difference is, that each track can be a member of multiple arrangement-versions (or whatever you decide to call it), whereas with folder tracks, each track can only be a member of a single folder track. This creates two problems: (1) there is no obvious visual representation of an arrangement-version (I'm beginning to hate this term), whereas a folder-track can be placed above its member tracks. You can still make an arrengement-version look like a track, but its memebers won't necessarily be right below it. Making it look like a track has some benefits. E.g. you could add "Add arrangement-version" to the other "create ... track" functions and muting/unmutung have obvious representations. I suppose this is one of the reasons why a folder-track is called a "track" even though it is not really a track but a track-group. And (2) you need to be able to edit the versions a track is a member of and design a GUI for that. I am not aware of many places in muse where a "many" attriubte is editable. Routes come to my mind and I think it can be done in the same way. But it also solves a number of problems. (1) it can do everything folder tracks can do, and (2) a track can be shared among several arrangement versions. If you write a song and record the vocals with just some guide tracks and then try different arrangements by adding more tracks, you'll always want to share the vocal tracks and possibly more. Finally is must be decided how muting and hiding all memebers of an arrangement-version are triggered and if hiding implies muting or not. But this must be decided with folder-tracks as well and is not a consequence of the n:m relationship- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Lmuse-user mailing list Lmuse-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmuse-user
