Re: [linux-audio-dev] Sequencer Concept Addition

On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 06:15:25PM +0200, Thorsten Wilms wrote:
> The absolute time / transport containers can be used for
> global settings. If you want settings for a sub group to
> persist through the whole arrangement (global vertical),
> you would just create a container that extends from start
> to end, just like a track. So you can, but are not forced
> to use a from start to end entity.
>
>
> > Similarly, i see the need for 'global horizontal' settings,
> > for example allowing tempo changes across all child
> > containers. Its not clear whether your model would allow
> > that.
>
> Everything inside a container with meter/tempo will
> follow each tempo change of that container
> (inside -> in sync with parent).

so, just to be clear, each tempo/meter container could
contain a complete tempo/meter map, not just a single pair
of values?

> > I dont think tracks neccesarily add space. Especially if you
> > optionally allow, for example, a per-container output
> > channel, as has been in Cubase since v1.0 (well actually
> > thats per-note, but the concept is similar).
>
> I was thinking about things like mostly empty tracks, with
> just some clips or midi now and then (FX, crashes ...).

i agree this is an important consideration.

> If you allow per object or region settings you are already
> close to my container concept. But it makes sure all that
> is visualized.

yep, thats cool, but i personally still wouldnt be happy
without the "track control" area on the left. Even if you
consider it to just be a shortcut to managing properties of
the containers. Also probably some of the visual container
items would by neccesity disapear at smaller zooms anyway. I
think its worth remembering that versatile systems are often
not very successful, as even if people can be bothered to
learn them, the flexibiliy has a habit of getting in the way
of the simple case which is in 95% of cases all that is
needed. Hence for example the common usage of the inflexible
one to one channel to track relationship model. This is
a serious issue for me as i resent having to use inflexible
systems merely for interoperability with the majority of
people who quite rightly dont want to spend their whole life
learning how to get an extra 2% productivity out of their
sequencer:-)

I like the rounded corners. I wonder whether they would look
as good when the boxes are smaller and there are lots back
to back? I'm currently using rectangles, which has the
drawback that you cannot see when containers overlap. I was
going to try a single "cut off" corner, but perhaps will try the
rounded corners also.

cheers

-- 
Tim Orford