It would be really good if Track Names were given a better naming convention.

Each of the tracks should be able to have a user defined name, which is saved with the song.

The confusing part is that I can have Trombone playing on a track called "Piano", and Accordion playing on a Track called "Bass". I can record something that is not a Solo on the track named "Soloist" and play Sax on the "Strings" track.

I know how it all started, and am totally sympathetic to the evolution of this great program, but I'm sure this all still causes confusion, especially for new users.

Isn't it time to let go of this naming convention and introduce one that actually matches the flexibility of the program itself?

Maybe 2015?

Regards
Video Track

That's a great idea, Trevor.

+1

I'd like to see default names like Trk1, Trk2, Trk3, etc. with the capability to rename each track to suit the user. User track names could be saved with each song or perhaps globally as a preference.

Having said that, the current naming convention doesn't take extremely long to get used to.

Ideas:

1:
Probably a permanent T1, T2, T3 etc, with the ability to add your own text.
T1 _______
T2 _______
T3 _______
T4 _______

etc


2:
If an existing style is loaded with Bass, Piano, Drums, Guitar, Strings, then the Trk1, Trk2 etc can automatically adopt the instrument names:
T1 Bass
T2 Piano
T3 Drums
T4 Guitar
T5 Strings

3:
If the track has any restrictions, then some indication as to what can (or cannot) be placed there.

I just use these little stickers and place them over the track names on the computer screen...

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/different-color-sticky-bookmarks-10616764.jpg

The stickers remind me of emulating scribble strips - masking tape we would put on a mixer to label the instruments on the track with magic markers. Mixers now often have the ability to show those track names electronically, picking them up from the track names in the DAW.

We have had a few other discussions about the fact that BIAB has evolved from defined instruments to where we are now, where you can have your choice of instrument on any track.

Hi Matt

Yes, exactly what you say. In the early days I've worked in many studios with masking tape and hand-written names alongside the sliders for kick, snare, floor tom, bass, hit-hats, cymbals, lead guitar, rhythm, vocals, alto sax, tenor sax, and etc etc.

We don't need to do that in studios anymore. These can be all be changed/named electronically. I think We want Biab to move on from the original hard-coded named feature-set, to match the flexibility that the program now actually offers. Not a big ask...

Hope others would agree.

+1

+1

+1

Sounds like that could be a problem with the drum styles, since each drum style can have 3 to 9 or more variations. Later, Ray

Yes ..... Ditto Trevor. +1, +1's. :-)

..... as well as 64 bit versions of the software.

+1

+100 !

+1

+1+1 +1.
Even if we had to put up with say 10 digits max for each name field (so as not to upset the interface), this would be better than what is clearly Wrong, an ERROR of programming, and a very bad show for newbies trying to think of the as a professional program. It is a pro program of course, but only for the most part.

I just can't see why the TK1... suggestion would not take five minutes to change in the code, there has been a lot of opportunity to fix this..

Z

The 'proper' way to do this (IMHO) would be to have the song file list and save the instrument names, then load these instrument names into the interface so they show both in the mixer, and in the main window on the brown bar (actually the brown bar is now redundant) and, in any other part of the interface they are required.

The text box could show the name of the instrument and the name of the player (why not). If this goes over a given limit (say ten characters) then there would be a drop down of the full name when hovering over, or a tooltip.

I would use it and I will add a +1


had to edit my original reply because I thought it was in the BIAB forum not the BIAB Wish List forum

so as we in my circles : "un-regard all" if you already read it

My apologies to those who read it and thought I was being a utter A.H.

Larry

Hi Larry

I'm sure nobody thought anything unsavory. Personally I'd like to thank you for lending your support to this functional change.

Now, if only Peter and the team are viewing this thread...

Cheers

Trevor

+1

While this idea looks pleasing to the user, there are some restrictions behind the scenes. In some windows there is a reference to the tracks by their first letter only and there is, in some of them, not much room to expand. Let's see with what we need to pay for this new feature.

Still +1

Good point but I think Track Numbers could be used OK, and a mouse move shows what the track is used for.
E.g. we currently have 'S' used twice (Strings and Soloist) which is a bit confusing.

Track Numbers would be unique. Something like this maybe?

At least it's a hint to the developers.

That was exactly the intention!

Anyway, working on a song now, this change is massive. It not only affects BIAB but RealBand as well across all generations of files and program versions.

We all were looking at some obvious aspects, like track names in the mixer, the top instruments menu line, and such. All of these can be changed pretty easy.

But when we enter chords in a song and if select an instrument to be silent in a certain measure, then we draw a different picture. If the designator for, e.g., drums would be changed to "3" then ALL files where a user of BIAB has something like "F.d" in there must be changed or there must be an overlay to interpret the "d" to display "3" and convert a written "3" back to "d" in the files to keep a certain level of compliance among the generations of files and versions of the program.

I believe this will take a while until the developers find a way to have a consistent naming convention within all the respective programs and files -- without burning up a year's output of a power plant to convert all MG?s and SG?s to a new format (world wide).

(That, on the other hand, would provide a whole bunch of new possibilities to write into the file and improve the entire system.)

Actually I would be much happier if the look and feel of BIAB and RB would be more similar than they are now.

Thanks

You make worthwhile points that I'm sure the incredibly competent developers can resolve (hint hint).