I've posted several times that track names need to be revisited as to "labeling". It's great that now the instrument name displays on the tracks; however, there are still a number of features that require you to know the legacy track names to use them properly (Bass, Drums, Piano, Guitar, and Strings, plus Melody, Soloist, Thru, and Audio).

My new suggestion is (assuming a more comprehensive redo is not forthcoming) is that tracks be labeled by their existing lettered named. So wherever you see a track reference on the screen, you would see its corresponding letter.

That way, the legacy Drum track could just be labeled track "D". Piano would be "P", Bass would be "B", Strings would be "S", and Guitar would be "G". I suppose since the others don't participate in things like rests, shots, holds, stylemaker track references, etc), they could just be labeled "Mel", "Sol", "Thru", and "Audio", pretty much as they are now.

That way you would see on the screen at all times the letters associated with the tracks, and then when you wanted to "Hold" all tracks except the tenor sax soloist which happens to be on the legacy Guitar track, you would already see a "G" next to that track and would now to enter Cmaj7...G.

That makes it visible and easy to work with. Relabel the track names in StyleMaker and other places they are referenced by just the letter designation (and I don't think it matters it's not A, B, C, D, E, etc), and that completely disassociates the former track instrument name from the instrument that is actually on the track. And that would remove the confusion of why the trumpet is on the piano track.

I would suspect that this would take a little work, but I imagine most of those designations are implemented as constants anyway.

Just a thought, and again, this is a bridge until some of the other track issues are more comprehensively addressed (such as why do RealTracks need to overlay MIDI tracks - why not keep all the MIDI tracks and just include some number of RealTracks (which ultimately could get their own designations).

I have provided mockups below. I realize this is probably a stopgap, but it seems to provide a bridge until something else is done.

I hope that made sense.

+1

I like your idea John. It's neat and to the point.

For what it's worth, I have disabled automatic track naming based on instrument so that my tracks always show Bass, Piano, Strings, etc.

I'm just trying to get away from the whole "the sax is on the Piano track, the guitar is on the Strings track, the organ is on the B[*****] track, and the xylophone is on the Guitar track". Now remember that for when you want shots, holds, or rests, or when you need to select instruments or VSTi's (in which case the instrument is the name of the VSTi not even the instrument assigned - depending upon the VSTi, of course).

Instead, put the sax on the P track, the Guitar on the S track, the organ on the B track, and the xylophone on the G track.

NOTE: The reason "Bass" track is asterisked, is because when you bold the first letter of Bass, the forum considers the remaining three letters inappropriate.

And the fun of having two or three 'S' tracks...

I like John's idea.

There was, of course, an extensive discussion of this with lots of good suggestions (though I think this good one is new). I kind of favor numbering the tracks, so no matter what else might be in the track name, you can deal with it by its relative position. But whatever works. John is correct that we are in limbo at the moment, unless you turn off the new feature as Noel did. And I feel for a new user who is reading the manual and not seeing anything resembling what's there.

Without intending to change the thought-train of this thread, is that something similar to this idea?

Definitely +1. It would be quite useful.

I think the change needs to be more comprehensive than what we have now, but my idea was to work within the framework of how things currently work until such time as a new solution is implemented.

When you do a hold, for example, you enter C7...G, to hold everything except the legacy guitar track. Well, where did that G come from, and if it's the guitar track, how come I am allowed to put a trombone on it?

By displaying the tracks using the legacy letter names (multiple S's, as Matt pointed out being the exception), at least for the tracks that get regenerated or are considered parts of a style, then you can see on the screen what they are.

If you change it to ABCDE or something, then would you have to enter C7...D to exclude the "D" (formerly Guitar) track? Well what happens when you load an old file that has C7...G in it?

That's all I was trying to get at.

Hope that made sense.

Videotrack's last post had track numbering, and that's what I recall. Yes, John your idea would be simpler to implement.

Definitely, find a way to tell the trombone to hold.

Okay, I'll get him to hold my coat....

(Ducking and running...)

Lawrie Pardy might take offense at that.

Emphatic +1. The way track names work one way in the mixer (adapt the name of the instrument used in the track) and different with commands (use legacy names) can make using anything that uses track names confusing. John's suggestion offers a solution that eliminates much of the confusion.

For what it is worth, I strongly supported the idea of changing track names to match instrument names. However I never envisioned the change working the way it was implemented. To me this implementation is a missed opportunity for PG Music.

I've changed the default settings so track names reflect the legacy track names for the same reasons Noel96 cited.

jford, You asked a great question and included a terrific suggestion in your initial post, " ... (W)hy do RealTracks need to overlay MIDI tracks(?) - (W)hy not keep all the MIDI tracks and just include some (extra tracks for) number of RealTracks(?) (which ultimately could get their own designations). I would support this as a wishlist request.

Absolutely, add this to the Wishlist as a separate item maybe?

I was very excited when track names that matched the instruments were added. Then very disappointed that it was only partially implemented.

I switched back to legacy track names too.

I have been suggesting for a number of years now that PGMusic open all 16 channels/tracks so we can add as many instruments as we want. An A/B switch so those that want it to stay as is can have that option.

While possibly doable, I think at some point they're going to have to bite the bullet and sever the backwards compatibility so they can move forward. While there are still XP users, it isn't supported anymore and Windows 7 dies in a few more years. 64-bit isn't going away. We have to get away from 8.5 file names (it's been 20 years since long file names came on the scene!)

We don't know what PGMusic future plans are, but I suspect file formats may have to be considered as part of preparing for the future. At some point (probably to the chagrin of many), they may have to get away from not using the registry (and for some things, they just have to). Some apps do it, but also offer a portable version that deosn't, which may be the way to go, don't know.

Just some rambling thoughts.

I concur, John; that's the future. By the way, there are a few mentions of BIAB in the Registry, for fonts and the last ten songs loaded, but those are not substantial.

John,

This may be slightly off-topic but I have a question about something you mentioned in the initial post. You said "I suppose since the others don't participate in things like rests, shots, holds, stylemaker track references, etc), they could just be labeled "Mel", "Sol", "Thru", and "Audio", pretty much as they are now."

I may be misunderstanding what you meant, but I noticed that if I generate a solo in the soloist track into measures that have holds, then the solo will in fact have holds in those bars. I actually wanted to generate the solo over the top of some held instruments and couldn't figure out a way to add the soloist track as an exception using the C... method. "bpdgs" are the only tracks that seem to allow an exception. The only way I could do it was to generate the solo without the holds in place, freeze the soloist track and then add the holds back in to those bars.

So I was wondering if the soloist track is in fact NOT supposed to adhere to shots and holds. If not, is there a way to add the soloist track (or melody track) as an exception with the C... method or is the freeze method the only option?

Jason

Hi, Jason -

I haven't looked in a while, and it may have changed, but it used to be that soloists did not adhere to rests, shots, etc (well, on the soloist track, as you can actually have RealTrack Soloists on any track).
Otherwise, how could you let the soloist "take it" while the rest of the band was "holding"?

Likewise for the melody track, since the melody certainly can continue while the rest of the band holds or rests.

And you certainly can't exclude the soloist track from rests, holds, and shots in the chord settings dialog (or by explicitly excluding instruments.

EDIT: Okay, I just tried this and apparently RealTracks soloists honor the rests/holds/shots, but a MIDI soloist does not.

This should be consistent, and since you can specify the specific measures to create a solo, then I believe it should "not" honor the rests setting (oftentimes you want the soloist to keep playing while the band doesn't).

I'll report this as a bug.

Hmmm.

Assuming this isn't an April Fool post, I agree, that's a surprise. I don't use those soloist tracks, so I didn't know this, but it's good info for us to have when answering questions.

John,

Thank you for checking it out. I'm glad I mentioned it now, and glad it wasn't just me.

Yes, correct workaround.
If the holds do in fact 'hold' in the Soloist, and you don't want them to, you can do this:

1: Freeze all the tracks (esp. if you have a generation that you like).
2: Unfreeze the Soloist.
3: Remove the Hold from the chord sheet and generate.
4: Freeze the Soloist that now plays through the holds.
5: Add the Holds back to the chord sheet.

Now, back to Track Names...