stevenson

Indeed. I'll do my best to not make it too long before the next drink. At least LPX gives us an opportunity to start bandwagoning again doesn't it? We live for controversy don't we?

FWIW I also agree LPX is too dark and its a shame there are not more options to customize. I think it's fairly unanimous that on first blush LPX looks just gorgeous. Just like a nineties Berlin night club, doof, doof, doof, doof..... But specifically areas of darkness and hard to read-ness that accumulate over time working with LPX are: - empty slots have black writing on dark grey. There isn't enough contrast to work out what's there. From here I can just make out EQ and then there is something that says "$%£$" my blue konakt plug, then some thing else that says"£@$@£$". Of course I know what they are and where to look for them, but eyes are trying to read them anyway and it's tiring. - the piano roll is just diabolical. Just open the piano roll in LPX and LP9 and then compare the two. Which is easier to read? Which one can you tell the velocities apart by colour most easily? What happens when you select notes in LPX? Do they change colour (ie brightness)? How easy is it to scan through the piano roll looking for anomalous colours for notes that are too soft or too loud? - Track mute a track. Change the region colour. Can you tell the region is a different colour....ah yes because the region writing is a different colour - very hard to read. - Muted regions - I am beginning to get used to them. There is just about enough contrast, but gee - it's not that easy to read. - At low zooms, loops look like complete regions. It's not a massive thing but LP9 was clearer. I am not a fan of the rounded corners either. Personally I find LPX too dark but manageable save the piano roll. But I remember LP8 was not brilliant when it came out but improved over time. I think one has to take the long view with these things. I know the UI is prettier than LP9 but I am definitely old school when it comes to form over function.

No, you could do that in LP9, if you had set the audio preferences to CPU intensive fast response mode, if that's how you liked to work. Which I don't. And don't get me wrong, provided I still have the kind of functionality i need for my work, I am not slitting my wrists. But as I said earlier, there are reasons why this isn't great for me, and there other similar ones, making LPX somewhat tiring to work with after a while. And that's taking into account the improvements such as being able to move multiple tracks. Well it is in fact exactly the same as the CPU intensive mode in LP9 so it's no different. I would have preferred a preference which could be set to the CPU intensive mode by default, which users of my proclivities could turn off so we can retain our workflow. Or - it could have been the other way around which would have made more sense to me - the on/off icon for turning off the CSO - NOT the track. The mute for muting the track. That would have made more sense to me.

I do remove the mute button from the track header. i have the same functionality - that wasn;t what I was saying. I don't like it. For example, this way you have to turn the track off so the icon goes grey instead of highlighted as it would for a mute. It might seem at first blush a small difference and on its own it doesn't do much harm, but its part of a cumulative effect of things not working the way you expect, or having to adjust and "get back" the same functionality of LP9. And after a while these things start to get a little tiring. It may be a case of getting used to it - but I am not so sure. A lot of things feel awkward and they are generally because of the UI changes that seem to be aligning more closely to garaeband. I can;t help wondering whether or not Garageband might have benefited from being made more "Logic-like".

Yes of course. Doesn't everyone have the pencil permanently set as a secondary tool? Btw, wrt markers: The current implementation would preclude me from using LPX for serious work as i use markers as navigation points round all but the smallest arrangements. I need to be able to see the marker indicators in the time line without the marker lane being open with its attendant problems - such as navigating by marker and inadvertently deleting them. Another issue is track solo. It doesn't work at all. I don't like having to use the on off switch in order to get the mute behaviour i want. Mute now mutes the CSO which means I can't store versions and alternatives on track duplicates (unless I use the in/off switch). I was using 32bit LP9 so that I could use 32 bit plugs and external video. Obviously that no longer exists in LPX. Wrt video, I would have to replace my video card in order to have 3 monitor outputs, so I could continue my working arrangement of 2 monitors and the 3rd tv. While I might do that if LPX had enough goodies relevant to my to entice me, I am not mad about the 'fit screen' implementation in the QT display and all up don't see too many advantages over LP9 at this stage. Wrt snappiness, it's snappier than LP9 on ML in some respects, but LP9 is MUCH snappier in SL for me than both lp9 and LPX, on this machine anyway (8-core Xeon 2008). In general, I find going back to SL feels like an upgrade. Graphics are better, and better performance in nearly every area. I switch between them a lot and the difference is really apparent.

Actually it does still exist. The behaviour has been reversed now though. You have to hold down shift-apple and click and you can draw in a midi region on an audio track. Just as well, I use this all the time. Very handy for a multitude of scenarios.

It's Me! http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QfDyE0cxjS0/RztQJvnaMKI/AAAAAAAABtY/lh21_-reIXo/s400/drac.JPG

You probably need to make sure the 'score' box in arrange is ticked. It's the parameter box in the top left hand corner of arrange. PS Hi to everyone!

then just check them so that the score appears. then fill in with repeats signs what you don't want to display with notes.

then just check them so that the score appears. then fill in with repeats signs what you don't want to display with notes.

then just check them so that the score appears. then fill in with repeats signs what you don't want to display with notes.

oh that's easy. just merge the regions together in the arrange page. when you are creating a score, the regions need to be contiguous.

sorry i meant 'checking'. you unchecked the score so that those regions would not display. what you want to do is display those regions but put a repeat sign in each of them. the first bar should have the phrase, and the subsequent bars for as long as you need should have repeat signs in them.

yes, but you need uncheck the 'no score' option for the regions that you want to have repeated but not appear on your score. you have put the repeat sign on the actual bar you wanted repeated. that's the bar you don't put the repeat signs since otherwise how will people know what to play and repeat 3 times?

i think i might be able to help but i am not sure what it is you are trying to do. you want to paste the part on the right to the part on the left? just delete what is on the left and copy what is on the right to the the region on the left... in any case if you are trying to make some readable for a musician, why not use the repeat bar sign. it will cover the notes you have within that bar so that it plays back in your sequencer but won't display. i think that is what you are after....