Making Logic More Film Score Friendly

This thread is to continue a discussion we're having in this thread.

FlowerPower wrote:

3) Go to http://www.apple.com/feedback/logicpro.html and send a wish to Apple about simpler ways to deal with scoring to movie within one project file. One solution could be a way to force Logic to declare a part of the project as 'independent', meaning that whatever you did in that area (say, in cue # 3, bars 48-72), nothing would be changed in the other cues in terms of tempo changes or object/grid alignment.

Inquiry followed up with:

I think what you want is multiple arrangements allowed in one song project. And then a "meta arrange" window where you can string those together as "arrangement regions".

 

The individual "arrangement regions" of course retain their internal time signature/tempo map characteristics -- which are dynamically reflected on the (non-editable) "meta arrange" timeline.

 

Maybe multiple tracks in the "meta arrange" window so you can overlap/crossfade "arrangement regions" -- though you're getting into potential signature/tempo conflict issues there.

 

This would also be useful for music in other situations where you need a higher-order level of composition -- long classical pieces, continuous-play albums, "concept albums".

I am soooooo totally into these ideas! But... (you knew that a "but" was coming, didntcha?!)

With the current state of Logic 8.0.2 and SMPTE-based operations, "Logic can't count". Kinda reminds me of the notion of "Johnny can't read"... Before any of these kinds of wonderful new feature implementations could take place, it's my thinking that Logic would need to be able to provide for absolutely accurate SMPTE operations at all frame rates without fail. The problem is that many SMPTE-based operations fail miserably. See the following links for details of a few of these problems:

SMPTE Location and SPL Don't Always Match

SMPTE: length change by frames buggy and inaccurate

SMPTE position changes after 2-click on value in Transport

Display SMPTE without BITS Problem

Movie Start Time: Entering Feet/Frames Offset Bug

As one who migrated over from Nuendo and DP.

I personally like the fact that Logic is a Music creation Tool. I'd like them to continue on this road making it easier to create music quickly, I feel a bit can be done in this area.

My wish,

right on!

1)I would love a "Lock Movie Start Time" feature

2) I would like to be able to route the movie's outputs to busses

1)I would love a "Lock Movie Start Time" feature

Why? Does it move on you? If it does it's likely due to a bug. Here's the bug: on Intels... if you set your movie start time and then change screensets, when you come back to the original screenset the movie start time will have changed. I saw this happen to all 9 of the students who attended my Logic/Film Scoring class last month, all on iMacs.

But if that's not the problem, I'd be interested to know more about why you'd want that feature.

2) I would like to be able to route the movie's outputs to busses

Ooh! Ooh! Yes! Yes! YES!

(Pardon my enthusiasm)

How about "any output, bus, or aux"?

(extra 's )

multiple video support & multi video export to compressor options

I'd also REALLY like to see a FCP/STP styled Tabs so we could have multiple arrangements open and work between arrangements. I am constantly going back to musical sound design arrangements to add to current projects, they are almost like templates that I update and improve upon now, I dislike having to bounce them or turn them into green loops (even though I LOVE that option for other situations) It would be incredible to be able to open it up in your current project in another tab, on an independent or global timeline!

There are unlimited possibilities for Logic, STP and FCP to work together, imagine if FCP could export its tabs in a multi video project to STP & Logic.

And the conform window in STP, lets through that into Logic!

pant rant, rant pant

Ski,

I think I have found a different variation of that bug.

Using the tempo list - say I have this entry>

Bar 10 = 1.00.00.00

Then say I wish to change that to bar 100=1.00

It changes the movie start time to compensate; or it does something like that instead of changing the sequence it self.

3) Let me also add I would be more comfortable with something like DP's intilligent accel/deaccel tempo maker. So you can hit an event; like this. In 9 bars of 4/4 I want to end at this time code and at this tempo - and it figures out the constant tempo accel needed in one click (it gets fancier)

4) And please address the warning click problem for starting a new tempo in the midst of an old one.

5) Negative Measure Support/Sequence Start Time

Why is this so hard? Logic is horrible at this - what good is going to measure -8 only? Director: "Can I have a longer lead into that cue please?" - Me: "Sorry, call apple" - I know there are tricks around this but I am just proving a point

I must admit Logic is really weak in the video area compared to its competition.

3) Let me also add I would be more comfortable with something like DP's intilligent accel/deaccel tempo maker. So you can hit an event; like this. In 9 bars of 4/4 I want to end at this time code and at this tempo - and it figures out the constant tempo accel needed in one click (it gets fancier)

 

Isn't that what Logic's Create Constant Tempo does (in Tempo Operations)... or wait, if you want an accel/deaccel, it's what Create Tempo Curve does - isn't it?

Logic's Tempo List is also very intelligent 'under the hood'. You can create a new tempo event anywhere, tell Logic what it's location shall be, and it will automatically adjust the previous tempo event's value (you can create a new tempo event to serve as a new 'previous tempo event' if necessary) so that you end up at position X/tempo Y at any bar position you want.

Example:

In bar 9, you want to have a new tempo happening for 9 bars that ends up with yet another tempo at bar 18, tempo 90.

To do this, you just need to create two tempo events; one at bar 9 and one at bar 18, and the wanted location (and tempo) for the last event. That's all.

When you do this, Logic will adjust the value of the tempo event in bar 9 so that it will get the value needed in order to reach bar 18 at your desired time code. (This has been in Logic since the first release).

In addition to the already mentioned Create Constant Tempo and Create Tempo Curve (with manual control over the curving and three different curve shapes), there's also Stretch Existing Tempo Curve, Thin Out Existing Tempo Curve and Randomize Tempo.

I agree that Logic is missing out on some very essential score-to-movie stuff, but the tempo operations are pretty advanced, and have been for a long time.

Nice!

Didn't know that one.

I don't think I understand your question...

Here's what the manual says:

Create Tempo Curve

The Create Tempo Curve operation lets you create numerous tempo change events

with just a few parameters, and provides a smooth overall change in tempo.

To create a tempo change in the Tempo Operations window:

1 Use the Position or Time fields to define the area that the tempo change should take place across: the left field sets the curve start point and the right field, the curve end point.

2 Enter the desired start and end tempos in the Tempo line.

3 Select the desired curve type.

Three kinds of tempo curves are available from the Curve Type menu. Each of these offers a Curvature parameter (the field to the right of the Curve Type menu), which determines if the tempo should speed up or slow down, dependent on whether positive or negative curvature values are entered.

4 Adjust the Curvature parameter.

5 Alter the concentration of graphical tempo events with the Density parameter.

Values of 1/8 and finer should only be used if really necessary (with very slow or fast tempo changes, for example). Don’t select a resolution higher than 1/8 or finer, just to make the curve look smoother. This results in an unnecessary amount of processing, and the creation of more tempo events than are needed.

Tip: Watch the graphic display, as you change the values: The displayed tempo curve (which is calculated from the tempo settings you’ve made) is shown in red.

Note: The “Continue with new Tempo” checkbox determines whether the original tempo resumes after the tempo curve ends (unchecked), or the new tempo (the last tempo change event in the curve) is maintained (checked).

6 Click Apply when you are done.

even easier is using the global track tempo lane. you have nodes that you can adjust so you draw your tempo just like you would automation. the secret is top use this in conjunction with smpte locked markers. then you can shape the tempo curve and see its effect on the point you are trying to hit.

its better than just simply dialing in a curve because a really effective tempo change will require an element of judgement that you need to use your musicality (ears) for. you shouldn't just calculate a tempo change just to hit a sync point within in the music. what if it the tempo change is unmusical?

even easier is using the global track tempo lane. you have nodes that you can adjust so you draw your tempo just like you would automation. the secret is top use this in conjunction with smpte locked markers. then you can shape the tempo curve and see its effect on the point you are trying to hit.

 

its better than just simply dialing in a curve because a really effective tempo change will require an element of judgement that you need to use your musicality (ears) for. you shouldn't just calculate a tempo change just to hit a sync point within in the music. what if it the tempo change is unmusical?

Personally I still prefer using the Tempo List and Tempo Operations because it is more precise.

I'm soooo loving this discussion! A couple of caveats, points, and questions...

• I've found that using the Tempo Curve function won't necessarily place your ending tempo at the targeted SMPTE location. Can anyone confirm?

Visual Interpretation of the Global Track Tempo Curves

• Using the tempo curve facility in the global tempo track can be deceiving... If you're viewing bars and beats only and drawing tempo curves, regions (and their contents) will not appear to move as you make changes to the curve. This behavior is correct, but it can be misleading... If you're trying to make a ritard or an accelerando to a particular hit point and viewing bars/beats in the ruler, you will not make that hitpoint with accuracy. To accurately view where the resultant target tempo is positioned you have to view the bar ruler in time (SMPTE).

Having said that, and to take up on what stevenson said, achieving the target tempo precisely at a given hit point may not necessarily result in the most musical tempo change.

The Manual...

• The manual doesn't give nearly enough information when it comes to explaining how the tempo functions work, i.e., when to lock the little lock icons. If I get a chance I'll post something here later that explains how to use them.

Intelligent Tempo Operations

• As FlowerPower pointed out, the tempo operations are indeed very intelligent. For example, if you are working in mixed meters, the values you enter for bars/beats in the tempo window will follow them/take them into consideration. Let's say you have repeating bars of 3/4 and 4/4. If you specified a tempo operation to take place between 1.1.1.1 and 3.1.1.1, Logic will indeed count that as 7 beats.

Beat Mapping and Tempo Curves

• Unfortunately you can't use both at the same time. If you have drawn in tempo curves in the global tempo track and then use beat mapping, your tempo curves will be instantly destroyed. Be careful! The only way around this is to make creative use of your Tempo Alternatives and then copying/pasting tempo maps from the various alternatives to combine the parts you need from each.

well i haven't used beat mapping in conjunction with tempo curves, but like automation, your curves will turn into nodes if you, for example, snip the song.

i am usually careful to set the resolution of the tempo curve to be fairly course - usually 1/4 notes for that reason.

but if you are trying to sync a particular hit point, using the marker is perfectly accurate at high enough zoom levels. in any case i will take musical over perfectly accurate any day, provided that the music is late in relation to the picture. in fact i generally prefer hits to be late than dead on anyway. and that is another something that has to be judged by feel IMHO.

Ski,

 

I think I have found a different variation of that bug.

 

Using the tempo list - say I have this entry>

 

Bar 10 = 1.00.00.00

 

Then say I wish to change that to bar 100=1.00

 

It changes the movie start time to compensate; or it does something like that instead of changing the sequence it self.

OK, I see some strange (?maybe?) behavior that I've never seen before, but first let's make a few things clear... "Movie Start Time" (MST) is the Logic parameter where (the way I think about it) you enter the timecode number as shown on the very very very first frame of the film. Not first picture, first frame of film (i.e., in the leader). If a TC number doesn't exist you have to calculate what that number would have been were there to have been a burn from the top, but that's another matter. Anyway, the way I think of it, the t/c of the first frame, once entered in the MST field, is set in stone and should never be touched under normal circumstances. It doesn't matter where in the film you want to start scoring from. This value should not ordinarily be changed.

With that in mind, the actual starting point of the movie that you are going to score to is determined by the SMPTE position of the first tempo event that appears in your tempo list. It doesn't matter if you have multiple tempi --- it's that first tempo event's SMPTE position that will determine how much (if any) offset into the actual movie file will be reflected in the movie window.

So...

Let's say your first TC starts at the typical 00:59:52:00 (that's if you have academy leader which is striped with TC from the top). Forget about the fact that you might not want to score from this point. What you do is enter that value in the MST field. Assuming you haven't written any music just yet, you'll have the one (default) tempo event at 1 1 1 1. The SMPTE position of that tempo event will determine what you see when the playhead is set to 1 1 1 1. If the SMPTE position of that tempo event is set to 00:59:52:00, you will see the first frame of your leader. But if you want to start scoring right from first picture (i.e. 01:00:00:00) changing the SMPTE position to 01:00:00:00 will now position the picture LATER in time: at 1 1 1 1 you will now see the frame of picture striped with 01:00:00:00.

In short, you can slip picture against the bar ruler (or even existing music) by simply adjusting the SMPTE position of your tempo event(s).

Now... to the behavior I'm seeing. Let's say your SMPTE position (as well as your MST) are both at 00:59:52:00. If you attempt to make the value of that SMPTE position earlier, the MST will change! Maybe in some circumstances this can be beneficial behavior, but in light of how I consider the MST setting to be set to the top of the film and never touched, I can't see much reason for attempting to make the SMPTE start time earlier, especially if I know that no picture exists before the MST's "minimum" SMPTE value. But I've also learned to "never say never" with Logic. So maybe this "feature" (?) is of use to someone.

Anyhoo..... To summarize the general behavior of picture against ruler when it comes to the tempo list (and to your question)...

• If you move the bar position from 1 1 1 1 to a later position, the picture will appear to move backwards along its timeline

• If you leave the bar position at 1 1 1 1 and change the SMPTE position, the picture will appear to move forward along its timeline.

Generally I don't have to think much about this stuff except when wanting to write a detailed post about it so I went back and tested all of this behavior... and... GAH! Sure enough, as I said before, under various circumstances (including some I haven't described) the MST will indeed change, I've never EVER had this happen before, so now my curiosity is piqued as to which specific conditions caused it to change. Hmmm... If I find repeatable behavior I'll post it.

Anyway, thanks for bringing up this subject. I wasn't aware that the MST could change (except per the bug I described a few posts ago).

but like automation, your curves will turn into nodes if you, for example, snip the song.

Cool trick! I'll have to try that.

Having said that, if I know ahead of time that I want to have music ritard or accel, I'll play in the feel and then beat map my performance to get a tempo curve. I find it's infinitely faster to get the results I'm after by feel than by calculating things out.

i thought drop a couple of lines about what i would like to see in regard to using large libraries particularly in a scoring for movies context.

there has been discussions about multiple timelines and extending the folder paradigm within logic long ago on the apple discussions site however i don't think that is practical now because of 32bit limitation within logic and how quickly we run out of memory with just one song (ie timeline) i think what i would prefer is something that also deals with the problem of switching songs and managing large sample libraries.

you have a project within which you have impulse reponses, samples, audio files, blah blah blah. within that project folder we have numerous songs referencing those 'assets' as they called now.

so extend this.

you also have a project layup in a seperate application that houses all the samples, plug ins, ALL audio DSP shite. everything audio related.

when you add an instrument or plug-in, it remains within the seperate application's memory, even when you switch songs. the songs only contain midi info, tempi, automation, and loops.

when you open a project ALL of the songs in that project open and you choose which one you want to work on. when you open the project for the first time, the second application is launched and ALL your audio plugs and samplers are loaded for the entire project, even though some songs may only access a few things.

now, you are free to switch songs with gay abanodon and it will only take a few moments. if you are using a compiled folder, or you have a temporary mix in one song you want to use in another, you can update the bounced file even though that file may referenced in an open song (not something logic would normally allow, but i am saying that it should).

this is NOT as elegant as multiple time lines, but i think multiple timelines would only be practically possible once logic is 64bit, not something that will happen anytime soon. using a 2nd app for audio is VERY much the ONLY practical way at the moment for using really big libraries. the mmap trick is limited only to the exs and in any case logic slows down a lot when using heavily programmed songs or when memory is very full, the mmap trick works dynamically so that logics memory is ALWAYS full. not the best situation in my opinion.

the technology for this exists and is well developed: audio jack, vbus, sbus, rewire, plogue bidule, au lab, rax, all spring to mind. howveer none of them can host logics plug-ins natively and with the exception of au lab they are all a whisker fiddly (i haven't tried vbus because i don't own any apogee gear). logic could do this transparently or at least a lot better and more simply.

Hi Stevenson... why is that you think 'multiple timelines' will need more memory?

Multiple timelines basically means that a project isn't limited to have one tempo list only, or one grid - but would mean that more samples would have to be loaded into memory. The differences is basically that if I work on a movie today, and beat map or edit the tempo of, say, cue 12, cues before and after cue 12 may either end up being out of sync with picture, or lose their grid alignment - that's all.

Of course the current limitation somehow 'inspires' people to avoid working with more than one cue at a time (per project), but most of use are learning this the hard way - when we discover that due to 'natural laws', changing the tempo or length of one cue will affect how the following cues end up. There are no warning dialogs or suggestions about locking objects and events to time code; I believe most people who try to edit a cue inside a multi-cue project at some point has discovered that something went wrong. This would not have to happen if a certain folder, a number of tracks, a marker or something else would have a different graphical/numerical reference, so to speak (tempo list and bar grid).

If certain function would require a certain amount of RAM or a multi-core Intel Mac, I'd rather see that these functions would be disabled on less powerful Mac than that they wouldn't be implemented at all...

because experience has shown that memory can run out very fast in scenario where there are a lot of plugs and samples being used. when this happens a lot of logics simplest and basic functions start to become funky.

tempo alternatives already occupy what appear to be a fair bit of memory. having lots of regions, audio regions with automation fills up the memory. combined with the fact that people who are going to want to use this functionality are likely to also be working with large sample libraries and given that we encountering big problems relating to lack of available memory in just modest sized songs with not necessarily all that many samples 3rd party or otherwise, adding to that by effectively having several songs within one is going to cause big problems.

its not the timelines in and of themselves but the myriad programming that goes with them. there just ain't enough room at the inn for all those guests!

people have run out of memory in logic even with just a few sample instruments. it really is a big problem. even the mmap trick gobbles at least 512 mb of address space in order to facilitate the farming out of samples to outside RAM. that makes a lean meal even leaner.

it would be possible within a 64 bit logic. it might be possible that similar tricks to the mmap be developed to facilitate the storage of data other than exs samples outside of logics address space. but i really doubt that.

what i am suggesting is not as elegant for sure, but it is much more likely possible given the technology we have already. it just needs implementation rather than development and then implementation.

Well, maybe what we really want even has to wait for a future version of the OS itself.

Lots of people are moving, or considering moving over from PTHD to Logic native these days, and for the money they save on not using PTHD, they could all get the fastest 8-cores and loads of RAM.

There has been great performance boosts only between sub-releases of Leopard, from one Logic version to the next, from pre-Intel Macs to Intel Macs, from using less than 8g RAM to using 8g or more (preferably with one memory stick in every slot), from dual/quad cores to 8-cores etc., and we haven't even seem what Snow Leopard can do yet.

I also tend to use the same, sample libraries over and over again in a movie - in many cues, so even if I would have lots of cues in one song, I wouldn't necessarily have a lot more samples in memory, I would just use them in more parts of the project.

If something will be easier by not having multiple timelines overlapping each other - I can live with that. I can even live with messages telling me that I can't load more sample libraries or audio files into my project... then I would have to spread all my cues over, say, maybe 3-4 projects instead of only one. The way I personally work, I do a lot of movie stuff with relatively few audio files and not too many large libraries, but I can see that the situation is different eg. if people should make realistic mock string arrangements for a whole movie in one project, eg. on a dual core PowerMac with less then ideal memory amount and memory speed.

it's about where the bottle neck is. on my system, i don't run out of cpu power, i have plenty of RAM (or at least enough) and i think my RAM is probably fast enough. it's simply as logic stands you can't squeeze all that much into it if you use anything other than exs. and modern libraries are all going the kontakt route because they want to protect copyright.

even if the other libraries start using mmap, my computer slows right down the bigger and more full of stuff - plug-ins, automation, regions, samples - logic gets. so get the stuff out of logic.

my next projects are going to be setup with au lab or maybe plogue bidule, depending on whether i decide to mix out of the box or not. certainly i am going to try and keep as much stuff out of logic as i possibly can.

I'm not really an expert on this, but I know that the new 8-cores are said to be about 2-3 times as fast (for audio) as the Quad PPC Macs.

An 8-core with memory in each of the 8 slots is 15% faster than the same Mac without memory in each of the 8 slots.

G5s used 400Mhz DIMMs, new MacPros use 800Mhz ECC fully-buffered DIMMs. The new Mac Pros uses faster and more efficient processors than the original Mac Pro, larger Level 2 caches, the system bus is faster than older Macs, and can have 4 times as much RAm as the G5s could and so on. Intel has already announced 6 core processors (allowing for 12 core Macs), use of multicore GPUs for non-graphical purposes, better support for multicore Macs will come with SnowLeopard, then there's OpenCL and what not... and: Apple want to sell hardware. It's good for them to sell software that needs/utilizes the fastest and newest hardware technology.

Who knows - maybe Apple even could be planning to do what Steinberg did when they continued to develop Cubase but introduced Nuendo... Apple could launch a new audio app that is built on a much more modern 'skeleton' than Logic is, potentially allowing implementation of stuff many of us have been wanting in Logic for many years - things that may not be possible in Logic (like multiple timelines, elastic time, automation node edits across multiple tracks etc). Remember - Logic 8 wasn't announced as a new 'song', not even a new 'mix', it was announced as 'Logic remastered'...

Even without all these utopian ideas... for the way I personally work, and with my current 8-core and 10.5.5 I'm sure multiple time lines would make wonders for my workflow, since I don't use lots of massive string libraries or lots of instances of complex softsynths like Absynth or Reaktor. All I basically want is a way to work on a cue without seeing that other cues lose picture sync or grid alignment.

http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/stats/powermac_g5_2.7_dp.html

http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/stats/mac-pro-eight-core-2.8-2008-specs.html

There has been a massive performance improvement over the last three years only, and I'm pretty sure that Apple is designing functionality and features for future Macs today, and that the next three years will be even more "revolutionary" (in terms of what computers can handle) than the three last years.

but my point is that cpu speed is NOT the bottle neck. nor is RAM speed. you simply can't squeeze enough into logic's memory space to make use of either the cpu speed or the RAM speed on modern computers. logic will need to become 64 bit for that to happen, and that won't happen any time soon (i don't think).

sure you will see some improvements in speed generally, but your timeline idea while brilliant, will still push logic over the brink judging by what we have now.

i can't say it any more plainly - faster computers even with a gazillion cores and quadrazillion Gbs of RAM won't change the limit logic has on its address space. it MAY be possible to offload more of its functionality outside of that space but, in the end this is what i am talking about anyway. get everything possible out of logics address space to leave room for things that absolutely have to be there.

actually if they were to implement something like my idea you could probably have the multiple timelines, since there probably WOULD be space after that. but without fundamentally changing how logic works with its content there just won't be enough room to run something like that reliably - i am very sure of that.

but my point is that cpu speed is NOT the bottle neck.

CPU speed, memory speed, front bus speed, numbers and sizes of caches etc. all has to do with overall performance. Re. 64-bit, someone stated somewhere that Logic 8 already is 64-but where 64-bit is needed, and that making everything in Logic 64-bit would be a bad, and not a good thing. I don't know... I've just seen so many PPC users complain about Logic 8 - and 8-core users praise Logic 8 (in terms of stability, speed, performance), and I have a hard time thinking that all the improvements between these two generations of Mac hardware won't influence the 'bottleneck'... If not, why would Apple state that the new Macs are 2.6 times faster than the QuadCore G5s? That's not a minor improvement...

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/179676-benchmark-old-g5-2-7-vs-new-mac-pros.html

In the above thread, Lagerfeldt refers to a benchmark test giving a Dual 2.7 G5 2251 points, and a Mac Pro (with more RAM) 8254 points. Maybe you are right (I'm not a coder), but seeing how Logic 8 behaves on an 8-core compared with my 'old' dual core Mac Book Pro (which apparently is close to the dual G5s in performance) is very impressive, and definitely has to do with number of the tracks, plugins, voices I can squeeze out of my system. Switching between multiple projects in RAM still seems sluggish (but that's not what I want to do anyway....)

I'm all for Apple implementing bottleneck solutions and independent cue-functions.

sorry - flowerpower....

you're not getting this.....

the bottleneck has nothing to do with hardware. nothing. performance from your computer makes no difference. none what-so-ever. you could have the fastest computer in the world, the fastest hard drives, the fastest RAM - everything.*

it makes no difference.

logic is coded as 32bit - and i am happy for it to stay that way because there are other solutions to the problem of memory than making it 64 bit. making logic 64 bit may cause its own problems - i don't know.

but logic being 32 bit with a limited address space is simply not going to be affected by whatever computer and however much RAM you put into it.

the problem as i see it with going multiple cues in one song and expanding on the folder paradigm and having multiple timelines, is that along with everything else, you will run out of memory space to be able to do this reliably and effectively. some of the performance issues relating to speed can be mitigated by a faster computer but some will not, because they relate to timing issues or clocking issues (i am no coder either) when you have full memory.

take for example the score editor in 7, and in 8. the score editor is painfully abysmally slow in 7, especially in page mode, and much faster on the same computer in 8. i upgraded from a G4 1 Ghs DP to G5 2.7 Ghz and found there to be virtually no difference in logics GUI especially the score editor - my primary reason for upgrading at the time.

but all that is beside the point. whether the project slows down or not is largely irrelevant because there will be the same issues with lack of memory within logics address space no matter the computer you have.

* i should just add, even if you max out your macpro with 32GB of RAM, logic is only going to be able to see 3.5Gb - 512Mb so about 3Gb of it. you can fill that up with just plug-ins - no samplers.

I know about the RAM access limitations.

I think the 'problem' with general discussions about and development of) software is that people work in so many different ways, and that we easily may assume that something that may work (or not work) for us will work (or not work) for others as well.

A couple of examples:

At the moment I'm helping a colleague who is writing an orchestral piece. He certainly may want to change tempi and length of certain sections within the piece, but may need only a few EXS presets to do the job + a reverb and maybe some EQs. When he's ready, he'll print the whole thing out, and hand it over to the orchestra who will perform his work. He is already working on it, and has come quite far - and have had no problems with limited RAM access at all - but would have had problems if this material would be written to a TV program or movie; problems with Logic's inability to deal with individual sections as independent units within one project.

Likewise, I've been involved in various projects where all the string arrangements have been done in Logic, basically using one patch - and later handed over to an orchestrator who is finishing the arrangement/score in Finale/Sibelius.

I can also imagine composing music to a movie using a good Steinway sample only - all in one project file - and convert my ideas (still in the same project file) to Real Book type lead sheets, and record the material with musicians.

There's no rule saying that all these attempts will fail for all people, and for those who make certain types of electronica) using external hardware synths, it would also be possible to do a lot of stuff in Logic without addressing much RAM at all.

Some generations ago people were writing large orchestral pieces only using a piano (some still do), and I know several musicians/composers who still prefer to do their main composing using piano (or another instrument) only, and uses DAWs for recording/producing only (or pays others for doing it). I'm personally sometimes distracted by the many options Logic gives me, and find it easier to compose using one sound only (preferably an acoustic piano).

So... while there are bottlenecks and limits on addressing memory space, some of us would see a lot of benefits if Logic could do what can be done today by a combination of several actions (lock events to SMPTE, edit a cue, insert 'buffer' tempo changes, re-beatmap sections that has disturbed (grid-wise) by SMPTE-locking) for us. It doesn't even have to be multiple timelines overlapping each other, the main thing is to be able to force Logic to consider material pre/post the current cue for 'holy', and either not touch it, or repair whatever weirdnesses that may come out of the necessary tweaks we perform.

I have already worked using a 'hybrid' method (a mix between one cue per project and several cues in one project) and know it can be done, and I do get what you say, but we're probably talking about so many things at the same time that things get confusing. Maybe what some of us want wouldn't help your workflow much, but it would help others (like myself).

To simplify the whole thing and focus on the most simple solution for avoiding things getting out of picture sync/grid alignment: I want a macro that does thing for me that I otherwise would have to do myself - a macro that I'm convinced that also would result in less people claiming that 'Logic's Beat Mapping is unusable' etc, simply because they haven't been diving deep enough into Logic yet to realize the side effect if what 'blind beat mapping' can do to a project.

So... in essence, the basic wish isn't even for 'multiple timelines', it's for a way to start a new bar wherever it needs to start combined with a way to lock everything (grid, picture, events, local tempo events) for certain cues.

Thanks for the invite to this discussion Macintonwa

This is also a bit of a favorite subject for myself.

To quote what started this discussion...

I think what you want is multiple arrangements allowed in one song project. And then a "meta arrange" window where you can string those together as "arrangement regions".

 

The individual "arrangement regions" of course retain their internal time signature/tempo map characteristics -- which are dynamically reflected on the (non-editable) "meta arrange" timeline.

 

Maybe multiple tracks in the "meta arrange" window so you can overlap/crossfade "arrangement regions" -- though you're getting into potential signature/tempo conflict issues there.

 

This would also be useful for music in other situations where you need a higher-order level of composition -- long classical pieces, continuous-play albums, "concept albums".

• This sounds suspiciously like using Arrangement Folders in part, the only thing missing here is it's own Tempo/Beatmap.

If you were to add that ability to Folders then you could move the arrangements around at your own discretion. This feature could take priority over a Global Tempo Map, and in the same way that one audio region takes priority over another when assigned to the same Channel, Arrange folders could work like that, including it's tempo operations. In fact, a folder level Marker Track also wouldn't go astray.

• I've taken to arranging inside Folders right from the start, this comes in handy for versioning, and the easy arrangement of sections.

However the Folder Strips are featureless in the Mixer.

I would suggest that it functions in much the same way as an Aux, giving you a volume slider and the ability to process a grouped signal. An option to "fold out" Arrangement Folders in the same way as Take Folders would be greatly appreciated, while a Double-Click will still open it in the usual way.

• I agree that timing & sync should be greatly improved, there's no excuse for problems pertaining to that. This includes syncing to External gear.

• There needs to be support for multiple videos as well, to accommodate for scene changes and versioning. in fact, now that I'm thinking, it would be great if you could tie movies to folders, while allowing for nested music only folders.

• When syncing up tempo changes I prefer working with locked regions and the Tempo Map, but like all automation, the level of detail needs to be greatly improved.

• I would also like a context sensitive Lock/Unlock To SMPTE button in my tool bar, two buttons where there should be one is a little redundant.

• I also believe Logic should be able to Import Soundtrack Projects as well as added support for round-trip editing with Final Cut Pro. Not to mention the implementation of STP's Conform feature and it's Multi-point Video HUD.

...

Logic is probably 90% there Apple would be mad not to improve on it. It's more intuitive than Soundtrack Pro, and additionally allows scoring to movies, and hosts a wide range of synthesizers that are useful for sample triggering & Sound Design.

ProTools has even had a make over adopting a lot of Logic's features, that's testament to the powerful potential of Logic.

Apple just need to observe the trends, give users what they want in an intuitive way and up the ante. After all, people would be prepared to pay a little more for a well designed program and on top of that... Logic sells Macs, often quite expensive Macs.

So... while there are bottlenecks and limits on addressing memory space, some of us would see a lot of benefits if Logic could do what can be done today by a combination of several actions (lock events to SMPTE, edit a cue, insert 'buffer' tempo changes, re-beatmap sections that has disturbed (grid-wise) by SMPTE-locking) for us. It doesn't even have to be multiple timelines overlapping each other, the main thing is to be able to force Logic to consider material pre/post the current cue for 'holy', and either not touch it, or repair whatever weirdnesses that may come out of the necessary tweaks we perform.

 

I have already worked using a 'hybrid' method (a mix between one cue per project and several cues in one project) and know it can be done, and I do get what you say, but we're probably talking about so many things at the same time that things get confusing. Maybe what some of us want wouldn't help your workflow much, but it would help others (like myself).

i know you know that there are RAM limitations with logic. what you may not be aware is how quickly you can hit them. you may not be hitting them now but add this functionality and who is to say you won't? also, there is a general problem with dealing with this issue that is critical for film scoring. on the one hand you are saying modern computers are powerful enough and on the other you are saying not everyone is going to use a large setup.

i have also used the many all cues in the one project approach and still do to a lesser extent even now. i personally have developed a nice workflow to deal with the issue of change in timings.

where i would like to see part of the approach you are advocating is the ability to drag an entire section of a song around arrange and preserve everything within in it - markers, key signatures, tempi - everything. and then when you move that section all sections outside of it are preserved exactly as they are, meaning automatic insertion tempo, key signature and time signatures to make sure they are unchanged.

until a way is found to remove the hosting of most content we work with outside of logics memory space, developing a solution for 'some people who don't want to use large layups' seems a mite narrow IMO. you could easily say 'why not use bounced out temporary mixes?' which is what we do today.

Quote from Stevenson:

where i would like to see part of the approach you are advocating is the ability to drag an entire section of a song around arrange and preserve everything within in it - markers, key signatures, tempi - everything. and then when you move that section all sections outside of it are preserved exactly as they are, meaning automatic insertion tempo, key signature and time signatures to make sure they are unchanged.

This is a succinct summary of exactly what I need!!

I just finished a series of three 90 Min. films which I had all in ONE Logic project 4-1/2 hours long.

I only actually actively composed for one film at a time, and had the previous films there in order to reuse my thematic material etc..

My point is; I utilized numerous manual workarounds, lots of pencil and paper notes, knowing when to lock and unlock objects to SMPTE, using region based automation, using odd time signature bars to get things "on the downbeat", religious backups for when I messed things up, always keeping the start position of objects in a cue the same regardless of where they actually play, and lots of math to reach my goal.

If I can do this manually, Logic should be able to do this easily without a big strain on its resources.

It certainly put a strain on my brain resources, but had the advantage of being able to quickly (with the director)

try out thematic material in various places in all three films.

The mixing was also considerably easier, due to to the similarity of the sound palette within a film.

Thanks to Ski, Stevenson, Flower Power, and Fader8 who came up with great ideas and workarounds in past threads.