check out how aodix handles zoom: http://www.aodix.com/images/screenshots/adx_seq.jpg
… the right hand side, with the red automation data shows what I mean.
Ah yes, tween-lines! Funny how a mind gets stuck in block-thinking after several years of looking at conventional trackers 
But yeah, that’s an excellent idea! I could actually get used to smooth scrolling just like that.
edit: so yes, if the running line (note head? whatever) changes to actually pass over individual lines gradually this would make the resolution changes much smoother and natural.
Still, at max resolution (I assume it would be somewhere around 256:ths) things will be quite cramped together…
the one thing i find "hard/difficult"sometimes is the "time-line,but i basically thinks thats because the way i have started working when i got renoise,because i can spend hours on making the sound,but still on a time-line basis
i have made like 20 seconds,but i think thats a question about getting used to it though 
That’s when the clips feature discussed in the arranger thread would become very useful.
Speed is dead, unpin me.
Would be great to replace this with a detailed draft for the “zooming” - how it will work with the stuff we already have now. But this might be something for the Design forum?
RIP SPEED 
I’m curious why the ticks per line-setting in song settings is capped at 16? Could it be upped a bit. for even smoother pitch slides etc?
Could it be changed so that pitching and other effects where the quality is important could use those “nibbles” instead of the somewhat hidden ticks per line.
why is the ticks per line thing still in there? wouldn’t it be possible to rewrite effects dependant on that value and simulate it somewhat close to how the ticks would work?
As i understend the accuracy of envelopes and automation is still linked to this value. and that’s another reason why i would like to have a possibility to set it way higher than 16.
your requests make sense and indeed I also posed the same questions during alpha stage
higher resolution for automation also means more CPU power needed. You can answer that you don’t care about CPU, and it’s ok, but if you think at it, pervious of the 2.0 version working at TPL-speed 12 implied higher BPM values in order to achieve good resolution, while now you can raise the LPB value, which: a] makes much more sense b] guarantees much higher resolution even at TPL 12: your beat resolution is now equal to TPL*LPB which can be quite an high number.
as a bonus, a maximum TPL value of 16 also gives a consistent design to all the tick based commands such as Ex, as stated by Bantai.
of course I agree on this
Dont forget that there will be, as soon as we have the full pattern zooming implanted, delays for the FX columns as well. So this would be just an intermediate solution. That was at least my reason not to touch it now…
Isn’t zoom useless with the new Lpb setup? Theoretically you could have massive ammounts of lines per beat, so i dont see why you would need to zoom even closer, when you could add more lines per beat on your selected pattern already.
Zooming out for overview purposes is another thing though. Having 128lines per beat in a VERY long pattern you already have the accuracy you need but lack the overview. Zooming out and not seeing what’s being played or can’t see all the notes or effects used has downsides too.
I would suggest that you have a zoomed area maybe 10-20 lines above and below pattern position marker/line. All data before and after that could have visual representations instead of the actual data. You would have an indicator that a note is played, but not what note, or indacators that there are effects used in. That way you still always see all data arouund the marker but get some overview of what’s before and after the marker.
Just a quick scetch of how it could look like in pattern editor, and it could be tightened even further. using less pixels between lines etc.
You can increase the LPB but you will get an insane scrollspeed. So zoom is far from being useless…
Zoom out is one thing, then your picture would work, but zoom in is another issue. Then you need to show the actual data as it is (like now with numbers and letters), even if something is hidden. In that case we need rules for what data should be visible (this is all discussed earlier in this thread).
Then its also the future arranger to take into account that is also made for an overview in a graphical way.
Perhaps the best way is to have a toggle between graphical appearance (pianoroll/clip style etc) and pure pattern data, no matter what zoom level you are on…
well since the introduction of the delay colum you wouldn’t need that much LPB to get the accuracy you want, especially if you get delay for effect column as well as mentioned by tactic… I just hope you don’t overdo things just becous they are wished for in the past. New features makes other less important. I myself don’t feel i need zoom function anymore since the intruduction of the delay column. Bet other people do as well. Even with the old speed setting i hardly ever used speeds past “3” …
Delaying fx or notes accurate will not help you when there are several events within a single row.
And you can never expect everyone to use all the features in such a large application as renoise, I would not worry 
I think you misenterped my mockup. The zoomed area shows sub-lines and non zoomed area shows regular pattern. So the highlighted lines within the zoomed area are supposed to be the real lines. and the unhighlighted lines is sub lines. I wanted to illustrate zoom this way instead of zooming the whole pattern. I guess zoomed mode would mostly be used for editing anyway clicking an area outzinde the zoomed area would move your marker and the zoom to that area. Pressing play in zoomed the area within zoom would scroll faster than the outside areas of course. I was kind of lazy and didn’t update the numbers on the left side but I’ll update the picture right away.
Ah, ok. I see. Well that is what we have discussed in here earlier as well. Would be very cool I think.