It may look like NNA but differs from it by ability to apply arbitrary commands to each note from start to end.
Note positions point onto separate track (or tracks if notes are many) where actual note is played with all desired effects. There can be launching of several notes at once from same position.
Track, when activated, allocates free channel for playing.
So it is something like midi sequencing - breaking a myth about opinion that midi sequencers are something professional whereas trackers are not.
Further mental researchs will be put toward shifting from hard quantization and ticks to less bounded to hard frames, mathematically precise positions of notes and effects. Events - generally speaking.
This will help to avoid redundant pattern’s length, and will improve readability of patterns.
MIDI-like internal representation of notes as, instead of as an array of cells
#1 will be most interesting in terms of sample representation / manipulation, supporting an ACID Pro-like workflow for situations that require it. See this post.
#2 could be useful for a minimised view of a multi-column track. If you can come up with a visualisation for, e.g. a chord where all notes in the chord are clearly visible, and also their per-note effects, this could also be used in more ‘mainstream’ use-cases.
#3 Is something which has been discussed in the Piano Roll thread. It also came up during a Pattern Zooming discussion. So far, this has culminated in the addition of the Delay column, which offers a lot of timing resolution. (Despite this, recording particularly intricate riffs from your favourite MIDI device still tends to lose notes… at least, last I tried to use it.) I should imagine that the days of tick-resolution dependence in e.g. instrument and automation envelopes are numbered.
These ‘events’ might be enterable by keyboard by virtue of Pattern Zooming, preserving our existing grid-dependant workflow. In fact “lines-per-beat” may eventually become the way that pattern zooming is implemented, such that doubling the ‘lines-per-beat’ for a pattern ends up emulating today’s ‘Expand’ command due to the way we stored the data
martyfmelb, well, I can’t determine if your answer is negative or positive, but I feel that my thoughts made the day.
I concentrate on overcoming limitation of today’s software.
Every idea and suggestion followed are derivative from that.
I like to use twisted patterns, where drums go crazy with 6 hits per 4 beats (or how it is named today).
By the way I used to see ancient vedic time measuring system.
That will certainly surprise you with its universality and accuracy.
Unfortunately we can’t use it at full extent due to its minimal time fraction equals approximately 1/30 of Cesium atom’s vibration .
Well, if it’s only a myth, then there’s nothing to worry about?
Pianoroll, pattern editor…Each has it’s benefits and downsides (as mentioned many times, so I won’t reiterate those arguments). But personally, I think it has to do with time/attention factors as well as pure, objective usability. I find it much easier and efficient to write notes using the pattern editor, a piano roll would be awfully sluggish compared to that. But if six months go by, and I return to a track, it can be a bit tricky to interpret what is going on. This gets even harder with other people’s tracks, as I have certain principles that simply make it easy for me to catch up with my own productions (like, put the beat in lower tracks, followed by theme etc). These principles might not be part of someone else’s workflow, and the whole editing style might be different. This is the only case where I’d wish for some kind of piano-roll alike interface: just to get a quick overview of things.
.