But if patterns have different set of columns?
track 1 (lead) : c-4 05 – 9400 ---- | — – -- ---- ---- | f-4 05 60 9600 ---- | — – -- ---- ----
track 2.(BD) : c-4 07 | — – | — – | — –
track 2.(Hihat): — – -- ---- | c-4 09 – ---- | — – -- ---- | c-4 09 – ----
???
Cool thought though, but does not seem practical at all. All rows in a row 
Oh right, that would require all tracks to have the width of the widest track… which would suck horribly!!! 
I agree 100% haha… I’m just playing devil’s advocate…
I’m dead serious about vertical automation lanes though 
just for the purpose of editing several of them in context (in context of each other and the pattern), not for displaying them all the time.
it’s not really right and left. it’s just this way <<<< and that way >>>>
It matches the usage of parameters in the dsp chain too. 
Do you never find yourself wishing you could make it take up more screen? And the ability to have multiple in view can hopefully come in there somewhere too. but maybe I should stop dreaming… 
Yes. 
Especially with a smart GUI - easily displaying and hiding parameters, an option to automatically show the automated parameters of the track the cursor is in… etc…
Just think of video editing programs, showing and folding parameters… it’s the shit.
Especially if continous display of patterns comes into play, maybe combined with pattern editor zoom… BAM, instant automation across several patterns / the whole song…! Doing that horizontally would be an abortion from hell in my not so humble opinion ^^
this is pretty much the same as the debate i got into about horizontalness & verticalness with regards to piano roll orientation on this thread:
it became too philosophical for me to want to get into it again , but i stand by my comments. pattern sequencer is good to have horizontal according to my doctrine 
not vertically, and not several parameters at the same time…
No, that would make zero sense actually… how would that make sense?
Squeezing? It would be optional. You don’t wanna see them, don’t turn them on…
Plus, I don’t wanna see them, I wanna edit them, in context.
That would show them in context of each other, but not in context with the pattern data… I already called this an “abortion from hell” so I guess that’s a “no” to the question if I think that would be better ^^
because that’s much more straighforward way? if you cannot see the advantage of this I have no idea how to explain it. 
Hmm. That made me actually reread all your posts and I only found one thing you keep repeating, that it would “use up space”, and then you ignoring my replies to that about it being optional, smartly showing and folding parameters etc… If there’s anything else, you haven’t mentioned it. In summary: uhhh.
vertical lanes would’nt intrude into the pattern editors space either, unless you’d display them… which I get tired of repeating.
Aligning envelope points to where it is can NOT be done horizontally (unless there was a horizontal pattern editor of course haha). Displaying line numbers is not alignment.
The automation window at the bottom intrudes just as much into the pattern editors space… I actually find vertical pattern space MUCH more precious than horizontal. I rarely have to view more than 3-5 tracks at the same time… but the more of the song (= time = vertical space) is on the screen, the better…
Okay, then I don’t see when the time values in the sample editor cannot be displayed, uhh, somewhere else, unrelated to the data they’re refering to? And then in a different axis, too, just for the fun of it?
If that was the initial state, and someone suggested to move them to a more sensible place, your argument basically boils down to “yeah but why do that when you can just flip your eyes back and forth”.
As I said, if you can’t see the advantage of this I can’t explain it to you. Just look at any complex software involving timelines.
Now to add even more confusion… it’s not that I think horizontal automation (and more importantly, stacking several parameters) is bad… because we tend to have more screen space horizontally than vertically… I just wish we could have both…
But fitting all the automation pane controls into the pattern editor would indeed be hard/sucky and would also mean redoing something that already exists, so maybe there could be a way to only display the envelopes in the pattern editor, and when you edit one of them, the automation pane and all the buttons therein get used to manipulate it?
If each automation lane could be resized individually, and Renoise could remember the width when folding/showing them… 
Ohh, also: colors! 
Worked it out a little better I think, with overview of pattern spanning!* , moved the buttons so they wouldn’t be hit if or when using the scroller, and moved stuff around so it would look kinda correct. horizontal automation lines would be tied directly with the pattern like how it is now. (even though it doesn’t look like it)
this way it doesn’t need a scroll bar until it goes higher than 100%.
At that time, 100%+ the automation lane would run at a speed according to it’s resolution like how it currently is now. Which would make this look even more awesome! 
*Hmm, I just realized while typing this, the automation types ‘point, linear and curve’ are keeping us from spanning patterns. :?
Isn’t it obvious that lining related information up would be much more convenient and improve productivity?
Sure? Think about it once again. Let’s take a 1680x1050 screen, like mine. The automation lane is about 950px wide then, height is about 75px. The same lane rotated to vertical and put along the according track would be 75px wide and about 640px high. On every screen wider than high (which we could deem standard, I guess) there is less space taken from the pattern view with vertical automation lanes than with horizontal.
Which would be the same with vertical lanes, only better.
Yes, it is. No, it doesn’t hurt, just like it wouldn’t hurt were all effect commands in a completely separated area of the GUI and in a different order than the notes themselves. Of course that would be extremely awkward, right? Such UI details can have serious weight if they get in the way frequently.
I don’t know how some of you guys do these mockups but this took forever!
Upon selecting the Delay Device it displays all of the automation lanes it has available.
The selected parameter in the Delay Device (Ldelay) is controlling the point directly (or vice versa) since the little blue thing next to the parameter is on.
I put some blank automation lanes in there to show the full device view.
Something like this could make it possible to use view filters to show all automation lanes of all devices or only show used automation lanes of all devices spanned
It would be great to see the Pattern Editor with something like this though.
after looking at this I think I might have to try linking an LFO to a parameter with an automation. 
Interesting, but I don’t have the faintest idea how it has anything to do with vertical automation.
EDIT:But probably because I’m a noob. 
Whoa, nice mockup, almost like the real thing! I like the idea of a larger automation panel.
But IMHO the horizontal approach is better. Why? Because there’s also something called effect commands.
Effect commands are already nicely aligned to the time, and as an integrated part of the pattern, there’s no trouble understanding how selection, copy/paste etc. would work.
Also, the horizontal approach will visualize a larger slice of time, and this is where envelope-based automation would shine!
Imagine applying a slowly increasing volume for the entire duration of a song? This is the stuff we need to be able to do IMO.
I was looking for some gameboyAdvance combo-button-smashing fighting games and came across Bit Generations DotStream and immediately thought of this thread, so I posted it without any explanation.
Maybe someone’ll see it and hopefully add to their creative thinking…