spilthyfred Wrote:(03-31-2021, 11:59 PM)spilthyfred Wrote: Requested behavior when cloning a pattern:
[quote pid='6485' dateline='1617043519']
1. the original one stays in its place
2. the clone populates at the first empty spot below it, and
3. the cursor also moves to this new position and the clone pattern is highlighted and "grabbed" so that you can then use the cursors to position the new pattern along the grid, then
4. press OK to execute.
The third part is just to position it elsewhere, but only if you want to. A more simple way to describe the behavior would be:
-Original pattern stays in its place
-Clone pattern goes to first empty spot below it, as does the cursor
-Press OK.... with the option of moving the new pattern elsewhere before doing so. It would have a different highlight color until you pressed OK
This would be an optional cloning behavior turned on in the setup menu. I think it would feel very smooth and seamless.
Ok, I think I understand this workflow now.
Thinking about it I'm not fully convinced that I want that. I see cases where I would like it but I can likewise make up cases where I don't want that. E.g. assume I want to clone a sequence of patterns. Assume the piece is longer, my originals are at the beginning and the clones shall go somewhere further down. Currently I would copy the [block of] patterns, then move down, hit clone several times and be done. With the newly proposed flow you clone, ideally the pattern appears at the right spot, then you move to the front again and repeat for all pattern. Constructed usecase?
I've just done exactly that in real life
As I said, I see cases where I would prefer the newly proposed flow but meanwhile I think this does optimize one particular workflow while complicating another. I'm in no position to decide which is better. Not sure that I would want this as a switchable option either. In particular I do have a couple of other things I'd like to see first (e.g. tables on MIDI and CV16 tracks, [global] search and replace, ...).
In short:
The process of cloning is just a tiny part of my use of NerdSEQ. Adding [new] ways to actually sequence music would always have my priority. This is particularly true for the proposed ways of evolving/modifying existing sequences while playing.
Kind regards,
Michael