a little usability improvement that would be nice is to either make the scroll wheel not work in the subsong box, or make it so once you've selected a new subsong, the focus is immediately moved to the patterns. the amount of times i've selected a subsong, then used my scrollwheel and skipped to some other subsong (instead of down the patterns as intended)... i'd say i'd lost count if i was counting in the first place :J
ui wrote:
* Something to check what instruments are/arent been in use in the FTM (this will help when you have multi-track files and you delete any of the songs inside)
this one's already implemented. "clean up -> remove unused instruments"
ui wrote:
* A LOOP command/effect?? to loop from X part to X part and X times? ***
* Transpose command/effect? a command to transpose the ROW. ***
not sure why you'd want these. you can select everything in a column or a row, and ctrl+F1~4 for transposing. i'm not even sure i understand the looping one. i think it's better to just duplicate frames so that it loops in the way you want.
The DMC volume in the editor sounds like a good idea to me. I use Rushjet1's badass DMC converter and it does a great job, but some samples just come out really low (like some Toms I ripped from Tales of Phantasia).
Are you using the latest one? (v1.02?) Also if you have problems with .wav files, send them to me. Errors where someone just says "it dont work" aren't helpful :P
this one's already implemented. "clean up -> remove unused instruments"
* LOL!!!... that's why your a moderator!, i had never saw that option before, thx to you, now i know it exist! juajuajuas... sorry about my noobing! :P
ui wrote:
* A LOOP command/effect?? to loop from X part to X part and X times? ***
* Transpose command/effect? a command to transpose the ROW. ***
Dave wrote:
not sure why you'd want these. you can select everything in a column or a row, and ctrl+F1~4 for transposing. i'm not even sure i understand the looping one. i think it's better to just duplicate frames so that it loops in the way you want.
* About the transpose, yes i know you can do that, i use it all the time, but a Transpose command will help to SAVE space into the exportation/compilation. I really dont know how Famitracker works when it export...
but for example. Lets say you have 8 row/patterns that are the same in notes, but they just go up or down the octaves. If you use 1 command you will be saving lot of bytes there (if famitracker works that way when export/compile the songs). But I dont know if that even posible
* Almost the same happend with the loop...
for example: you have 8 patterns that you wanted to loop 2/4 times... if you do it like its now, you will have to clone/duplicate it 2/4 times which means each pattern/row add extra bytes in the nsf. If you have a 1 song nsf all will be fine with few extra bytes but if you have a large compilation and wanted to save space, this is a GOOD way to do it.
The DMC volume in the editor sounds like a good idea to me. I use Rushjet1's badass DMC converter and it does a great job, but some samples just come out really low (like some Toms I ripped from Tales of Phantasia).
Are you using the latest one? (v1.02?) Also if you have problems with .wav files, send them to me. Errors where someone just says "it dont work" aren't helpful :P
I've been using 1.01. But now I've gotten 1.02 since you mentioned it. I haven't had any problems with wav files nor have I had any problems with anything else as far as I can remember. I'll let you know if I find anything.
I don't think having a transpose command would save space. You would still have to have 2 patterns, one with the command, one without. Wouldn't that be exactly the same as just having 2 patterns, one transposed? (The version where you just transpose them would probably even save the bytes that would have been used for the command itself!)
I dunno, trying to save bytes via Famitracker seems like... isn't this the wrong tool for that? I mean, there are all sorts of patterns and space saving techniques, but they are always specific to an individual song. If you're at a level where your byte count matters, you could squeeze a tonne more out if you were writing your own music machine code.
ppMCK is another great tool for space saving, although it missed out on even more space-saving techniques (such as text replacement macros).
rainwarrior wrote:
You would still have to have 2 patterns, one with the command, one without.
Ah ha, that's where you're wrong. The effect could potentially be applied to the last row of the pattern preceding the one you want to transpose. And even if you do make a separate pattern and apply the transposition on this one, you would really only need to apply the effect once, so all other transposed patterns remain the same.
Still, I do realise that it's not the best way to go, and yes, as I've said numerous times, we're writing music not programming homebrew NES software. But I thought I'd throw the request out there and see what happens.
exactly how i feel. optimisation should be a background process as far as possible... you can do other things to be more efficient about space; slower speed/less rows, less effects, instruments etc. a transpose effect would probably be insignificant in comparison. optimisation is important, just not so important that it should start stepping on the toes of famitracker as music software.
anyway i spoke to miau and ui in #famitracker and we all reached this conclusion.
we talk about the transpose and loop aswell!, but i still think than the loop command would be nice to have it, and also will help if you want to compose a whole soundtracks (as im doing) and some of the songs needs to loop somewhere and few times.
About the transpose, yah, i think i was looking at the "wrong side" to save space, but thanks to miau who is always around having solutions :PPP
Ooh! Another feature that I think would be just dynamite is a customizable key that mutes/unmutes all channels except the one the cursor is in. So often I am editing a bit of music, and I think I'd like to hear what the line I'm writing sounds like by itself, so I have to go up and double-click the channel name. Not a huge chore, but I do it so frequently that it would be a wonderful thing to have it bound to a key.
_______________________
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, all men are Socrates.
Ooh! Another feature that I think would be just dynamite is a customizable key that mutes/unmutes all channels except the one the cursor is in. So often I am editing a bit of music, and I think I'd like to hear what the line I'm writing sounds like by itself, so I have to go up and double-click the channel name. Not a huge chore, but I do it so frequently that it would be a wonderful thing to have it bound to a key.
Solo channel: Default Alt+F10, configurable. I use this all the time.
Ooh! Another feature that I think would be just dynamite is a customizable key that mutes/unmutes all channels except the one the cursor is in. So often I am editing a bit of music, and I think I'd like to hear what the line I'm writing sounds like by itself, so I have to go up and double-click the channel name. Not a huge chore, but I do it so frequently that it would be a wonderful thing to have it bound to a key.
Solo channel: Default Alt+F10, configurable. I use this all the time.
Oh rad, thank you very much.
So this morning at like four o'clock I woke up and had an amazing idea for a suggestion for FamiTracker, and now I can't remember it anymore. Will it come back to me later in the day, or was I just dreaming? Only time will tell.
EDIT: Okay, I don't think this is what I thought of this morning, but it would be nice to be able to use the letters A through F in place of 10 through 15 in the field for defining the volume envelope of an instrument. If nothing else, it would save some visual space on instruments with long envelopes.
_______________________
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, all men are Socrates.
This idea refers somewhat to my earlier suggestion of separate volume growth and decay effects (like, say, Mxx and Nxx) that each get a full byte of resolution. Their improvement over Axx would be obvious, since the maximum duration for Axx's growth and decay is so small. However, extremely useful would be an effect, let's call it Txy for now, that used x for the destination volume and y for the time to take to get there. It would look at what the volume level already is and go to the destination level from there, thus requiring only one effect name for both growth and decay. And I've always wanted to be able to grow or decay smoothly to specific level, rather than just to 0 or F.
Then, of course, I have to ponder what could be done to combine the high resolution of Mxx and Nxx with the usefulness of Txy.
_______________________
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, all men are Socrates.
