+1
Bonus points for using more of the screen for the number of tracks chosen (e.g, the tracks are taller).
Super bonus points for making the above work in 6x6 mode using the current number of “active” tracks. That is, you start if with one track displayed, that expands to two when you record another track, three when you add another one…
+1 to this!
Oooh, I really like that idea.
I already liked your proposal when you initially did it in another topic, so obviously I still agree… 
It may be possible to set the number of parts but that is not currently a priority. We have talked about the possibility.
We have also toyed with this idea but it will be massively complicated to implement, so bear with us on that possibility. It is not currently a priority, the auto-record function would make 6x6 a less tap dancey on its own.
To my point of this is not a light issue, and is really a polish not a priority.
I agree - but as this is not a priority with Singular now - when and if they get to it (hope they do) I’d prioritize choosing # of Parts over # of Tracks. For myself, i typically know how many Parts my song is but as an improviser, a new track idea can appear anytime so the ability to add tracks & not be limited to a set number would be important to keep.
Brennan next part default will be a great improvement, thank you. I sincerely hope that Max no of Parts will not need a lot of coding too, so that it can slip into your plans. I hope that it is clear now that only with both these changes in place, the 2x2 and 6x6 modes will work exactly the same (in their sequential use).
meadowbrook I agree on your prioritisation, that’s why in my proposal I first ask for choosing/fixing the no of parts (now) and only later I introduce the concept of song matrix as a generalisation (future).
Noted!
I’ve given more attention to 6x6 mode lately.
Super +1 for this!
That is exactly what I need!
2x4 or 3x4 with auto next part following with BB
We can see the point of something like this but we do see it as an advanced feature seeing as 6x6 can be used to achieve all of this and that will be streamlined with the in progress MIDI update.
Thank you all for your feedback!
6x6 by itself will not achieve this, right?
‘Next part selected’ needs only one initialisation statement like ‘C=1;’ instead of ‘C=0;’ in the code, so programming time would be like 1 minute. Max number of parts seems similarly changing a constant to a variable. It looks like political reasons push this implementation to the far future not technical difficulties.
Here is what I think: Big companies like Roland can afford to mutilate some of their products in order to protect the more expensive ones, but smaller companies can not afford to hold back strong sides of their products for too long.
Thank you for listening to user suggestions. It was an unpleasant surprise for me that Eros does not follow BeatBuddy in 6x6 mode. Looking forward to the update!
Hello .
Here is a suggestion, let me know what you think.
Why not remove the 2 x 2 mode and leave only the 6 x 6 mode with the possibility of choosing the number of tracks and parts before starting to record and also keep, as for the 2 x 2 mode, the change of parts with the transitions of the BEATBUDDY? Everything would be much easier to use.
Thank you.
Oh I get what you mean. Yes that seems like a good idea. I suppose in 6*6 mode you could just record what you need anyway.
Might be confusing if the operation of the device footswitches changes dramatically when you have more than 2 track or 2 parts.
I do see the benefit of having a simple UI with 2 tracks (mapped to two buttons) but more than 2 parts. Might be a good idea if the buttons are directly mapped to the tracks when you have two (or less) tracks in a part. But then the UI gets a little more complicated once you go above two tracks. Some issues to work out (and I doubt SS would ever go for it).
I do like the idea of being able to chose the number of parts and tracks (for other reasons). There is a feature request for this somewhere…
It’s a nice wish, but I think until/unless 6x6 mode is as functionally easy as 2x2, it’s a reasonable compromise.
Personally, in my use I rarely feel limited by 2x2 mode, and 6x6 hasn’t had much use. Since it requires more tap dancing to use 6x6, I appreciate that they added 2x2 mode.
Hey there,
We do not plan on going this route, but thank you for the feedback.
The thing that we are most likely going to look at, if we do, Is the concept of setting how many parts or possibly how many tracks are in a song. The problem here is the changing behavior, and what people expect to be able to do in each track set-up. The amount of possibilities makes this a rabbit hole for us, and so it’s something we are willing to explore, but later on as a future feature.