I think the idea of number of tracks o 6 x 6 would be a great idea. Often, with my soundscapes, I tend to use 3 or 4, so to have the option to limit it to that would save some unnecessary clicking.
1 Like
Agree.
+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…
6 Likes
+1 to this!
1 Like
Oooh, I really like that idea.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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).
1 Like
Noted!
1 Like
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
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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!
1 Like
As an update, in the meantime I changed the role of the BeatBuddy, it is not the central unit/clock master of my MIDI rig any more. In fact I only use the BB in singer songwriter like gigs with no synths. Otherwise as MIDI slave it is a great visual beat/measure indicator.
My Aeros is now cc triggered by a MIDI sequencer to switch between Parts, during recording and performing. While recording, the Tracks are handled by the switches of the Aeros itself. While performing the Tracks are cc muted/unmuted by a MIDI controller switch.
So it’s done, in practice I only use the 6x6 mode as a starting point. Then I use any number of Parts as needed, usually 2-4, while each Part has a varying number of Tracks, usually 2-4. It works really nice. I feel free. Thank you SingularSound.
For me the only MIDI command missing now are PCs to load projects.
My 2-cents for what they’re worth:
Adding more flexibility with the x by y by parts is a wonderful addition to my current flow. At the very least being able to scale from 2x2 through 6x6 with all of 3x3, 4x4, and 5x5 being available is a massive improvement over current limits.
Not sure if the hardware limitations would create an issue but in a dream world I’d like to be able to choose the “x” and “y” for the “x by y” set up.
2 Likes
This is already done in 5.0.0 beta which is out since Christmas, we have a setting to allow Auto Song Part changes
We are still looking into whether we will be doing what we currently are calling N x M mode but no promises