Provide the same approach to MIDI as on the Play, where you can switch between MIDI and Audio views to manage each.
What is the problem?
The Tracker only allows 8 tracks of audio in total, where the Play can do 16 (8 audio, 8 midi). Would sending 8 tracks of midi data be technically feasible? It shouldn’t greatly increase CPU demand as it is only sending midi data and isn’t doing any audio processing which is what really eats CPU power.
What do you want to achieve?
The same approach as with the Play where you can have 8 audio tracks and 8 midi tracks operating at the same time, thus giving you 16 tracks of audio (arguably more through polyphony on midi channels). Having parity between the two products allows you to explore so much more between them. It also greatly expands what is possible with the Tracker.
Are there any workarounds?
Any links to related discussions?
Any references to other products?
A very interesting idea, thank you! I have edited it a bit to remove the use of first person as the guideline request.
Yeap! Even a “midi” mode only with 16 midi tracks would be cool.
Sorry, I missed the detail in the guide. Apologies!
I’ve added this as a feature request a loong time ago
(see: Additional/Exclusive Midi Tracks · Issue #640 · polyend/TrackerBetaTesting · GitHub)
Sadly, back there the Github Issue was just closed without any resolution as to why this was not taken into consideration.
So, i’m officially here +1 'ing this! I would to see this feature on the Tracker.
Oh! Certainly good to know it wasn’t just me thinking along these lines!
I assume if the request was closed it must be because it simply isn’t technically possible or something, but would be good to get confirmation on that. Really think it could change how the Tracker gets used if it was do-able though.
i agree. i’m not going to be mad if it’s not possible either. I just think it would be a great feature to have somewhere down the line (or the next iteration ).
Make sure you actually vote on this wish at the top of the post
I’d completely missed that - thank you!
This is a great idea and should definitely be implemented!
100% - this would make the tracker so much better!!
Something I wanted to add to this: I tend to find that when it comes to combining the Play and the Tracker, there’s an assumption that the former would be controlling the latter. I think there’s also a case for using them the other way around, with the Tracker controlling the Play as a rhythm section, for example. Arguably that may be possible now, but I just think that with the expansion to 8 audio and 8 midi channels, you would open up all manner of ways to use the Tracker - including the Play across 8 midi channels (for example) and then various samples triggered locally on the Tracker.
That’s what I love about both devices; there’s overlap, but sufficient difference too that combining them can massively extend the possibilities here.
i like this one. I was going to say it would be good if you have a midi synth that operates on midi omni and is the only outboard you are using , then effectively you can send on multiple channels and expand your midi tasks - but, this would be a better solution. Ive currently come to a situation where ive used all the midi categories in my project for a particular channel.
This sounds great!!
Also, ability to assign specific MIDI channel for each track to receive MIDI would be awesome!
i dont get it. You mean tracks instead of channels?
Isnt midi implemented as an instrumentnumber which can be put anywhere on any track and step?
So how would audio and midi tracks be seperated?
(i used to own a tracker og when it just came out, but own a Mini now, so maybe it’s different then i know of)
This should be tracks, instead of channels yes. The idea is to have 8 additional and dedicated tracks for MIDI.
Nothing else would have to change. MIDI Instruments on the Tracker represent the 16 MIDI Channels. So that could stay the same.
Dealing with 8 Tracks, thinking about what to prioritize and making it fit is a big part of the charm of using the tracker. Being able to see all notes happening at one time and the free spaces in between. If used right, 8 tracks are plenty enough as long as you don’t make a song out of long sample loops, you can put midi and samples in the same track. And then there is render selection … I guess i just don’t see the benefit of having more tracks and loosing oversight as a trade off.
I totally agree… BUT… there are usecases where more/dedicated MIDI Tracks could be useful.
If you want to play a big polyphonic chord from an external device, where each note is either micromoved or not played at the same time, you have no other choice but to use multiple tracks, which eats heavily into your available space. This is where i think these 8 dedicated tracks would be handy. I also for example use MIDI to trigger non-musical gear… like visualizers… that can take a lot of steps away from you as well.
Now if there was something like “rendering” down of MIDI Notes, so that it would group a bunch into a “package” you can trigger… then i’d say the 8 Tracks would not be necessary.
All in all… the addition of the dedicated MIDI Tracks would make the Tracker a far more capable sequencer.
I personally also find it important from a marketing/sales/competitive perspective. It would put it on par with the capabilities of something like the Digitakt, which offers 8 tracks of audio sample sequencing and 8 tracks of MIDI sequencing.
I am still not convinced. If my Setup was this elaborate with visualizers and stuff i’d rather buy a second tracker (used for 300€ here in germany) and have two screens with all info on first sight instead to handle all that stuff