Currently, the tracker only supports 8 audio tracks, which was sufficient for TFMX Editor, 34 years ago. However, for modern music, this is limiting for users who want to use the tracker as their primary composition tool. 8 voice polyphony in not enough.
What should this feature achieve?
Make tracks capable of containing 4 sub-tracks. The sub-tracks will be routed through the parent track’s channel.
Proposal:
The user expands a track using Shift+Pattern, or using an option in the pattern settings.
Once expanded, the track will be split into 4.
When collapsed, the track can be named “Track 1 [=]”, displaying the data of the first sub-track.
When expanded, they can be named “Track 1 [A]”, “Track 1 [B]”, etc.
Some limitations may apply:
Only one track can be expanded at a time. If another is expanded, the others will collapse.
Only the first 4 tracks can contain sub-tracks.
They can only be for audio (not MIDI).
Advantages of this solution:
This solution preserves the functionality, layout, and user experience of the views built based on the current number of tracks (Master, Performance, Song) and the implementation of multitrack USB streaming.
It is scalable. It can be implemented on a single track or multiple tracks depending on the hardware capabilities.
It offers an opportunity to extend sound polyphony beyond 8 voices.
It can be ported to Play+.
Are there any workarounds?
Resampling (partially)
This workflow doesn’t help at the beginning of the creative process when you’re experimenting. It doesn’t give you the opportunity to refine.
Oh man, having polyphony might be the best upgrade of the Tracker ever. But I never dared to post this request, because I presume CPU limitations just don’t allow for any more sample tracks. Were that not the case, I’d think the MIDI Chord FX for sample tracks might already have been implemented.
Sample polyphony should consume minimal CPU resources. My suggestion to save some CPU is to route the subtracks through one mixer (parent) track, as the other devices mentioned do.
The synths are the biggest CPU consumers in the Tracker.
I disagree and think 8 is perfectly OK. It’s a tracker with its roots in demo-scene history where many of the most famous tracks ever produced used just 4 tracks. Sometimes less is more, and some jobs require certain tools. Did you pick the correct tool?
I know where this sentiment is coming from and I have the same tracker origin myself, but I 100% do not agree with this. Over many years of usage I’ve come to appreciate trackers for their songwriting strengths beyond just cramming as much as possible in four tracks like I did in the Protracker days. No other sequencer is this capable, period.
So I don’t think the Tracker needs to be burdened by a forty year old demo scene attitude. It already evolved way past its 4 track legacy by including proper effects, mixing, performance tools, synths, to name just a few. So having polyphony would just be another massive improvement.
Totally agree. It’s why I’ve stayed away from things like laptops and midi keyboards and Omnisphere/similar VSTs. Just far too much choice for what I need and puts me off. There’s already loads in Tracker!
With all respect if you think Tracker is the most capable sequencer out there, period, I would argue this is more just a personal opinion and preference rather than an objective fact. If it’s that good as a format, why aren’t all the major artists and studios using it?
I agree the format has moved on a lot, and there’s room for a “pro” version, but as it stands, for me it’s fine and does more than enough already. If it had 4x4 tracks, that’s still limiting, so then what? 24 tracks? At that point you are probably better off sitting at a proper DAW. My opinion of course.
For me Tracker has the right amount of tracks and choices. I wouldn’t tracker being and MPC or something like that with millions of choices. I think it’s perfect right now.
Just the synth/ midi tracks are awesome. Perfect. The right amount.
Of course you’re correct in this being my own baseless opinion.
But as much as I love trackers, there’s always room for improvement, and I wouldn’t want innovation to halt because of some presumed tracker legacy. I can’t shake the feeling that because of this legacy, trackers are always being associated with a very specific style of fast chiptune or breakbeat music. And it’s great at that, no question about it, but the tracker type of sequencing is perfect for practically anything. It would only be further improved by suggestions like the OP did.
I guess a point to consider is that with Tracker Plus you have 16 voice polyphony (additional 8 voices shared by the 3 synth tracks). When I was using the Tracker OG I found the 8 tracks sometimes limiting but since switching to the Plus I have never found it an issue as I use the synth tracks for the melodic elements. I have always assumed the 8 audio track is a hardware limit of the OG and that this was one reason the Plus was developed, so in some ways the answer to this is to upgrade to the plus? Personally I think the approach of the Plus (synth tracks triggered by MIDI tracks) works better rather than subtracks as it preserves the simplicity of the workflow.
I guess likely considered already but could also consider that another workaround is that if you are building a drum track from hits rather than loops you can get lots of different voices into 1 track as long as the samples are short and don’t overlap.
As a statement presented as fact, I disagree, but as your opinion, I don’t recall saying it is baseless, more just your preference. Whatever that is actually based on is your prerogative.
I agree that there is always room for improvement, but for me, part of the appeal of trackers and a hardware device like this is the fact that when you strip away the synth engines and modern effects etc, what you are left with is the essence of tracker production and the distinctive sound that produces. It’s not all fast chip tune music though, there are plenty of examples of synthwave and Italo disco styles that also became ubiquitous with trackers.
I’m sure that time will see those innovations you crave come to fruition, but right now, for me this perfectly hits the sweet spot.
