Suggestion for 1.51 - increase the number of songs

[comradec]

Given that there will have to be major changes in the OS for it to allow a clean transfer of songs and associated data between projects, I would suggest that an urgent priority for version 1.51 should be to increase the number of songs permitted per project.

As songs are effectively trapped within their projects at the moment, the current maximum of 50 songs is hopelessly inadequate.

The songs themselves appear to contain very little actual data - that's all in the phrases and, mainly, the audio samples - so I can't see a good reason why increasing the number of song slots should be impossible.

If the maximum songs capacity was increased to, say, 200, we would all be given some breathing room within the Fantom-G, allowing us to store plenty of completed songs within a project while still having space to keep little ideas and works in progress.

--
Steve Cooke
http://soundcloud.com/stevecooke

[nickoli]

What sorts of things are you sharing between songs that you need more then 50 songs in a project?

[comradec]

The request for an increased song capacity is only a stop-gap measure.

What Roland ought to be addressing as a matter of priority - hey, they're about 20 years late in this - is making sure that the Fantom-G's filing system creates automatic associations between songs and their component data - eg, phrases, samples, etc. Then we could move songs between projects without any hassle. *Every* other synth workstation I've owned, going back to 1991, was capable of that. I was amazed to find that the Fantom-G, the most expensive piece of musical gear I've ever bought, is not capable of that.

I write songs on my Fantom-G. As well as the finished articles, there are, as you'd expect, a load of unfinished pieces - basic ideas, works in progress, etc.

If I've written, say, 10 finished songs and 30-plus unfinished pieces, what am I supposed to do now that I'm getting near that 50 total?

I would like to have a project where I could put my all the finished material and then work on developing the unfinished stuff on another project. Only there's no real way of transferring that material between projects - not without many hours' work taking detailed notes and then many more hours re-assembing the component parts of the songs.

So what am I supposed to do here - delete my unfinished material even though I might like to come back to it later?

--
Steve Cooke
http://soundcloud.com/stevecooke

[madAhorn]

Agreed....I am already at 50 and having to decide what to delete...

I may start writing in my X again...unlimited songs you know...

I see no reason why the G is not unlimited as well!

Oh...I can just start another project!...but why do I have to?

[V-CeeOh]

madAhorn, just to be fare, you don't have unlimited songs on the X. You have a limit of 256 for the User area and another 256 for the card. I do agree however that 50 songs for a project it is very limiting on the G.

[PauloF]

Comradec,
Isn't possible to save the project, then save it with another name, delete all finished songs and load it again? Then you will have all your unfinished songs to work on (on a different project).
I would do it that way if I had a G.

The G's concept is completely different to the one in the X, so in my prespective, all data in a given project should be somewhat related (songs, samples, phrases, etc).
I would rather have several (smaller) projects to choose from than a big one with all my stuff, finished or not.
Just MHO

PauloF

[V-CeeOh]

Paulo
The biggest problem is when you want to combine the songs from several projects into one new project. Your method only works to get part of the songs in one project to start another.

[PauloF]

VC,
I agree. That will be difficult yes.

But I haver a doubt. Can't you copy SONGS from several projects into one new one or it is just the max number of SONGs that is a problem ?

Maybe I need to have one G first and have the experience LoL

[The Audacity Works]

comradec:

*Every* other synth workstation I've owned, going back to 1991, was capable of that.

No, *every* other synth workstation you've owned (and in fact, every one I've ever worked on), going back to the advent of MIDI, saves all MIDI data within the song file itself.

The Fantom-G's song file is like an XML document that points to phrase numbers and sample numbers. A Fantom-G song is literally a list that says "okay, at measure 1 play phrase 0042 and at measure 1 beat 2 play sample 0068." There aren't any MIDI notes or CC data in a Fantom-G song file at all. Yes, that's different, and it has numerous advantages. Transferring songs from project to project is not one of them.

Exporting an SMF file does exactly what people have been talking about—it collects all phrases used, merges them into an existing track (format 0) or across multiple linear tracks (format 1) and saves the resultant data as an SMF. They simply want that process taken to the next logical step—splitting the data back into its respective phrases and samples in a different project. Doable? Yeah, but the way I envision it, it's not as easy as people think.

But I agree that there's no reason I see why the Fantom-G shouldn't have more than 50 songs per project, especially considering how easy it is to make ten or twenty different versions of the same song. Maybe Roland was worried people would run out of phrase or sample locations and purposely limited the number of songs accordingly?

[madAhorn]

Ah...I did not know the X had a song limit...256 x 2 is definately nice, however...

Thanks Audacity..

[comradec]

The Audacity Works: "No, *every* other synth workstation you've owned (and in fact, every one I've ever worked on), going back to the advent of MIDI, saves all MIDI data within the song file itself."


Well, you are hardly contradicting me there. All it confirms is that every other synth workstation adopted a sensible way of managing data, whereas the Fantom-G does not.

In that respect at least, using the Fantom-G is like having a car with a brilliant hi-fi system, superb remote control facilities, unrivalled safety features, and so on, but no wheels. "Hey, we're not using wheels. We're not like other cars. We adopt a different approach." That's the trouble with it. Some of the basics, the fundamentals, the good practice developed over many years, have been completely ignored in the rush to come up with a new concept.

Whilst I would like various other issues addressing, I think I would be very happy were the song capacity to be increased to 256. That would deal with the problems at hand.

[The Audacity Works]

Yeah, you're right, it is certainly different, but those differences can also be extremely cool. Phrase-based sequencing is the only reason I'd ever touch a keyboard for full or semi-full music production. Yes, it's a pain to copy songs from one project to another—you just have to plan ahead.

To use your car analogy, I'd say it's more like having a car with a brilliant hi-fi system, superb remote control facilities, unrivalled safety features, and crazy-ass 20" solid gold wheels... that turn into rabid weasels if you try to swap them.



But every other car has a decent hi-fi system, barely-there remote control facilities, marginal safety features, and tiny, crappy wheels with rusty 13" hubs... that can be swapped all day without ever once turning into insane marmots ripping at your flesh.

Anyway, yeah. It'd be nice to have 256 songs per project, even if each song could only have 4 unique phrases. That way, if we had 25 different versions (or mixes!) of the same song—using the same phrases and samples—it wouldn't eat up half the project.

[Atlas5]

On the FG is difficult thread...............

It's hard to change workflows and learn new OS's and feature sets after you've deticated a great deal of time learning the last set of methods. I used to use Opcode Vision, since it went away, there are lots of other sequencer packages out there, but...........I all but gave computer sequencing up. I bought Digital Performer, ProTools, Cubase, to name a few and I just have little desire to learn them.

On the FG is the greatest side.

Get over it, the FG is capable of producing excellent results, if there are workflows or features you feel are missing, your spending too much time worrying about the technology and not spending enough time working your music.

[Coffeebean]

Increasing the number of songs would be fine.

I would prefer an increased number of user patches instead! What do you think? I think that's quite limiting. As I own Art's sound packages I have no free patches left and don't what to delete any of them for own created patches.

[Artemiy]

Oh yes, more multisample and patch locations would be cool! I do not release any new sounds for the G yet as I have no space left in the Mega Pack and I know that my customers get upset sometimes when they know they can't access all sounds at once.