May 12, 2008 at 21:10 #776
[transferred from a separate thread in the Support area – by LDT]
The normal operation could always have one level of undo available. (This undo could be performed by e.g. a doubleclick on PLAY (not > ). The PLAY function as we know it, we don´t change at all.
So if you decide to use PLAY, you dont have the normal one level undo, but off course instead you have the PLAY function.May 12, 2008 at 21:22 #1572MikeParticipant
I am a bit unclear on what exactly would be possible to "undo"? Only a single button push, or something more structured?
For example, if I rotate a knob (POS) to change track timing by 8 steps, would UNDO only move the track steps back by one knob click? If I change a track base note three times to find the correct note, would it only undo the last selection?
I guess I don’t understand what undo is for that makes it better than the current PLAY implementation?
Granted I almost never wish for an undo function, or use the PLAY mode either.
ripeMay 12, 2008 at 21:44 #1573
Regarding the multistep stuff you mention, Gabriel will have to tell how the behaviour will be, but I feel the question is somewhat missing the point of this feature. The point being these multistep actions that you mention can all be reversed, meaning: If you go three steps up, you can go three steps down, if you change your mind.
The interesting part is all the functions that are irreversible. Deleting the wrong track, hitting RMX by accident, deleting a page, the RND function etc, etc. This is where one level of undo will shine.
And no, it does not do anything that PLAY would not be able to do, but PLAY is something that you use consciously with a purpose. Like, you probably wont use PLAY because you are thinking that your next move will be accidently erasing the wrong track.
Is it more clear now?May 12, 2008 at 22:05 #1574MikeParticipant
Yes I suppose I see the logic in that, for the single button operations it would make more sense.
I have been more in the habit of saving the entire machine state when I get to a milestone, to safeguard against the occasional crash, rather than protecting from user error, which UNDO would be handy for.
ripeMay 13, 2008 at 07:55 #1575Quote:I have been more in the habit of saving the entire machine state when I get to a milestone
…that is what I do also – but, I have not yet loaded the saved information back; does this really work?
…and, what I’d love to do is to save different setups on the computer, and push them onto the Octopus during a performance session like:
[code:1]Octopus-state_01 = song1 + song2 + song3
(pause, load Octopus from computer)
Octopus-state_02 = song4 + song5 + song6
…but if I understand correctly, this will not work in case I upgrade the Octopus to the next OS-version, as the saved information may or may not be compatible?
…sorry, I just realize that I am moving off-topic…:whistle:
fairplyMay 13, 2008 at 08:26 #1576
The one step undo can only work for selected functions, that will have to be defined appropriately, and only for one step back. Lars termed them "irreversible" functions, I think that pretty much hits the nail on the head.
As far as saving the machine state goes, saving and recalling internally has to work, otherwise you would probably not be able to turn the machine back on.
Loading in data from the computer will also work seamlessly, even if Octopus is playing while the data is sent to it. So potentially there is no need to pause.
Data compatibility across OS versions is a major issue that we are just about to address. I cannot make any commitments yet, but it is something that is long overdue and very high on the priority list.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.