What are "Sequences"? Are they just glorified Patterns?
A sequence is practically an order list. Sequences could be seen as subsongs. You can have multiple sequences with the same or different patterns, which makes for example composing music for a game with a fixed sample set easier. In the 03.02 release, the feature is not very advanced yet, mostly due to the lack of treeview support and the fact that only the first sequence will be kept when converting to another format. Those things will be fixed in the next release, though (together with some features that Skaven has wait for long enough now :)).
Note to Jojo: Perhaps another thing to take into concideration is the fact that if the sequences use the same numbers for the pattern row, it is treated as duplicated patterns (meaning that if you have a pattern 12 in sequences 1 and 2 and you change either of them, the other one changes as well).
Quotemeaning that if you have a pattern 12 in sequences 1 and 2 and you change either of them, the other one changes as well
I don't see anything wrong with that, what do you mean?
Quote from: "Jojo"Quotemeaning that if you have a pattern 12 in sequences 1 and 2 and you change either of them, the other one changes as well
I don't see anything wrong with that, what do you mean?
He means that if you make pattern 12, and you use it in both sequence 1 and 2, you are able to edit both sequences by modifying pattern 12.
It would be logical if you want to make variations on songs but not spend much time on copying the patterns between sequences.
If you do multisong modules the classic way (i.e. joining several songs by separating them with a "---" or "+++" pattern), you have the same "problem" as well. What's the matter with that?
Quote from: "Jojo"A sequence is practically an order list. Sequences could be seen as subsongs. You can have multiple sequences with the same or different patterns, which makes for example composing music for a game with a fixed sample set easier. In the 03.02 release, the feature is not very advanced yet, mostly due to the lack of treeview support and the fact that only the first sequence will be kept when converting to another format. Those things will be fixed in the next release, though (together with some features that Skaven has wait for long enough now :)).
I'm not sure what you mean. Are they a series of patterns that are all named the same thing, or are they single patterns? What's the difference between sequences and patterns?
A sequence is basically an order list for now. You can have multiple order lists in one module now, so to speak. Is that clear enough, or what part of it is misleading / hard to understand?
Quote from: "Jojo"If you do multisong modules the classic way (i.e. joining several songs by separating them with a "---" or "+++" pattern), you have the same "problem" as well. What's the matter with that?
I think the idea of the problem is that one can accidentally edit a pattern that is used also in other sequences so that it works better in one sequence but becomes worse in others. Of course being careful about 'pattern duplicate before edit' minimizes the risk.
Quote from: "Harbinger"What's the difference between sequences and patterns?
Word 'pattern' is ambiguous in MPT, but here pattern means the thing with the actual note and effect data that is shown in pattern view. The horizontal list shown above the pattern is the sequence/orderlist, and that defines the order in which the patterns are played; in a way it's as simple as pattern playlist, although commands like Bxx can affect the actual play order.
So multiple sequences can be used to create multiple pattern playlists that can share the same patterns. Consider the game music example Jojo mentioned: one could have one file with separate sequence for each game track and since everything is done within the same module file, the same set of instruments, patterns etc. is available for each track.
I really would want it that if I edit a pattern in one sequence, it also changes in the next.
But since I'm not using MPTM, I haven't played with sequences at all.
Well, that's what actually happens. I personally don't think it's dangerous, because you can either
- Insert patterns by pressing the "create new pattern" button (and similar actions like "duplicate") - this will always create an unique pattern!
- Type in the pattern number yourself. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but if you type in the pattern number yourself, how can you *not* know that it has already been used? The fact that the current order list is being duplicated when creating a new sequence is of course a bit misleading here, so it would be better if "create new sequence" would not duplicate the order list.
Quote from: "Jojo"Type in the pattern number yourself. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but if you type in the pattern number yourself, how can you *not* know that it has already been used?
I think you're expecting too much. Someone could be writing for example a soundtrack consisting of tens of sequences and it could take weeks/months to complete. While working on sequence number 28 three weeks after completing the first tracks, it's quite acceptable not to remember whether pattern 14 was used in any previous sequences. That's of course an exaggerated example, but similar problems are present even if not having such a massive number of sequences.
Quote from: "Jojo"The fact that the current order list is being duplicated when creating a new sequence is of course a bit misleading here, so it would be better if "create new sequence" would not duplicate the order list.
I don't quite see what's misleading there. Anyway the duplication was chosen as default because it's very easy to clear the sequence, but much more troublesome to re-create it for example if wishing to create a slightly modified version of the track. It's not that relevant, though, once it's possible to copy/cut/paste order selections.
QuoteI don't quite see what's misleading there.
Well, the most misleading thing is that there is no real visual indication that what you see is the new sequence. The pattern editor will just look the same as before, and unless the treeview's "Orders" item is expanded (in the SVN version, that is), a beginner would f.e. not see the consequences of his action.
Okay thanks Jojo and Relab. I think this discussion should help me write it up in the manual.
I've been looking into this sequence feature recently and found this topic and the related request thread (http://forum.openmpt.org/index.php?topic=3072.0&highlight=sequences) very informative and interesting in many ways.
I've thought of possible solutions to the issues discussed here :
No indication of the current sequence number :
-> in the pattern panel, select the sequence number next to the sequence name (see mockup).
Risk to alter a pattern used in several sequences without knowing it :
-> in the pattern order, add an asterisk * for these patterns.
-> in the pattern order right-click menu, add the possibility to Replace by Copy for these patterns (equivalent to : Duplicate Pattern + delete original).
Mockup :
(http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/1857/sequence1.png)
Sequence 0 : patterns #0 to #4 are marked as "used in another sequence".