Absolute Snap!

[Orren]

I can't believe more people aren't talking about this one either!

Since the beginning, Logic had only had relative snap. Meaning, if you had a region at Bar 1.1.1.234 but wanted to move it to the exact next bar at 2.1.1.0, you coudn't do it. Logic would keep the one-bar "relative" distance, so that if you moved by bar, you'd end up at 2.1.1.234.

But now, there is an "Absolute Snap" option in the Snap menu! You can check this, and your region at 1.1.1.234 will be moved to 2.1.1.0, then 3.1.1.0, then 4.1.1.0, etc.

Yeay! I do a lot of heavily grid-based electronic parts, so to me, this is a godsend!

Orren

[Dor]

Nice.

[StuckInThe70s]

Cool! I asked about that in a separate thread. Glad to hear it's now available!

[TonyBelmont]

Excellent.

[jdg]

yes, i noticed this tonite... love it

[nikki-k]

one reason I sold Logic to go back to PT....

one of MANY that prompted the opposite two days ago....

[Blue May]

That is a great new feature.. one of the most frustrating things in logic finally resolved!

[dlmorley]

This was probably my main gripe. Excellent!

[tengu]

Thank God. That used to frustrate the hell out of me.

[sharky]

Yeah... I majorly concur. This is awesome.

I haven't been this psyched about a piece of software in a long time. I can't wait to rise up tomorrow and crank out a couple jams I've been working on.

The snap feel in Logic is like going from a car without power steering to a car WITH power steering.

[jindrich]

VERY glad to hear.

the very idiotic behaviour of the snap in logic was THE MOST ANNOYING thing ever and a reason alone to pay $15k for protools.

I can go back to logic now, at last.

[Orren]

Originally Posted by jindrich

VERY glad to hear.

So was I!

the very idiotic behaviour of the snap in logic was THE MOST ANNOYING thing ever and a reason alone to pay $15k for protools.

To be fair, I have spoken with (and consulted for) a significant number of composers who actually chose Logic specifically for it's relative snap functionality. They were really wonderful performers, who always were able to play the right feel for their specific song, and when they moved by a musical division (bar, quarter note, etc) they want to be able to maintain the temporal relationship. Absolute snap locks notes to the grid, which can destroy that relationship.

Personally, I do very grid-based synth programming, so I wanted absolute snap desperately! But that's not to say the previous behavior was "idiotic" it just didn't work the way I needed it to. I'm glad that we now have both options—best of both worlds.

Orren

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by Orren

Personally, I do very grid-based synth programming, so I wanted absolute snap desperately! But that's not to say the previous behavior was "idiotic" it just didn't work the way I needed it to. I'm glad that we now have both options—best of both worlds.

Sorry but not having a feature like absolute snap was a big part of what was making Logic feel like such an archaic application for the last 5 years. It was absolutley rediculous.

I am glad they have finally caught up with every other DAW in this regard.

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by Orren

So was I!



To be fair, I have spoken with (and consulted for) a significant number of composers who actually chose Logic specifically for it's relative snap functionality. They were really wonderful performers, who always were able to play the right feel for their specific song, and when they moved by a musical division (bar, quarter note, etc) they want to be able to maintain the temporal relationship. Absolute snap locks notes to the grid, which can destroy that relationship.

Personally, I do very grid-based synth programming, so I wanted absolute snap desperately! But that's not to say the previous behavior was "idiotic" it just didn't work the way I needed it to. I'm glad that we now have both options—best of both worlds.

Orren

Well and the best bit it it isn't "previous behaviour" as you can still use it like that if you want. Choice in this case is GOOD

[Ashermusic]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

Sorry but not having a feature like absolute snap was a big part of what was making Logic feel like such an archaic application for the last 5 years. It was absolutley rediculous.

I am glad they have finally caught up with every other DAW in this regard.

The better you play, and I play quite well, the less attractive this is. I am glad they have retained the option of the old behavior.

[Lwilliam]

I had forgotton how annoying that "feature" was. I'm glad you can set it to snap like every other midi sequencer now - and still do it the "old" way if you want.

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by Ashermusic

The better you play, and I play quite well, the less attractive this is. I am glad they have retained the option of the old behavior.

Your playing abilities have zero to do with that feature being long overdue but congrats on your chops!

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by Ashermusic

The better you play, and I play quite well, the less attractive this is. I am glad they have retained the option of the old behavior.

I'd say it has more to do with what kind of music you make.

[mars]

Originally Posted by Orren

I can't believe more people aren't talking about this one either!

Since the beginning, Logic had only had relative snap. Meaning, if you had a region at Bar 1.1.1.234 but wanted to move it to the exact next bar at 2.1.1.0, you coudn't do it. Logic would keep the one-bar "relative" distance, so that if you moved by bar, you'd end up at 2.1.1.234.

Sorry - this is incorrect. In pre-8 Logic you can use Shift+CTRL when moving parts to put them exactly where you want. Not exactly "snap" but the same end result.

[zvenx]

Ironically Nuendo up to version 2 and in some windows even with the current version does teh opposite which use to bug the hell out of me.
I am very curious why would you want it to snap to the bar and not maintain its relative timing to the bar?
rsp

[Orren]

Originally Posted by mars

Sorry - this is incorrect. In pre-8 Logic you can use Shift+CTRL when moving parts to put them exactly where you want. Not exactly "snap" but the same end result.

You still can move by tick (which is what you're referring to). I'm referring to "snap." The difference between "snap" and "move by tick" is the difference between using a delay slapback processor or manually nudging a copy of the audio file. Both get you the same result, but one is not the other.

Orren

[Orren]

Originally Posted by zvenx

I am very curious why would you want it to snap to the bar and not maintain its relative timing to the bar?

Very often, I find that I may play parts that are in good time, but slightly removed from the exact bar. This is fine when an entire band is playing, since they will all very likely be slightly off the bar. However, if I later want to program parts that are dead on the bar, with absolute snap, I can effortlessly snap the performed parts to the bar, and everything lines up. Without absolute snap, I have to do what Mars points out above, which is manually drag the parts onto the bar, careful to not miss the exact "0 point" of the bar, and end up at "4. 4. 4. 340" instead of "5. 1. 1. 0" etc.

Orren

[zvenx]

thanks, do you quantize?
For me if it doesn't start on the bar is because I dont' want it to start on the bar. If I did I would quantise. I am always curious and fascinated to see how completely different workflows are between different musicians/producers.
Thanks for answering.
rsp