It’s been requested and planned for a while I think. Like I said, strange priorities. My thread so I don’t think I need to “drop that for now”.
Ok. It’s better. Like others I’m still not sure why they simply didn’t adapt PT’s way of doing it.
Sure, I most certainly will, and it’s an improvement. I wish they could have included labeling though. Seems odd to me though that they’d leave out labeling of the groups. In PT, as has been pointed out, part of the issue is control, i.e. being able to control several tracks by actively just controlling one. The other part has to do with organization. So if you want to make focus on a group by making it alone visible for example then in PT it’s easier because you can use the name of the group or use the VCA to get that done. If I understand this new updated linking I would, in a large project, have to identify and look at a track part of the group that I wish to see in the mixer for example, or have to remember which number corresponds to which set of channels. Simple naming would have solved at least that problem, wouldn’t you agree?