Is it the same thing?
Improved item renaming is probably a more global request but the wish I posted was specifically to rename the samples from within Bitwig to more useful and meaningful file names.
Hmm I mean it could be merged if it were to become a more general overhaul of how name changes are handled, but as it stands the two are somewhat separate, my request is about renaming with options for batches, here we‘re talking about updates rippling through to prher projects etc.
Very well, thank you for your explanations. Let’s work on each request separately, then.
Although the request sounds simple, after playing a bit some questions come to mind.
When a sample is dragged on a project it becomes an Arranger Clip. These clips can be renamed through the inspector channel and the new label is used in some places. The original name of the sample is also kept (which is good, that is the source audio) and it is shown in other places. Sadly (and confusingly?) the clips in the arranger show their the original name, not a new name set by the user.
Anyway, when you say that the rename should be applied through the project, this rename would need to happen at the original file name level, the new names set by the user via the inspector channel would rename the same. I guess this is fine.
Yeah, I think this becomes even harder when we take into account the Bitwig packages and their updates. I guess that, for consistency, it is better not to make it easy for users to fiddle there?
Note that a clip resulting from a bounce will only become a sample in the user’s library if they “Save Arranger Clip To Library”. When they do this, they can rename the clip to “Kick” or whatever.
The request was really about the underlying audio file. Renaming clips and other objects in BW actually works really nicely. I do sometimes rename the file myself and then replace it in the sample list so its avoiding that step that I want.
I have logged this with BW support and got a pretty positive response, as if its something they are already thinking about
Thank you for the clarification. Then this request is indeed quite straightforward. Let’s clarify this in the description and let’s promote this draft to Features.
@AndyT I have edited the description based on your last comment. Is it still ok?
There are two things that would be useful to clarify:
What do you mean by “a central library”? How can the DAW know that a file is in a special place? All they see are folders and files (I think). At most, Bitwig could probably detect files from installed Bitwig sound packages.
And the “harder” option looks very harder indeed. If a user renames a file used somewhere else, Bitwig will tell them that a file is missing when they open the project. The user can fix the problem by adding the right file to the project. I really doubt a dev team would want to go trhough the work of building some kind of database to track changes in local files across all projects.
If we don’t know for sure, I’d rather leave this blank.
A central library would require Bitwig keeping a database of audio files, so that if you renamed a sample in the library, any track using it would know about the new filename as it would be referenced through the database.
Alright, thank you for the explanation. I have the feeling that this central library idea complicates the implementation a lot, but there is no point in us discussing it here. If nobody has any objections, I will promote this draft to #features in a couple of days.