Allstair--
I hadn't thought of that either, and what you say makes sense. If I had limited the potential for total tracks in my setup (prefs) I would not be able to double-click in the mixer's bottom "box" and get a new track. As for the re-launch, I did know that, but thanks.
I now see that I had also missed an essential point, and apparently so did at least two others who had offered advice and guidance and philosophies, but maybe your instructions still answered my question - one of the two I thought I was asking, ;-0.
That is: assuming I have the potential (in my hardware and setup) to create and can see the number of tracks. My issue with these ostensibly "new" tracks (that become tied into another track) involves those in my potential list (when the project is first open) and / yet still empty. In fact, it's not about creating "a" new track, it specifically about creating a "new" track - if this makes sense - meaning, one that is by definition not associated with another.
In other words, in my scenario I have a few tracks with audio in them; and decide to add another. This "other," or "new" track (i.e., in the Arrange Window's left side list of "tracks," which is to be distinguished from the "audio track" which I've referred to as a "track assignment") can be one of these "free," or open, tracks, i.e., not yet used. Another scenario might be that my hardware setup (as established in the Preferences) has 24 possible but my template only uses 8. Maybe this is leading somewhere...
If I had 16 tracks in my template, but only 8 set up in my basic project, and then clicked SHIFT+ENTER to create a 9th track, would this track be a twin of another? That's my issue. It's not about adding new potential tracks, it's about the nature of the "new" track was not literally "new, as it contained routings, and other attributes, that had been defined in another track, specifically the particular track that happened to be selected at the point I used the "Create New" command (Shift+Enter). The most problematic aspect of the issue, for me, is that the newly created (twin) track shared the same "audio track assignment (or channel) along with buss assignments. AND these attributes, routings, what ever, could NOT be changed without also changing the initial track (track 8, if that's the track I had selected immediately before choose "Create New."
In other words, this ostensibly, but not truly, "new track" would actually have a name that was identical to "that" initial track that I'd have selected immediately prior to "create new." Correct? Although I can change its name i cannot change its audio track assignment. Correct?
The reason for this, and solution to it, seems to be that the term Create NEW is not literally denoting what i think It should, and so for me to create a new track I need to use one of two other procedures: 1) ensure I have an audio track selected, and then choose "Create New From Next Inst" (SH
CORETURN, with which I also have some terminology issues, or 2) CO+RETURN which brings up the "Multiple New Track" dialog.
Having belabored this point to some degree of boredom for you and others i must say that the MAIN reason this is a bummer for me is because there seems to be NO FACILITY to separate those attributes (routing, etc) from those "twin" tracks. If there was I'd simply change the audio track assignment and move on.
But yes, I did understand that in order for me to create any new track it needs to be enabled in one of the three hardware preference settings for the audio, midi or instrument respectively.
So thanks, and back to you, Allstair. Am I making sense, and did we establish that "Create New" doesn't really connote "new," but rather "clone?"
And, am I correct in that there are two ways to create a new track (assuming it's possible and set up for in prefs) 1) "Create New From Next Instrument or 2) "Create Multiple?"
And is it correct to say that once an audi
