UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:03:00
(permalink)
Mod Bod
Standardization - is it a bad thing?
...
Do all these various paths ultimately lead to clutter and disorganization as a legitimate complaint? Will a lack of customization actually be better for someone in the long run if "production of a finished product" is the main concern?
...
Sure, I'd like to be able to customize some things myself. Colors for example. But mainly so that I can read certain labels or help bring my eye to certain items in the Track View.
Is a lean, mean GUI more efficient? And more professional in appearance? I'm sure there will be differing views of this.
Hi Dave, McD analogies aside, you make a very good point. I personally think it all depends on implementation. The better each feature is implemented, the less need there is for customization. Here is an example: In previous versions of Sonar there was the ability to customize menus. Especially menu keyboard shortcuts. That was (and still is) necessary because the menu keyboard shortcuts had not been properly thought out and they had changed from something more or less logical to something random. Obviously there were going to be some users that would want to restore the previous shortcuts. The menu customizations offered that flexibility. That flexibility might look like a good thing but ultimately, someone at Cakewalk should have spent some serious time on working out the most logical and intuitive menu structures and shortcuts so that the users would never even think of wanting to customize those menus. One might argue that what seems logical and intuitive to me might not be to someone else so I will provide an example that I feel is quite obvious: When you right click on a track header you get a menu. The keyboard shortcuts for that menu are seemingly random. I would suggest the following changes: Right-click- D on the track header adds a MIDI track. That is weird because right-click M is not assigned! Right-click- A adds an Audio track (good). Right-click- F does nothing. It should add a track Folder. Right-Click- I does nothing. It should do make Instrument Track. Right-Click- C does nothing. It should do Clone track(s). Right-Click- L does nothing. It should open the Layers submenu instead of Right-Click-Y.  Right-Click- S does nothing. It should Save as track template. Right-Click- D should Delete the select track(s). (After M is reassigned) Etc... Surely people will agree that this makes more sense? The above is just an example. My point is that things should be well thought out and thoroughly implemented and I think people will then be much less inclined to ask for more customization. UnderTow
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:08:48
(permalink)
Rothchild
Well, sorry if you failed to understand me there John T. There was an argument presented by way of an analogy. The argument is non sequitur the analogy, you're right, is just an analogy.
Glad to see high standards are being maintained and you're providing your normal level of input to insightful, discursive, dialogue around here.
Child
Um, no. He didn't present an argument. He raised a question about standardisation, and offered an example of such with the McDonald's story. There is neither non sequitur nor analogy here.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:11:26
(permalink)
DeeS
Actually I'm with you Randy. I would like some customization such as a floating Toolbar that can have the buttons I use the most put on it. You know like the SAVE button. I really can't believe that an action as critical as saving doesn't have a Button in the Control Panel.
This is of course also true. Some things will always need some level of customization simple because we are all using our DAWs to achieve different tasks. The ability to show and hide some parts of the GUI depending on our needs and current tasks makes sense. Still, I think that the better things are implemented, the less there is need for customization. Here is another example: If the Event Inspector in the Control Bar would also display info on Audio Clips (Start Time, End Time, Length, Buttons to toggle Groove-Clip, V-Vocal, Mute/Unmute, Lock state etc) Everyone would keep that module there because it is always useful regardless of whether you are working on MIDI or Audio events. As it is now, anyone that doesn't use MIDI will probably want to remove that module from their Control Bar. So again, smarter more complete implementation diminishes the need for customization. UnderTow
|
drumr
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 683
- Joined: 2006/04/28 10:37:30
- Location: Twang Town
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:16:02
(permalink)
While I appreciate some of the newer features of X1, I don't really like the drab ProTools like appearance of it. Anxiously awaiting the next patch here.
|
Dave Modisette
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11050
- Joined: 2003/11/13 22:12:55
- Location: Brandon, Florida
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:35:11
(permalink)
I haven't eaten anything from MacDonald's or any similar assembly-line fast-food kind of place for a long, long time, and I never worked for one either - but I remember someone telling me that the trick was to order a standard menu item with some arbitrary change, say no pickle or no mustard or onions or whatever; that meant that it had to be done right then, from the beginning, and you would get it fresh, instead of something that might or might not have been sitting in a delivery queue for 10 minutes. And your customization came at a cost - time. That's what I'm getting at.
|
gothic.angel
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 572
- Joined: 2009/02/27 12:21:53
- Location: Darkness
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:41:35
(permalink)
nighthadfallen
I bet if you could do an accurate poll of the total number of Sonar users, you would find, overwhelmingly they prefer the new look and functionality. It wreaks of modern aesthetics and efficiency. Thank God.
NOT, AT ALL.... Threads and posts around clearly show that , aside from the look in itself, there are serious complaints about many features that have now been somehow "lost" as they are "hidden"... ...which means "functionality" is not at its best with X1.... I really hate to say it, but SONAR has been stripped down.... and to me that means "impoverishment"... 'Hope Cakewalk will revise this... seriously...
post edited by gothic.angel - 2011/01/08 09:44:05
GothicAngeL - EBM - Dark Electronics______________________________SONAR Platinum ∞, Rapture ProSAMPLITUDE X3 Pro Suite, FL Studio 12, Reason 10
_________________________________________ DELL Dimension E521 - AMD 64X2 - Windows 10 Pro_________________________________________ Proud "Apple's i-STUFF" Worst Enemy...
|
Rothchild
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1479
- Joined: 2003/11/27 13:15:24
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:47:31
(permalink)
Ok, sorry JohnT.
The question, as I see it, is put forward by the means of an 'argument'. There are a series of statements (including some empirical observations) which invite us to make further statements on the effect, we believe, the premise provided will have on our DAW of choice.
The proposition being made is: 'if we believe Sonar is analogous to a McD burger, surely we must accept that standardisation (pre-defined and easily repeatable stages to aid children in manufacturing goods) is a good thing?'
Quacks like an analogy to me, but if you want to call it a metaphor or something else all good with me, hopefully I'll at least pick up on the sense of what you're saying.
I guess you may be right, that it's not a non sequitur, it might just be a strawman. Again I apologise if my sloppy use of language broke your comprehension engine, have faith that there will be a patch along soon.
And hands up who's got plastic bags in the 4th drawer down?
;-)
Child
|
nighthadfallen
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 118
- Joined: 2004/04/11 16:31:49
- Location: Burnt Hills NY
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:57:34
(permalink)
nighthadfallen
I bet if you could do an accurate poll of the total number of Sonar users, you would find, overwhelmingly they prefer the new look and functionality. It wreaks of modern aesthetics and efficiency. Thank God.
NOT, AT ALL....
Threads and posts around clearly show that , aside from the look in itself, there are serious complaints about many features that have now been somehow "lost" as they are "hidden"...
...which means "functionality" is not at its best with X1.... This is all so subjective. For all we know, the dissatisfied user base represented at the forums may account for a small percentage of the satisfied users overall. The dissatisfied users are just LOUDER. I prefer it over 8.5.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 09:58:07
(permalink)
Rothchild
The proposition being made is: 'if we believe Sonar is analogous to a McD burger, surely we must accept that standardisation (pre-defined and easily repeatable stages to aid children in manufacturing goods) is a good thing?'
I really don't think so, though I suppose ModBod will tell us if I'm wrong. Claiming Sonar was like Big Mac would be a lunatic claim, and he doesn't strike me as a lunatic.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
HumbleNoise
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2004/01/04 12:53:50
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 10:04:45
(permalink)
I sometimes feel I'm not very qualified to comment on these types of things because I'm a very occasional, older (57) user and not very schooled in music or music production so for those of you who have years of intense experience with Sonar I totally understand the angst. On the other hand I might be one of the more qualified users because of my usage and (lack of) expertise. And by more qualified I mean my type of user might represent Cake's biggest potential market, which as a business, you cannot ignore. So as a not so professional user I found X1 to be incredibly easy to learn and use vs 8.53. I found the groove 3 videos and I was on my way. I read the manual, checked the help files, watched more videos, stalked the forums, learned the few (for my way of working) new shortcuts, mastered Screen Sets, the multi-dock, the browser and love the inspector. I don't use the couple of modules that don't fit on the Control bar and I ALWAYS use cntrl 'S' to save in EVERY windows program so NEVER even looked for a save button and would never use it. I was watching the groove 3 videos and learned that 'W' rewound the project. I just didn't know that. But I NEVER thought to myself W? wtf? That's not logical! I just press 'W', Works great. Works even better because it's so close to the left side of the keyboard were the cntrl and alt buttons (and my left hand) live. So for some reason I don't look for or care that much about logic when looking for short cut keys. Not saying it's right or wrong - just sayin'. The only reason I change colors is to make it pleasing to the eye or to play with when I have some free time. As a matter of fact I have almost never even considered what the color of X-1 is. In 8.53 I was always trying out new skins and color combos. Because they were there? I'm not sure but I'm just not compelled to change the colors of X1. I've got my Audio Tracks one color and my MIDI another but it's not how I differentiate between the two. So I guess I'd like to change some colors but, again find that I am not in the least bit compelled to do so. I find all the controls I need are at right at hand and the more I learn about the new ways of X1 the more I like it. I opened up 8.53 to check a project and was blown away by its look and feel and not in a good way. It looked cluttered and I still have no idea what most of those little button do. I'm an old dog but apparently can learn new tricks and X1 let's me create my rudimentary music, after I learned how to get around. 8.53 was always a mystery to me. The purpose of this post is, of course, not to convince others that their needs go unheard or unheeded but just to reiterate that X1 nailed it - for some people, ruined it for others. It's matter of how your brain works and the reason people gravitate to any software versus another. The bakers knew that risk when they made the changes and they'll reap the consequences - both good and bad. The bugs are an entirely different issue and the fact they would ignore long standing bugs is inexcusable and speaks volumes about their business principles and attitude towards their user base. They don't effect me that badly because I have very little at stake but for a professional? NO WAY is X1 ready for that market and they should not pretend it is. It's the pretending or misrepresentation that I think makes people the most angry and angry they should be. Will the bakers pull this one out? Will a successful NAMM showing simply reinforce their marketing decisions? Or reveal its flaws? Sales are great, why fix bugs? Or sales are great, NOW is the time to fix bugs. The future will tell but the clock is ticking. To close please do not read into this post that I think that the complaints that people have about X1 are somehow diminished because this one user likes it. I understand I am only one user among many but wanted my thoughts to be heard (read).
post edited by HumbleNoise - 2011/01/08 10:11:43
Humbly Yours Larry Sonar X2 x64 MAudio 2496 Yamaha MG 12/4 Roland XV-88 Intel MB with Q6600 and 4 GB Ram NVidia 9800 GTX Windows 7 x64 Home Premium
|
Rothchild
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1479
- Joined: 2003/11/27 13:15:24
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 10:05:12
(permalink)
It was actually a cheeseburger, and everyone knows ModBod is a top fella and that any lunacy he expresses is of the very highest quality!
Child
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 10:09:46
(permalink)
For the record, I'm a professional and I'm pretty happy with X1. I do music composition and recording, sound effects, and voice recording work with it. Currently haolf and half qwith it and 8.5, as I'm not doing any imminent deadline stuff with it just yet. But I'm getting less and less worried about that, and I imagine I'll be fully switched over by the end of the month.
Just want to point out that this "it's only for noobs and hobbyists" thing is not really true.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
Rus W
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 541
- Joined: 2010/11/04 00:09:34
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 10:37:53
(permalink)
Mod Bod
I haven't eaten anything from MacDonald's or any similar assembly-line fast-food kind of place for a long, long time, and I never worked for one either - but I remember someone telling me that the trick was to order a standard menu item with some arbitrary change, say no pickle or no mustard or onions or whatever; that meant that it had to be done right then, from the beginning, and you would get it fresh, instead of something that might or might not have been sitting in a delivery queue for 10 minutes.
And your customization came at a cost - time. That's what I'm getting at.
Exactly. It's not that they don't want you to customize; they don't want you to spend a whole alot to time doing it. Having said this, they have no clue how meticulous or not users are as in how much time they'll spend customizing, but they don't want that to be all you do. That's one of the biggest - if not the biggest problem - diversity. While many are all for it, it really does put a huge damper on things. As I said earlier, if Sonar (Cake) tried to appease everybody, they may as well shoot themselves (not just in the foot either) - Cake, please don't - not literally! I'm also in the keyboard vs. mouse thread, but that's only with two choices: "What tool do you use to compose music?" Not 200 choices as in: "What softsynths do you use or not use?" It's everywhere. So, many choices - so little time to think to make a decision. It's not "Paper or Plastic?" anymore It's Radio, CD Player, Computer, MP3 Player, Ipod, iPhone? Yet, all these items do the same core thing. Play/download media. Yet, musician purist are mad because everybody uses a computer and software to make music - while you even have a billion choices there as well. (Sonar, ProTools, Mixcraft, PreSonus, Ableton, etc) These, like the devices that later house what they produce, all do the same thing at heart. I'm not saying that everybody should stick to one thing (ie: Sonar) because that one thing would turn out to be a huge mess! So, ask yourself: What is worse? One entity trying to be everything for/to everybody or so many entities trying to be so many different things when they're just one thing at heart which might tick off any and everybody? Which evil would you like to deal with? If you think about it every different program out there is a customized version of another as they swap ideas. Whether it'd be a more intricate or simplified GUI or bundled effects or what have you. But as you said, time is key because it took all the people time to make these programs from the most simple to complex and they all want us to do one thing, which is why I understand the "limitation" put on customization because they believe that users will spend more time "pimpin' their whips" instead of driving them. Yes, we'll drive them, but let's trick the you-know-what out of them first. With alot of choices, that is bound to happen. The same could be said for the multiple synths, FX, etc in high end products, but with these items, you are doing what the app you got was designed to do - make music - "driving" the software - pimpin' it like there is no tomorrow! I'm all for customization, but too much of a good thing ... it's odd because we probably spend more time customizing the finish product than it took them to make it! We'll ask for piles and piles of toppings, but never get around to sinking our teeth into what underneath them because either we can't or didn't really want to in the first place. (This seems like an extreme hyperbole, but one I don't necessarily disagree with)
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 10:51:24
(permalink)
Mod Bod
I haven't eaten anything from MacDonald's or any similar assembly-line fast-food kind of place for a long, long time, and I never worked for one either - but I remember someone telling me that the trick was to order a standard menu item with some arbitrary change, say no pickle or no mustard or onions or whatever; that meant that it had to be done right then, from the beginning, and you would get it fresh, instead of something that might or might not have been sitting in a delivery queue for 10 minutes.
And your customization came at a cost - time. That's what I'm getting at.
Absolutely, and that applies in DAW-land as well; it's possible that customizing things to be/look exactly the way you think they ought to be/look will improve productivity and speed up workflow, though I'm not sure it's as clearcut as some people imagine... but regardless, it's going to take a time investment in getting it set up that way. I have a feeling a lot of people spend/waste a good deal of time doing it for the sake of doing it, and up to a point I understand CW's desire to lead a little bit away from that. In hamburger-land, I'd FAR rather wait 5 or 10 minutes more for something fresh (and, while we're at it, happily pay more for local, freerange and organic) than have it NOW the 'default' way. That's a cost I'm more than willing to pay. Others might not be. But, does the same hold for DAW usage? I'm not sure. I do tend to agree that in many cases providing kitchen-sink customization options can sometimes indicate a deferral of responsibility for proper interface design. Over in Reaper-land they seem to be moving towards a kind of DIY-DAW concept with 'Walter' and I think it's an interesting experiment - but overall, in balance, does it lead to increased productivity or better user experience? I'm not sure. I do suspect that given the general culture of Reaper users, it seems like it's something that people wanted and are welcoming, so it seems like a smart move. Will X1 look like an equally savvy concept once the major bugs and issues are shaken out? Time will tell, I guess. I'm still in a wait-and-see mode with regards to X1 - I have a somewhat older system and smallish screen and, not being in a position to invest in those things as well as upgrading I want to try a demo to see how it runs here before taking the plunge. But when it comes time, and given that some serious thought has apparently been put into re-imagining the interface structure, I'm certainly going to have a good look at what they've done and give it a reasonable chance before deciding it's all crap and changing as much of it as possible back to what I'm used to.
|
HumbleNoise
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2004/01/04 12:53:50
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 11:04:00
(permalink)
UnderTow
Mod Bod
Standardization - is it a bad thing?
...
Do all these various paths ultimately lead to clutter and disorganization as a legitimate complaint? Will a lack of customization actually be better for someone in the long run if "production of a finished product" is the main concern?
...
Sure, I'd like to be able to customize some things myself. Colors for example. But mainly so that I can read certain labels or help bring my eye to certain items in the Track View.
Is a lean, mean GUI more efficient? And more professional in appearance? I'm sure there will be differing views of this.
Hi Dave,
McD analogies aside, you make a very good point. I personally think it all depends on implementation. The better each feature is implemented, the less need there is for customization. Here is an example:
In previous versions of Sonar there was the ability to customize menus. Especially menu keyboard shortcuts. That was (and still is) necessary because the menu keyboard shortcuts had not been properly thought out and they had changed from something more or less logical to something random. Obviously there were going to be some users that would want to restore the previous shortcuts. The menu customizations offered that flexibility.
That flexibility might look like a good thing but ultimately, someone at Cakewalk should have spent some serious time on working out the most logical and intuitive menu structures and shortcuts so that the users would never even think of wanting to customize those menus.
One might argue that what seems logical and intuitive to me might not be to someone else so I will provide an example that I feel is quite obvious: When you right click on a track header you get a menu. The keyboard shortcuts for that menu are seemingly random. I would suggest the following changes:
Right-click-D on the track header adds a MIDI track. That is weird because right-click M is not assigned!
Right-click-A adds an Audio track (good).
Right-click-F does nothing. It should add a track Folder.
Right-Click-I does nothing. It should do make Instrument Track.
Right-Click-C does nothing. It should do Clone track(s).
Right-Click-L does nothing. It should open the Layers submenu instead of Right-Click-Y.
Right-Click-S does nothing. It should Save as track template.
Right-Click-D should Delete the select track(s). (After M is reassigned)
Etc...
Surely people will agree that this makes more sense?
The above is just an example. My point is that things should be well thought out and thoroughly implemented and I think people will then be much less inclined to ask for more customization.
UnderTow
Undertow, While I think the keys you suggest make logical sense I'd prefer ALL the short cut keys to be on the left side of the keyboard no matter how lame the letter seems. I have my right hand on the mouse and operate the keys with my left and reaching for the 'L' for anything does not work for me. So even though the letters looks good, their position on the keyboard is equally as important - to me.
Humbly Yours Larry Sonar X2 x64 MAudio 2496 Yamaha MG 12/4 Roland XV-88 Intel MB with Q6600 and 4 GB Ram NVidia 9800 GTX Windows 7 x64 Home Premium
|
JClosed
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 690
- Joined: 2009/12/19 11:50:26
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 11:07:05
(permalink)
I must say I agree with HumbleNoise here. Well not that strange really, because we have about the same age (I am 56), and the same use of the program. I think he as a point here...
Just an opinion...
|
yorolpal
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13829
- Joined: 2003/11/20 11:50:37
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 11:22:09
(permalink)
Mind if I steal your hotkeys there Undertow, ol pal?
post edited by yorolpal - 2011/01/08 17:39:41
|
damon777
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 101
- Joined: 2008/05/19 13:14:46
- Location: Mansfield Notts UK.
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 11:27:38
(permalink)
All this talk about food is making me hungry!
Dell XPS 430, 8GB Win7 64 VS 100 x2 PCR 500 8.5 PE X1D Expanded X2A Producer E Omnisphere, Stylus, Trillian Alesis M1 620`S Alesis M1 520`S. Novation Nocturn.
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 11:34:43
(permalink)
HumbleNoise
Undertow,
While I think the keys you suggest make logical sense I'd prefer ALL the short cut keys to be on the left side of the keyboard no matter how lame the letter seems. I have my right hand on the mouse and operate the keys with my left and reaching for the 'L' for anything does not work for me. So even though the letters looks good, their position on the keyboard is equally as important - to me.
That is a valid point I had not thought of. Probably because I am tall and have long arms. I also always have my right hand on the mouse (Or Pen Tablet when using Pro Tools) but don't mind reaching over with my left hand to hit keys on the right hand side of the keyboard. Although I have a preference for the logical naming I propose, I could live with having all those shortcuts being on the left of the keyboard as you propose. (Especially if the reason was mentioned in the manual). To me the important thing is that there is a good reason to do things in any particular way. Currently many keys do nothing in that menu and many menu items have no shortcut at all. In other words, no thought has been put into that particular menu's shortcuts. I think my point remains valid: If good thought is put into the design and implementation phase, less customisation is needed. UnderTow
|
Dave Modisette
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11050
- Joined: 2003/11/13 22:12:55
- Location: Brandon, Florida
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 11:45:27
(permalink)
Why did I use the MacDonald's analogy? Well, it shows how teams are built based on non-negotiable standards. You could take me off of the grill crew of the MacDonald's on University Blvd and send me to the crew on Beach Blvd in Jacksonville, Florida and I could instantly go to work on that team and they wouldn't miss a beat.
And another reason, and forgive me because this is just how I feel based on what I particularly like to do, is that if you are not recording top notch bands in original settings and specifically your own music, it's cooking someone else's hamburgers to me. Your product is your labor and you do whatever you do to make the mortgage payment. The more you do at an acceptable quality level, the more money you make. So if I like cooking hamburgers at MacDonalds, it's great. If I hate cooking hamburgers at a trendy place in South Beach, it sucks.
But enough about hamburgers and back to the benefit of standardization in the MacDonald's scenario. Have you ever gone over to a friend's home studio to collaborate or to help them out with an issue? If your SONAR set up is the same as theirs you can go to work and hardly skip a beat. But if they have everything moved around and all the hot keys changed, you run into an immediate problem.
I've never worked on Pro Tools. What's the customization like on that platform? Could it be that it is somewhat "nailed in place" in regard to standardization and that allows the Pro Tools studio to call a guy across the country and plunk him down in front of their Pro Tools rig and everything is in the same place?
Does SONAR's customization abilities paint it into a corner of being a "one man show" platform and not an industry standard? Once again, I'm not looking for arguments. I'm just enjoying a discussion and learning what everyone else is doing. And if you are doing background music for message on hold recordings, I don't mean to insult you by saying it's a lesser job. To me, a job is a job. You either enjoy it or you don't. I work in plastics and I love my job but you might absolutely hate it.
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:01:50
(permalink)
Mod Bod
I've never worked on Pro Tools. What's the customization like on that platform? Could it be that it is somewhat "nailed in place" in regard to standardization and that allows the Pro Tools studio to call a guy across the country and plunk him down in front of their Pro Tools rig and everything is in the same place?
That is mostly how it is. There is no keybinding customization for instance. Every Pro Tools on the planet uses the same shortcuts hence you can buy Pro Tools Keyboards with coloured keys and all the shortcuts printed on the keys. (The shortcuts are very well thought out and cover nearly every possible function in PT). I can work on any Pro tools setup anywhere in the world right off the bat. That doesn't mean that Pro Tools is less powerful. On the contrary. PT in many ways is much more powerful than Sonar but the power comes in different places. (No need to go into that right now). UnderTow
|
HumbleNoise
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2004/01/04 12:53:50
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:04:51
(permalink)
Dave I just understood your post (slow this morning) and I think you make a very valid point and one I had not thought of re: customization. I agree that while on the surface the 'full metal customization' mode seems to make sense as it will fit each individual, building an interface to fit the individual is counter to creating a standard interface that every user can interact with in the same way. Two different design philosophies and directions.
One reason McDonald's is so successful (as well any other successful chain) is that you know exactly what to expect EVERY TIME. Some people love it and for exactly that reason. Others hate it for exactly that reason.
But Undertow's point about the thought needed to create that consistent interface is still the most important issue at hand.
Did the bakers get it right? We can't know in 6 weeks - but we will in 6 months.
Humbly Yours Larry Sonar X2 x64 MAudio 2496 Yamaha MG 12/4 Roland XV-88 Intel MB with Q6600 and 4 GB Ram NVidia 9800 GTX Windows 7 x64 Home Premium
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:05:36
(permalink)
Mod Bod
I've never worked on Pro Tools. What's the customization like on that platform? Could it be that it is somewhat "nailed in place" in regard to standardization and that allows the Pro Tools studio to call a guy across the country and plunk him down in front of their Pro Tools rig and everything is in the same place?
Yeah, interesting point. Display customisation in PT is very limited, as it happens.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
Lynn
Max Output Level: -14 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6117
- Joined: 2003/11/12 18:36:16
- Location: Kansas City, MO
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:26:11
(permalink)
Mod Bod
Have you ever gone over to a friend's home studio to collaborate or to help them out with an issue? If your SONAR set up is the same as theirs you can go to work and hardly skip a beat. But if they have everything moved around and all the hot keys changed, you run into an immediate problem.
Dave, you bring up a good point. The beauty of previous versions of Sonar was the ability to customize your own setup, and yet, be able to go into another Sonar studio and know your way around because you could find any function you needed by knowing where the menus were. I think it's still much the same with X1. Now, we all have to learn a new paradigm because the menus have changed, but once we get to know them we'll be where we were before. I believe CW has taken a small step backward by reducing the customization of X1, but hopefully they'll listen and give us back some options that we had before. Stay thirsty, my friend, Lynn
|
keith
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3882
- Joined: 2003/12/10 09:49:35
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:38:13
(permalink)
John T
Mod Bod
I've never worked on Pro Tools. What's the customization like on that platform? Could it be that it is somewhat "nailed in place" in regard to standardization and that allows the Pro Tools studio to call a guy across the country and plunk him down in front of their Pro Tools rig and everything is in the same place?
Yeah, interesting point. Display customisation in PT is very limited, as it happens.
Well let's not get caught up in what you can and can't do in PT. SONAR X1 specifically is presented as "DAW 2.0". Work how you want. Arrange your screens how you want them arranged. Dock this, dock that, dock the other thing, do the flippedy doo on all your DAW windows and your in workflow heaven... blah blah.. Problem is, as many threads and posts have pointed out, many things in the new UI are kinda cool, while many other things are kinda broken. Menus in the wrong place. Wierd side effect stuff. But most importantly -- no way for an individual to correct what's correctable for their own needs, feature bugs notwithstanding. Limited customization = FAIL. Hamburgers or no hamburgers. If you want PT with limited customization... why don't we all just use PT? I mean talk about "standards", there's your "standard" right there. PT. Or do we want something better? I vote for better. Maybe I'm looking for DAW 2.5.
|
keith
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3882
- Joined: 2003/12/10 09:49:35
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:47:34
(permalink)
UnderTow
That flexibility might look like a good thing but ultimately, someone at Cakewalk should have spent some serious time on working out the most logical and intuitive menu structures and shortcuts so that the users would never even think of wanting to customize those menus.
Here's one of the big problems, as I see it. You assume cake didn't go through that process. From my perspective, they did, and what you ended up with is X1. So it was either "some one" with or without some targeted focus group providing usability feedback. Based on my own experience, I'm guessing they hired one of them High Priced Consultant Types.  But whoever that collection of someones was, there's obviously a disconnect between them and a good portion of SONAR users. Or at least the vocal ones. There's every shade of purple between the nighthadfallen's and their "this thing is perfect!" assessment with those saying "I can't believe I can't access the frobnitz from a button in track view anymore".
|
Rothchild
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1479
- Joined: 2003/11/27 13:15:24
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 12:52:41
(permalink)
At least if I went to another Sonar studio I could get part way there to feeling at home by taking my preferred colour scheme with me, maybe they should just make the menu / button / layout customisations easily saveable and shareable also?
Without wanting to get drawn in to too much more semantic disection I think there is a difference that needs to be drawn between 'standards' and 'conventions'. The convention is for cheeseburger to have meat, cheese and condements in the middle, with a bun around the outside.
The standard (operating practice) for McD's to create this is built (customised?), by them, to suit their own needs (low paid, interchangable and shifting workforce) the 'standards' applied by another burger maker to arrive at the 'same' (in the sense of a conventional burger) will be different according to their business need / marketing strategy.
Personally I'm happy to set my own standards based on what I understand to be 'best practice' conventions (gain staging, order of processing, recording / mixing methods etc) so they are adapted to how I work and how I work with others.
(and just to be clear, my use of the word argument was meant in it's philosphical sense rather than as 'a blazing row')
Child
|
HumbleNoise
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2004/01/04 12:53:50
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 13:51:00
(permalink)
Hey I was just wondering. Would a simple customizable 'My Tools' module in the control bar be enough to add the customization needed? Or is the issue deeper and more complex?
If it's the former then X1 is ideal situated to add that feature in an orderly fashion in the future.
If it's the latter then I dunno.
Humbly Yours Larry Sonar X2 x64 MAudio 2496 Yamaha MG 12/4 Roland XV-88 Intel MB with Q6600 and 4 GB Ram NVidia 9800 GTX Windows 7 x64 Home Premium
|
nighthadfallen
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 118
- Joined: 2004/04/11 16:31:49
- Location: Burnt Hills NY
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 13:53:27
(permalink)
nighthadfallen's and their "this thing is perfect!" assessment
Keith, it's funny that I can't like X1 without being characterized in such a simplistic manner. I like to make some smart-ass remark to you, but alas, I've got to remember we're talking about music software and not a grave subject. Thanks.
|
keith
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3882
- Joined: 2003/12/10 09:49:35
- Status: offline
Re:Customization or the lack thereof.
2011/01/08 14:37:13
(permalink)
nighthadfallen
nighthadfallen's and their "this thing is perfect!" assessment
Keith, it's funny that I can't like X1 without being characterized in such a simplistic manner. I like to make some smart-ass remark to you, but alas, I've got to remember we're talking about music software and not a grave subject. Thanks.
Well, on the other hand you have a group of people saying "UI layout/flow is not good enough". And probably a bunch of people in the middle who just don't care enough to say either way, or mostly like it but not 100%, or kinda hate it but not enough to ruin their day, or whatever. So what's the difference which group you belong to? I could have said whiners, kool-aid drinkers, and everybody else. If you're offended by the categorization then apologies, but it seems to me based on your comments that you're representative of a large group of users that are a-ok with X1 as it is... a big step forward, less clutter, better organized, more "efficient" (your word). My comments were only to point out the obvious question: How could X1 be such a huge step forward for some (you, for example), and at the exact same time be such a big step in the wrong direction for others? Life used to be so much simpler back in the day... all we had to worry about was whether or not a pause button would be useful... or if instrument tracks were just a lazy way to avoid an extra dialog box... now we have this "skylight", and this "multidoc", and "Smart Tools(tm)"... it's... it's just all too much... too soon...  BTW, I think some targeted customization options would alleviate 90% of the disparity/disconnect/whatever...
|