[Implemented] Busses: why do they have to appear in a separate area?

Check out "Virtual Patch Points" in the "coming features" section on this page.

I think he means drag and drop the order of each channel strip in the console view. I believe he's referring to a console strip as a lane. 
 
I would also like to be able to move the strips around in console view rather than switch to track view to do it. 

kredek
I know that in the physical world you have busses placed in a dedicated area of the mixing console.
But why does this have to be a restriction in sonar?
I often work with groups of tracks and I would prefer to be able to place the bus they are routed to right next to them instead of in an area far from them.

And speaking of the mixing console : it would be great if the lanes could be rearranged directly here.

I work on a laptop and therefore my screen is rather small and I guess that this is one of the reasons I have these wishes.

Seeing as your screen is so small you really need to get familiar with Screensets if you haven't already.

mudgel
Seeing as your screen is so small you really need to get familiar with Screensets if you haven't already.

I agree and I use this feature a lot.

I look forward to trying the virtual patch points even though it might sound more like a workaround than a perfect solution.

Off course the virtual patch points are hard coded.
It will be much more usable than dropping and dragging a console strip. If anything, the former would be the workaround. This is a very well thought out implementation far ahead of the suggestion to simply move a bus.yrt is flexible enough that you will be able to achieve that too.

Where do you folks come up with this stuff. Not hard coded and workarounds.

mudgel
Off course the virtual patch points are hard coded.
It will be much more usable than dropping and dragging a console strip. If anything, the former would be the workaround. This is a very well thought out implementation far ahead of the suggestion to simply move a bus.yrt is flexible enough that you will be able to achieve that too.

Where do you folks come up with this stuff. Not hard coded and workarounds.

I think you misunderstood my intent. And I should've been clearer. The point I was trying to get across was that changing the existing track/bus structure was probably a bad idea because many (if not most) users are probably perfectly content with the way things are, but that the virtual patch points opens up a ton of flexibility, thereby allowing those who want to be able to have busses live right next to tracks (myself included; I've chimed in on this before and am really looking forward to the new feature) to be able to do so, while still allowing those who prefer separate track/bus panes to keep working the way they're used to.
 
I was acknowledging the point that the virtual patch points are a "workaround" because CW is not going to separate tracks/busses as requested/suggested, but in practice the virtual patch points are actually a solution that works for everyone.  Those who want to route tracks to busses right there in the track pane can use the virtual patch points and accomplish what they want to accomplish.  Those who like the tracks and busses separated as they are doing have to do anything different or learn a new feature.
 
I've been a proponent of virtual patch points and have sought clarification directly from CW about the feature on these forums, so I'm in no way bashing it.  In fact, it's probably the new feature I've been most excited about.

   Glad that helped!
 

streckfus

mudgel
Off course the virtual patch points are hard coded.
It will be much more usable than dropping and dragging a console strip. If anything, the former would be the workaround. This is a very well thought out implementation far ahead of the suggestion to simply move a bus.yrt is flexible enough that you will be able to achieve that too.

Where do you folks come up with this stuff. Not hard coded and workarounds.

I think you misunderstood my intent. And I should've been clearer. The point I was trying to get across was that changing the existing track/bus structure was probably a bad idea because many (if not most) users are probably perfectly content with the way things are, but that the virtual patch points opens up a ton of flexibility, thereby allowing those who want to be able to have busses live right next to tracks (myself included; I've chimed in on this before and am really looking forward to the new feature) to be able to do so, while still allowing those who prefer separate track/bus panes to keep working the way they're used to.
 
I was acknowledging the point that the virtual patch points are a "workaround" because CW is not going to separate tracks/busses as requested/suggested, but in practice the virtual patch points are actually a solution that works for everyone.  Those who want to route tracks to busses right there in the track pane can use the virtual patch points and accomplish what they want to accomplish.  Those who like the tracks and busses separated as they are doing have to do anything different or learn a new feature.
 
I've been a proponent of virtual patch points and have sought clarification directly from CW about the feature on these forums, so I'm in no way bashing it.  In fact, it's probably the new feature I've been most excited about.

All good. Now I understand. Thanks.