Please make one last minute change to X2... Wider FX Bin, please!

I would be happy if they did. However we can now place a VST into PC with X2. Still a wider FX bin would be a nice touch. It was never wide enough before. In X1 they narrowed it.

I hope it's possible without extensive testing. FX bin is too narrow for most plugin names. Of course it's possible to edit shown names in the registry but giving a few more pixels would make everyone's life easier.

EDIT: Wider FX bin would not cause any problems because displays are nowadays generally quite wide anyway and you can adjust header pane width.

Alternative solution: Please make full plugin name be shown as a tooltip when hovering mouse in the bin.

scook


Really...just one little change before it goes out the door? Would you run your business that way? 

Yes,  most definitely yes,  and i do everyday.  Just ask one of my clients how i handle last minute changes and tweaks.

I don't know what is so wrong with a member proposing a suggestion. It will most likely not happen but do we need to dump on a good idea just because it may not be in the first release?

Its a great idea and if our efforts are aimed at CW and not finding fault with the timing of the suggestion we might just see it sooner rather than later.

There is nothing wrong in not liking an idea but we are seeing too much animosity lately.

Scook I don't think its our call to decide what can and can not be done. Nor do I think its good for the forum to find fault in a rather tame proposal. If CW decides it can't do it, fine. But why on earth would a forum member make another member feel uncomfortable over it and make that member have to defend the idea?

Some ideas need defending but this is not one of them.

Although Panup has done a great many things for us I don't defend him on that basis but rather that the idea is good and I can't see any good purpose in knocking it.

Because I did bring it up; we all owe Panup a great deal of respect for his hard work on our behalf. I say that because he has in fact done what he is asking CW to do. A last minute change. And done it multiple times.

If you are fearful it could cause problems with the program then I think you should be assured that CW will not do something that would do that.  

shawng


I'm not sure anyone finds fault in the proposal, and of course only cakewalk could tell you, and they won't, but the "last minute" already happened,  it is now past "the last minute" and probably well into production.  I would find fault with the always pervasive attitude that they need to cater to every whim on the forums immediately and if they don't, they are somehow running a rotten company.  it's probably very much too late to do anything but fix a major showstopper bug at this point, and even that would probably be left to a patch.  So, no problem with the suggestion, I agree with the OP that it would be helpful; but to claim that not honoring this request is tantamount to ignoring the customer base is absurd.  I would like this to be worked on and added as a patch at some point though.  that's more realistically a possibility.  programming software is not magic,  it's really hard work.

I reread the proposal and I can't find any suggestion that CW "ignores requests". Or any negative attribute what so ever.

I think you are probably right that it is too late but I'm simply looking at the idea as being a needed change and that it most likely can be done with little effort by CW. 

scook


John: I do not know how you read "should/should not" as "can/can not." It is true I am unaware of CW development practices and if as you say they routinely add last minute customer requested enhancements, so be it. Honestly, I would rather not know about it and wish they provide a nonpublic pipeline for that stuff. There is no amount of discussion that will convince me that is a good idea. Maybe I have just been burned to many times both as a developer and a user to change my opinion.

I do agree that CW or any legitimate software company would never intentionally introduce a change that would negatively impact their products.

I do appreciate Panup's contributions, thank him for them and if he, as you say, feels uncomfortable with my comments, I apologize to him.

Please do not misread my comments as knocking the feature request.

I didn't say they add last minute requests. I said Panup does.

In the context I used can and can not, it applies.

But the real question is how did a simple request get so much activity?

"Knocking it" is a slang term meaning finding fault. I think it also applies.

It seems ist really a matter of timing. If that is true isn't that due only no one thinking of it before? Should it be in contention simply because its late?

Lets give some slack here and let it pass. CW can handle it well enough.

scook


I was fine until you started putting words in my mouth. Nothing I have said could be construed in anyway other than expressing my concerns and software development philosophy. It only got so much of my activity because you choose to call me out for expressing my opinions.

I'm sorry for making you feel uncomfortable.  That was not my intention. I don't believe that I put words in your mouth. If I did it was inadvertent. 

I tried to point out the way I look at it. Which I must say is something I should have thought of asking for a long time ago. It has been a minor annoyance to me since X1 came out. 

Then there is the greater notion of finding fault with good ideas. Ideas you or I may not find all that useful to ourselves but useful to others.

Take the VST 3 thread. I tried to be fair to both sides. Yet I tried to be supportive of the pro VST 3 side.

It is a request that should be considered not for the reasons given because they are suspect but simply for two reasons. The first is its being requested that is what the forum is partly for. It allows for a discussion- the interchange of ideas. The second because at some point I think it will need to be supported.

It doesn't need to be supported now but some time it will be.

read that in a HAL voice

panup


Dear Bakers, please increase FX Bin width by 30 pixels. It would mean a lot to me and it should not be too risky one minute change. A few pixels, nothing more...

if this really means so much to you, why not just go with X2 producer and use PC instead of the old FX bin?

when you drag plugins into PC there's much more room for the name of the plugin

What a totally enjoyable thread!  Thanks for the entertainment gents!

The trivial changes that Panup suggested requires all of about 10 - 15 minutes to impliment.  Further, there is little need to test it.  And finally, CW is already working on a patch for Sonar X2.  That has been the MO for CW for years.

They catch things before the product is sent out for replication, but they have no time to fix them before the deadline so shortly after Sonar X2 is released, there is a patch.

I am all for Panup's suggestions.

Q: How many CW forum members does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Don't know becuase they are always bickering about something and never get around to it.

Q: How many CW forum members does it take to change a lightbulb?  A: Don't know becuase they are always bickering about something and never get around to it. 




 



Guilty. But in my defence I was bored and drunk.


I like panup's idea too- I would like the hover-over magnification even more than the fx bin widening

It would seem that if PC will now accept VSTs, that the effects bin may be on it's way out.
That would be a shame.

Hey Panu, are we talking console strip FX bin? Wouldn't a wider FX bin mean a wider console strip? I'd like to see the console strips a bit thinner like the old Sonar had so we can see more of them on screen.
 
The new console FX bin is already bigger than the old one. Why do some think it's smaller? Because the old Sonar used smaller text and didn't have that big ON/OFF switch. If they went back to the smaller font we'd see more of the name there.
 
You can also make the FX bin as wide as you want in Track View and dock them in multidock.
 
...
 
I do think your alternative fix makes sense, though, and would be a lot easier to add.
 
 
Steve

Off topic: check the image link for my alternative color scheme... Gradient Volume and Gain controls, black FX bin background, green FX bin text and ON/OFF buttons, blue selected track background... Color customization rules! ;-)