I don't see that the GUI/Workflow/learning curve is as sharply defined as all that...they do have something to do with each other to some extent...

The thing is that it can be really annoying having to relearn something that you've been doing for sometime previously without issue...and maybe what we really need to do is to quite frankly ask ...why do we go and buy something that was admittedly different from what were used to?

I'm not saying this to knock anyone. I'm just speaking from my own POV here ...

I've had some issues with the GUI myself as well but I have grown to appreciate it a bit more each time I've used it...I do appreciate the fact that it can be slower but I found that it allows me to maybe reconsider some things in my arrangements that i otherwise would have just plowed on to begin with...

UnderTow

John

Yet I have not found the new GUI hard at all to learn.

No one said it was hard to learn AFAICS. People are saying that they don't like it after they learn it.

UnderTow 

...THE (main, possibly) issue....

@John:

I get your points but I don't get the policing aspects of your postings...they do come off a little preachy..if that is the phrasing I'm thinking of...

The criticisms have almost nothing to do with nostalgia and are often times much closer to a philosophy that recognizes a universal truth that 1 is less than 2.

Furthermore, not all of us advocate for the ability to customize.

I personally don't value the ability to customize.

I want to purchase the ability to make use of a program that already exemplifies good ideas.

very best regards,
mike

Jim,

I have to say... I like you a lot... you add value to my day.... and, I estimate that you are one of the forum members that may be able to imagine that I *operate* from more than a single perspective. :-)

Which, it seems to me, allows both you and I to not take "me" so seriously.

all the best,
mike

If you phrase it like that, no one can be right but you. And people think I am arrogant.

I find it very hard to read in that any arrogance. To the contrary its very humble for me to admit I don't understand something. If I had said "we" instead "I" then you would have had a case. I do not believe others need the instruction I am asking for. Therefore I ask it coming from me only and from no one else.

I think you read me wrong more often then not. Besides however you may think I imply why simply deal with the questions and not your mistaken reading of tone.

I still await some step by step listing I can follow to see what I am not seeing in this whole subject.

FastBikerBoy
I'm getting fed up asking this question and yet still no one has replied to it with specifics. What could you do with the old tools that you can't with the new?

Well, I think I'll answer that question.

With the old PRV tool configuration you had three mouse buttons to which you could assign different behaviors, left, middle and right. The smart thing to do would be to assign these three buttons to the actions most frequently performed.

Here is an example setup:

Left click: Insert/Move Note/Controller
Middle click: Erase Sweep
Right click: Lasso Selection

I think these three behaviors covers what most users will spend most of their time doing, and it can be done without the use of modifier-keys, leaving the left hand completely free to do other things. That isn't possible in X1.

Let's now add modifier-keys to the mix. There are three modifier-keys, Ctrl, Alt and Shift. If we take the number of possible combinations using only one modifier-key at the time that multiplies up to nine combinations, which means that you can do every possible action with one tool and you should never have to use more than one modifier-key at the time. That isn't possible in X1. I'm working under the assumption that fewer modifier-keys are better and with the new smart-tool I sometimes have to use all three modifier-keys at once to achieve what I'm trying to do.

That's why I think the old smart-tool was smarter than the new one. And with the old Sonar we got three such smart-tools which we could configure in different ways depending on in which context we needed them. For example you could configure one smart-tool for composing and another for editing if you so desired. In X1 we get one smart-tool which isn't configurable and five other tools that aren't so smart.

Hope that finally answered your question.

To sum up, I think the two main problems with the new toolset are that the tools aren't configurable and that we can't use the middle mouse button for anything useful, which causes the need for too many modifier-keys.

PedalPoint

FastBikerBoy
I'm getting fed up asking this question and yet still no one has replied to it with specifics. What could you do with the old tools that you can't with the new?

Well, I think I'll answer that question.

With the old PRV tool configuration you had three mouse buttons to which you could assign different behaviors, left, middle and right. The smart thing to do would be to assign these three buttons to the actions most frequently performed.

Here is an example setup:

Left click: Insert/Move Note/Controller
Middle click: Erase Sweep
Right click: Lasso Selection

I think these three behaviors covers what most users will spend most of their time doing, and it can be done without the use of modifier-keys, leaving the left hand completely free to do other things. That isn't possible in X1.

Let's now add modifier-keys to the mix. There are three modifier-keys, Ctrl, Alt and Shift. If we take the number of possible combinations using only one modifier-key at the time that multiplies up to nine combinations, which means that you can do every possible action with one tool and you should never have to use more than one modifier-key at the time. That isn't possible in X1. I'm working under the assumption that fewer modifier-keys are better and with the new smart-tool I sometimes have to use all three modifier-keys at once to achieve what I'm trying to do.

That's why I think the old smart-tool was smarter than the new one. And with the old Sonar we got three such smart-tools which we could configure in different ways depending on in which context we needed them. For example you could configure one smart-tool for composing and another for editing if you so desired. In X1 we get one smart-tool which isn't configurable and five other tools that aren't so smart.

Hope that finally answered your question.

To sum up, I think the two main problems with the new toolset are that the tools aren't configurable and that we can't use the middle mouse button for anything useful, which causes the need for too many modifier-keys.

Outstanding post. Thanks. I must say I can't argue with the good points you make.

I will say this CW decided that it was more important to have consistency across views then to have the control you talk about. Further the middle mouse button does bring the tool HUD for quick access. I concur with this notion BTW. It may not be as quick as before but a good way to get to others tools. As you point out the most used tools need to be at hand and for me at least the smart tool by itself does just that. With it by simply position alone one can do most of the tasks one needs to do in the PRV but the same actions work in the TV on audio as well and in the same way. This is to me far and away more useful then the ability to have a custom tool set for my specific needs in only one view. 

We can debate the basic logic of this without either side coming to a final sagreement. I do however wish if only to satisfy those with a need for custom tools the ability to have it their way in the future. To me the concept CW implemented with the new tools has, from my point of view, found a very good way to do this. I really like it and I like it a lot better then it was before.

John

If you phrase it like that, no one can be right but you. And people think I am arrogant.

I find it very hard to read in that any arrogance. To the contrary its very humble for me to admit I don't understand something.

If you were humble you would be asking for clarification which you didn't. You were making statements. I don't buy your false humility for one second.

You are happy with  the X1 workflow so why are you even in the thread? This stuff clearly doesn't concern you.

I think you read me wrong more often then not. Besides however you may think I imply why simply deal with the questions and not your mistaken reading of tone.

Ah so you telling people to find another DAW is me misreading your tone?

I still await some step by step listing I can follow to see what I am not seeing in this whole subject.

Why? You are happy with X1 so why do you even care? As usual you are playing forum police. Telling people to go away if they are not happy with a particular feature in X1. That is sheer arrogance. If you can't see that it is just another failing on your part...

UnderTow

If you were humble you would be asking for clarification which you didn't. You were making statements. I don't buy your false humility for one second.

No one least of all me is selling you anything. Personally I don't care what you buy or not. Yes I use declarative sentences a lot because this is a forum where I don't want to write a book on any given subject.

Why? You are happy with X1 so why do you even care? As usual you are playing forum police. Telling people to go away if they are not happy with a particular feature in X1. That is sheer arrogance. If you can't see that it is just another failing on your part...

Forum police? What are you talking about? Any oppinion that differs from your own is going to get this kind of response? What utter nonsense. You try hard to sound capable of a real interesting argument yet in the end you resort to personal characterizations. You need to stop that kind of tactic.

John

If you were humble you would be asking for clarification which you didn't. You were making statements. I don't buy your false humility for one second.

No one least of all me is selling you anything. Personally I don't care what you buy or not. Yes I use declarative sentences a lot because this is a forum where I don't want to write a book on any given subject.

Why? You are happy with X1 so why do you even care? As usual you are playing forum police. Telling people to go away if they are not happy with a particular feature in X1. That is sheer arrogance. If you can't see that it is just another failing on your part...

Forum police? What are you talking about? Any oppinion that differs from your own is going to get this kind of response? What utter nonsense. You try hard to sound capable of a real interesting argument yet in the end you resort to personal characterizations. You need to stop that kind of tactic.

As usual this is pointless. Back to the Block list you go...

UnderTow

OK!

Thanks for allowing the discussion about PRV!

best regards,
mike

I appreciate your great attitude!

I'm sorry. Was my comment about how the new middle mouse button behavior isn't useful out of line? Because I do find it a bit odd to create a new smart-tool that's supposed to do everything so you won't have to change tools, and then go on to use one of the most important and easily reached buttons, the middle mouse button, for, well, changing tools. Sorry about that. I'll zip my lips. ;-)

Pedalpoint are you saying when you hit the middle mouse button you do not get the tool HUD?

Yea, a Heads Up Menu seems hardly useful.

Specially cuz I use the middle button for the ENTER key on all my computers.
 
>> just an hour ago I was editing and moving audio clips about. Sure is easier to click the middle button to OK a change rather than having to place the mouse pointer on the OK button, or reach for an ENTER key. Although I am pretty good at using my thumb when needed.
=================
My wife has hers mapped to Double-Click.

Both more useful than a pop-up menu.