.

mike_mccue


Good work bapu! 

LOL Mike, I guess I need to change my avatar
 
 
Steve
 
 
 
 
(Strummy)
 
 

I am not sure how many of you are actually using the Track inspector but it has the potential for actually gaining space once you start using it.  It has actually taken a while to make use of it but now that I have adjusted to it I can operate with 1/2" less space occupied for Inspct and TV Header compared to 8.5.(just brought up last project I worked on in both) 5.5" in X1 6" in 8.5.

All the functions are there including polarity etc with the exception of the edit filter and velocity+ so I can operate with only the track name and edit filter  showing.  I also am able to set a narrower track height to avoid minimizing/max toggles so can have more tracks visible at a time.

Initially it was a pain to make the change but it is now starting to become second nature to look for the info in a new spot and has actually improved work flow.

May be a different approach to how  I worked in 8.5 but I think it is more efficient for me. 

I am not sure how many of you are actually using the Track inspector but it has the potential for actually gaining space once you start using it.

 
Thing is, the 8.5 Track Inspector offered the same things if you wanted it; but you weren't forced to used it because of the ineffecient use of realestate and elimination of buttons from the track headers in X1.
 

.

Very few have said that a track inspector is a bad thing, but many have said taking stuff from the track view and hiding in the track inspector is very inefficient.

Hiding? How is it hidden?

This thread documents statements of many people who have voiced their opinion and annoyance that the track view now wastes space and has eliminated things we previously enjoyed viewing the the tracks.

I see it very differently. I look at 8.5.3 and I see a very inefficient UI in comparison with X1.  Although I am a strong supporter of democracy in this case they are wrong. It doesn't matter how many say they don't like it they are still wrong. Plus for everyone that is opposed there are many that are for the new UI. Shall we take a poll? 

In the examples of phase switch and stereo interleave there is absolutely no way for anyone to claim that X1 has enhanced efficiency. Furthermore, as has been suggested, one must use the inspector to view those settings and so this clearly amounts to a further waste of screen display space... even if only temporarily... and even if is doing so on a second monitor.

Not something I need to tweak all the time. I think most users will be in agreement with that point. Plus as I said with a dual monitor setup I have lost nothing in accessing those widgets.
This fits in with CW's streamlining of the UI and I applaud it.  Besides I gain so much more for what I need to do. 

With regards to second monitors: I personally retired my second monitor precisely because I don't like to have all that surface area acting as both a barrier and a reflection surface for the sound coming from my monitors.

The same concerns speaker manufacturers have about frontal area on their cabinets and edge effects at the corners can be applied to monitor displays.

I'm over it. The less the better.

I have a single monitor... and it's simply a necessary obstruction for working with a modern DAW. A desk isn't all that great either... just another necessary obstruction.

In my opinion dual monitors may please many people, but they are not a panacea and using two monitors comes with all kinds of baggage that many people seem willing to not consider.

OK, if that is your story. LOL You do know that X1 supports multiple monitor better then any previous version? Your loss.

.

.

mike_mccue


Facts is facts



click view image to see as 100% scale

Here's my take on this: There's some good points and some much ado about nothing IMO.

1) You wouldn't cover every square inch of your wall space or floor space in your home with objects would you? Every inch of the counter tops and tables packed with objects ready to be used at a mere whim? If you did it would probably look a lot like those hoarder's homes you see on TV.

Not all empty space is "wasted". SONAR has been widely criticized over the years for putting too many controls and buttons and text in a given space contributing to a somewhat overwhelming and claustrophobic feel at times. Many don't find this conducive to learning nor creating. Lots of design theory places great value on empty (some might say "wasted" space). So I don't buy that every empty area is "wasted". It's there for breathing room and delineation. Empty space vs wasted space is in the eye of the beholder.

2) The stylized icons for expand collapse are simply that - stylized - and they suggest the behavior just fine. I think this is pretty nit-picky and is an "argument" leaning toward total utilitarianism.

3) The abbreviated text in X1: Now here's something I agree with. To me the text could be scaled down in size and hopefully the garbled names could return to something more intelligible.

4) The fact that the FX bin goes away too soon when reducing the track control area horizontally: I also agree with this and it's no doubt a bit frustrating. It should allow you to collapse more of that empty/wasted space before it disappears. I can't see any reason for it to be the way it is and it's got my vote as something to tweak/fix. But it is just a tweak and I don't think it could be characterized as something that contributes to an entire UI design failure (I'd say the same for the font tweaks as well...)

5) The interleave and phase buttons: I'd say we should give these back as an option, on the track controls if people really really want them. Having said that I find it just a bit odd that one would really miss these buttons all that much. You could look at the console if you needed to see a lot of them at one time. I guess I can understand the interleave more than the phase button. But I understand choice is generally a good thing and everyone has different expectations from their DAW, so I say make them available if feasible. The problem is that the more controls you make available in that area, the more track control configurations you have to account for visually and it makes keeping clutter under control and a tidy look that much more difficult to achieve.

One final point I'll make that is personal and subjective: Regardless of the arguable problems with the picture on the right, I personally find it quite a bit more attractive to look at.

So I'd say there are a few viable tweaks that could be made (allow more collapsing before FX bin disappears, make font smaller and longer text entries more intelligible, give option to show phase and interleave buttons), but let's not make it out to be more than it is. We're all different as users but it personally hasn't stopped me working with it and I still feel like the benefits of the UI (Browser, MultiDock, Inspector, far better aesthetics, etc) outweigh these negatives.

mike_mccue




I do feel it was foolish on Cakewalk's part to hide things in it and leave all the wasted space on the track view where those buttons could have been useful.

Not to pick at you Mike (with sincere honesty - so forgive me for appearing to single you out) but I thought this was a good example of something I've been meaning to point out lately to the whole community.

Is "foolish" really the best way to describe the decision to remove Interleave and Phase from the track controls? Isn't there a more realistic and less inflammatory way to get the point across considering the scope of the "problem" (which let's be honest - is small). It was a fairly minor design decision that you don't agree with  - and perhaps you have fully valid concerns about it. But to call it "foolish on Cakewalk's part" I just think takes it to place where its doesn't really need to go. Granted this is not as extreme an example as I've see elsewhere as of late.

If there was less of this, I think it would improve the overall tone of the forum while still keeping the productive ideas and complaints rolling.

Now perhaps "foolish" is the most accurate way to describe your feelings on the subject and if so, then of course I respect your decision to use that particular verbiage.

I'd like to see the FX bins a bit bigger or atleast a better way to see what's in them if you have more than 2 FX

Bub

John

My personal interest in interleave is due to the fact that I frequently overdub on mono tracks with stereo effects. If I listen to playback in stereo and hit record the interleave swaps back to mono and then I have to see that and be reminded to return it to stereo. I am personally less concerned about phase switching, but it is clear that it is now much less efficient to view and ascertain the phase switch status of each of your tracks. Previously you could make an assessment simultaneously while viewing a dozen or more tracks. Now you can not.

Even in the case you use as an example you don't need all the tracks in your project to show this information. You are working on a single track. With the inspector all the information you need to work on that track is there. It is not hidden to you. Now if you want to glance around to other tracks that are not showing their inspector then you have a case. Beyond that I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

The interleave is a big issue for me. It would be very nice to see the icon back on each track. I work with mainly audio tracks and I can't tell if it's the way X1 is designed, or if there is a bug, but the interleave settings definitely change unexpectedly. The phase, I rarely if ever use it. I much prefer to use the channel tool, especially if it's a stereo track I'm working with.

LOL I was hoping no one would bring up that bug. That is a valid reason to have them displayed. However when CW fixes the bug the need will disappear. I hope.

John

My personal interest in interleave is due to the fact that I frequently overdub on mono tracks with stereo effects. If I listen to playback in stereo and hit record the interleave swaps back to mono and then I have to see that and be reminded to return it to stereo. I am personally less concerned about phase switching, but it is clear that it is now much less efficient to view and ascertain the phase switch status of each of your tracks. Previously you could make an assessment simultaneously while viewing a dozen or more tracks. Now you can not.

Even in the case you use as an example you don't need all the tracks in your project to show this information. You are working on a single track. With the inspector all the information you need to work on that track is there. It is not hidden to you. Now if you want to glance around to other tracks that are not showing their inspector then you have a case. Beyond that I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Some of us mix by being able to look at as much unabbreviated information for as many tracks as possible...  The track view (with all if it's options fully visible/selectable) in the previous version of Sonar suits me best...

It's not like folks are asking the bakers to embark on a new concept... just to be allowed the most logically efficient option in accessing our project information within the track view..

If you can not understand where I am coming from - then I will take much solace in the fact that Brandon's response leads me to believe that we can expect to see some tweaks in the UI which will improve upon the current situation!

Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]
One final point I'll make that is personal and subjective: Regardless of the arguable problems with the picture on the right, I personally find it quite a bit more attractive to look at.

I feel the same. The colours and the sharpness in X1 is much more pleasant that the default 8.5.3 offerings. (personally, I use a colour scheme in V8 as created by one Sonar user).

1) You wouldn't cover every square inch of your wall space or floor space in your home with objects would you? Every inch of the counter tops and tables packed with objects ready to be used at a mere whim? If you did it would probably look a lot like those hoarder's homes you see on TV.

This is a bad analogy for one simple reason: a music software UI has to fullfil a role of being usable, clear, and pleasant (all at the same time). My wall/floor space does not need to fullfil all these roles. I could have clutter all over, or have it clean as in a Zen garden. My wall is not a commercial product, yet Sonar is, and it needs to adhere to good design principles.

Did you see the post where UnderTow showed a retouched image of how the track view in X1 could look? It showed a much better use of the space. Your wall would have liked that as well!

John

My personal interest in interleave is due to the fact that I frequently overdub on mono tracks with stereo effects. If I listen to playback in stereo and hit record the interleave swaps back to mono and then I have to see that and be reminded to return it to stereo. I am personally less concerned about phase switching, but it is clear that it is now much less efficient to view and ascertain the phase switch status of each of your tracks. Previously you could make an assessment simultaneously while viewing a dozen or more tracks. Now you can not.

Even in the case you use as an example you don't need all the tracks in your project to show this information. You are working on a single track. With the inspector all the information you need to work on that track is there. It is not hidden to you. Now if you want to glance around to other tracks that are not showing their inspector then you have a case. Beyond that I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

I almost included in my post that I anticipated that you would make this non productive counter argument but I deleted that portion of my post because I considered it unfriendly.

Now that you have made this counter productive presentation I will simply respond that the simple fact that any one of us wants to have this available in track view, as it has been for many years, is enough to nullify any argument against this that you may pose.

You are free to have a preference... and your opinion, but it is insulting that you insist on forcing us to adopt your preference while using invalid arguments and offering your opinion as fact.