[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (Jon Con)

Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:01:23 GMT

The EQ plot has returned to NV and the buttons for the PC have been reduced in size (much like the suggested images)
Channel numbers and channel names are now on seperate lines so much easier to read
Track icons have also changed their appearance, the icons fill the width of the channel and have no real box around it.

There are a number of other changes to the Narrow strips. Since I went gun-ho and started using X1 for clients sessions I've completely changed and adapted how I use this section. Previously I had one monitor dedicated to the console view and the other to the Track view. Now I'll use the console view in the multi-dock on the bottom half of the 2 screens and work with it alonside the channel inspector. I never expand the Prochannel inthe console view because it took up too much of the screens real estate, I'll just click on the Prochannel tab in the track inspector and work from there.

For volume fades I'll use the console view and for editing EQ or plugins I use the inspector. I've also started using the draw feature a hell of a lot more for riding automation than I ever remember using before.

For me I didn't like change at first but I have to say now I'm happy with how things are laid out in X1 for me.

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (ba_midi)

Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:14:31 GMT

JohnoL

Is this issue resolved now with x1B?

Not for me. I try not to use the CV now. It's lost a lot of its usefulness for my workflow, whereas in 8.5.3 I always keep it visible on my 2nd monitor.

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (JohnoL)

Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:06:14 GMT

Is this issue resolved now with x1B?

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (n0rd)

Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:28:04 GMT

So... X1a yea...

Was there any UI fixes???

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SONARtist)

Sat, 18 Dec 2010 17:26:51 GMT

Just wanna say that N0rd and Cake2010 have some great ideas, some others too ... Cake should take the best suggestions from all of them and make it happen !

+1

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (cake2010)

Sat, 18 Dec 2010 07:41:03 GMT

If there will be some kind of competition, here´s a few toughts:

- It has to be a simple idea, easy to implement.
- Never seen in any other DAW.
- Clear explanation of the idea (preferably with a JPEG-image).
- Use of GUI-elements that´s already there.

(and it could be any good idea, not just a console view).

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (cake2010)

Sat, 18 Dec 2010 07:09:20 GMT

@SongCraft: LOL! I don´t think ´Optical Illusion Console´ is the best idea..

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (chrisharbin)

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:40:26 GMT

SongCraft

chrisharbin

Jeeez louize, make it stop (headache)

Awwwwwww hope you feel better soon!

.

Awwwwwwww, cute puppy!

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:09:40 GMT

chrisharbin

Jeeez louize, make it stop (headache)

Awwwwwww hope you feel better soon!

.

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (chrisharbin)

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:03:50 GMT

Jeeez louize, make it stop (headache)

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:59:49 GMT

cake2010

SongCraft

Suggestion:
What if Cakewalk has a competition or simply a suggestion thread (sticky) where we all can submit/contribute ideas (including images - examples) for the ideal mixer UI design, most importantly to gather 'Innovative' ideas, I mean really clever ideas that will greatly improve the workflow along with greater view/access of all essentials.

I don´t think Bakers responded to this yet. I´m interested in the ´competition´ part. How about it? Will there be a free upgrade if it´s a great new consept and they like it and implement it?
Actually I came up with an idea again (sorry about that" />) for a console view: Instant access to a hundreds of channels without ever need to scroll. But I don´t want to put it in the public forum because it ends up fast into Cubase or something.." />

I try to imagine 500 mixer channels all viewable on one screen without ever having to scroll, who will be the first to succeed in designing such a concept and win the competition?

LOL! I found out soon enough it can look quite cluttered and freaky, like looking at an 'optical illusion' - see image:

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (cake2010)

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:34:53 GMT

SongCraft

Suggestion:
What if Cakewalk has a competition or simply a suggestion thread (sticky) where we all can submit/contribute ideas (including images - examples) for the ideal mixer UI design, most importantly to gather 'Innovative' ideas, I mean really clever ideas that will greatly improve the workflow along with greater view/access of all essentials.

I don´t think Bakers responded to this yet. I´m interested in the ´competition´ part. How about it? Will there be a free upgrade if it´s a great new consept and they like it and implement it?
Actually I came up with an idea again (sorry about that" />) for a console view: Instant access to a hundreds of channels without ever need to scroll. But I don´t want to put it in the public forum because it ends up fast into Cubase or something.." />

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (pbk)

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 04:27:59 GMT

John T

I don't think anyone could sensibly argue that the narrow strips mode isn't a mess. Wide mode looks fine, so in that sense, sure, you can say the console view design is fundamentally fine, but for anyone who wants / needs the narrow view, that doesn't help them.

Word.

What is really sad is that the strips were not perfect but usable before. Now narrow strips are broken. Frequently sacrificing functionality for form is a bad idea. " />

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (John T)

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 03:58:05 GMT

I don't think anyone could sensibly argue that the narrow strips mode isn't a mess. Wide mode looks fine, so in that sense, sure, you can say the console view design is fundamentally fine, but for anyone who wants / needs the narrow view, that doesn't help them.

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 03:45:45 GMT

mistrbigg

hmm. the narrow strips view in x1 is WAAYYY better than in 8.5.3. IMHO you just have to read the dang manual.

ive seen a lot of responses to people complaining about how they mix 60 channels of audio (as an example) and have to have the strips narrow which i understand, but, if you use sonar that way.. you are more than likely using a mouse to adjust parameters, and unless you guys have something i dont, like some new cool multi mouse thingy (i want one! hehe), you can only REALLY do that one track at a time (unless you are grouping tracks, in which case i would HIGHLY suggest just adding a stereo or surround buss)

the phase is still there guys, the arm parameter is still there guys, the plot is still there guys, the ins and outs are still there guys, in addition to a gain control now at the top. now it is setup at least in producer, in the pro channel which is FAR better sounding than any of the previous eq's, unless you have the ssl's like i do, and even then, i am finding the prochannel to be better because it sounds AWESOME, the tube sat absolutely kills on vocals, and this is a SOUND RECORDING program.

I know i sound like a dick when i say this, but i just dont care anymore. These programs (DAWS) are supposed to, to my knowledge, facilitate SOUND. although i respect non musicians, non REAL producers, and non Engineers that call themselves such as Good, sometimes great or even incredible TECHNICIANS, they ARE NOT REAL MUSICIANS OR PRODUCERS. not worse because of this, just different. in many many ways i believe this is the true main reason the music industry is now focused not on music but on marketing (because technology has allowed EVERYONE with a computer and a good internet connection to have access to these recording softwares and music and such) and why it is so hard, though possible to find what more than 80 percent or so of people would agree is GOOD MUSIC. i read the main "do you use the cv in sonar" thread nearly all the way through and was honestly saddened that so few people even use the cv anymore. it shows me the technicians are no longer focused so much on shaping sound of real playing, then mixing it, as much as they are programming in sounds that are already performed, sampled, or played by what i personally would consider a real musician.

Sonar to me, is set up more like a real console environment with midi and Software instrumentation as an addition, rather than a midi and design program set up with the audio music as an addition. it is because of this i use it, i go from tape to sonar x1 and the results so far have been fantastic, radio ready, when the MUSIC is good. pushing buttons and tapping akai midi controllers definitely take skill, and i'm not knocking it, but calling it making music isn't what it is, its more creating an artistic expression, which in itself is valued the same to me but NOT THE SAME.

back on topic. i think most will find if you read the manual, and learn it, it isnt hard to figure out the console view at all. and i for one appreciate the effort by cakewalk put forth to obviously make it more like a physical mixing console rather than a fake TOY. the ONLY problem i have found i cant seem to fix is being able to shift busses around...i like my master bus on the right, not the left and i bus like crazy (most of my mixes have 15 or so mix busses such as drum splines sent to a master drum buss, then massaged, or multiple bass track sources run to one buss, or guitars done similarly or lead vocals, done in multiple takes, ran to one buss, while the backings are ran to another, all the while having the master buss set up with analyzers and bit meters to monitor what the heck is REALLY going on, which is something i am POSITIVE few users do anymore as i am a mastering engineer by profession and now receive SLAMMED mixes ALL the time)

i know a lot of you out there do do this, and im not talkin to you all, i am talking to what i feel is the majority when i say, READ THE DAMN MANUAL, USE THE SOFTWARE, PUSH SOME BUTTONS, FIGURE IT OUT, and most importantly HAVE A LITTLE PATIENCE.

You didn't acknowledge there are various flaws and bugs in CV here's just a few examples..... one letter for track names, overlapping numerical values, can't reorder in CV, occasionally with old projects loaded where pan is 10% reads incorrectly at 0%, ProChn inline CV bugs. {phew} Anyway I have confidence that Cakewalk will see to most of that in the next update due very soon " />

You need to understand that Cakewalk values 'Customer Feedback' - 'Suggestions', there's been a lot of valuable contributions from a lot of us for which I'm sure Cakewalk appreciates. " />

---------------------

I like this following quote because it makes sense:

Mike Trujillo [Cakewalk]
without negative comments we would have no idea what the user community is experiencing that can be fixed or made better. It's when passion turns to anger and hostility towards other folks and their opinions that things turn south. Then it's just destructive and serves no purpose to the greater good.

-

Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (mistrbigg)

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:49:01 GMT

hmm. the narrow strips view in x1 is WAAYYY better than in 8.5.3. IMHO you just have to read the dang manual.

ive seen a lot of responses to people complaining about how they mix 60 channels of audio (as an example) and have to have the strips narrow which i understand, but, if you use sonar that way.. you are more than likely using a mouse to adjust parameters, and unless you guys have something i dont, like some new cool multi mouse thingy (i want one! hehe), you can only REALLY do that one track at a time (unless you are grouping tracks, in which case i would HIGHLY suggest just adding a stereo or surround buss)

the phase is still there guys, the arm parameter is still there guys, the plot is still there guys, the ins and outs are still there guys, in addition to a gain control now at the top. now it is setup at least in producer, in the pro channel which is FAR better sounding than any of the previous eq's, unless you have the ssl's like i do, and even then, i am finding the prochannel to be better because it sounds AWESOME, the tube sat absolutely kills on vocals, and this is a SOUND RECORDING program.

I know i sound like a dick when i say this, but i just dont care anymore. These programs (DAWS) are supposed to, to my knowledge, facilitate SOUND. although i respect non musicians, non REAL producers, and non Engineers that call themselves such as Good, sometimes great or even incredible TECHNICIANS, they ARE NOT REAL MUSICIANS OR PRODUCERS. not worse because of this, just different. in many many ways i believe this is the true main reason the music industry is now focused not on music but on marketing (because technology has allowed EVERYONE with a computer and a good internet connection to have access to these recording softwares and music and such) and why it is so hard, though possible to find what more than 80 percent or so of people would agree is GOOD MUSIC. i read the main "do you use the cv in sonar" thread nearly all the way through and was honestly saddened that so few people even use the cv anymore. it shows me the technicians are no longer focused so much on shaping sound of real playing, then mixing it, as much as they are programming in sounds that are already performed, sampled, or played by what i personally would consider a real musician.

Sonar to me, is set up more like a real console environment with midi and Software instrumentation as an addition, rather than a midi and design program set up with the audio music as an addition. it is because of this i use it, i go from tape to sonar x1 and the results so far have been fantastic, radio ready, when the MUSIC is good. pushing buttons and tapping akai midi controllers definitely take skill, and i'm not knocking it, but calling it making music isn't what it is, its more creating an artistic expression, which in itself is valued the same to me but NOT THE SAME.

back on topic. i think most will find if you read the manual, and learn it, it isnt hard to figure out the console view at all. and i for one appreciate the effort by cakewalk put forth to obviously make it more like a physical mixing console rather than a fake TOY. the ONLY problem i have found i cant seem to fix is being able to shift busses around...i like my master bus on the right, not the left and i bus like crazy (most of my mixes have 15 or so mix busses such as drum splines sent to a master drum buss, then massaged, or multiple bass track sources run to one buss, or guitars done similarly or lead vocals, done in multiple takes, ran to one buss, while the backings are ran to another, all the while having the master buss set up with analyzers and bit meters to monitor what the heck is REALLY going on, which is something i am POSITIVE few users do anymore as i am a mastering engineer by profession and now receive SLAMMED mixes ALL the time)

i know a lot of you out there do do this, and im not talkin to you all, i am talking to what i feel is the majority when i say, READ THE DAMN MANUAL, USE THE SOFTWARE, PUSH SOME BUTTONS, FIGURE IT OUT, and most importantly HAVE A LITTLE PATIENCE.

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (cake2010)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:55:22 GMT

@mgh and Songcraft: useful ideas!

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:37:26 GMT

mgh

As an alternative alternative, it'd be cool to have stem docking (or a sub mix console view); so you have yer multidock thing, and in it you can have tracks 2,3,4,5 and buss 1 (say guitars) in one small space (grouped, maybe) in one window, then tracks 6,7,8, buss 2 (violins) in another, 9,10,11, buss 3 (violas) in another;...

Yes, as an alternative, alternative view (option)! I think that would be cool.

That's a nice idea for managing the CV in Multidock! I like it :)

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:35:16 GMT

cake2010

@SongCraft: Looks informative, but IMHO not sure if it´s easy to read when there´s 30 channels.

But I totally agree that we should forget the hardware look and consept, and invent something more convenient. Best and useful ideas are usually very simple and possibilities with software are endless...

Yes agree, forget the 'hardware' look and concept because what's more important is 'convenience' and 'efficiency' of workflow.

And....

. Customization of 'Mixer Chn Layout' ~ I would like to see all elements in mixer channels 'fully customizable' using a simple lock/unlock modes; in unlock mode the ability to click on any element in a mixer channel and drag/place it wherever one wants and to show/hide any element, thereby making the mixer channel layout fully customizable.

. Customization of 'Track Titles', background color, font type and color, with the ability to select a group of channels for simultaneous customization for example; same color background for identifying Drum Kit tracks.

. Customize 'Button Size' (small, med, large)

. Customize 'Font Size' (small, med, large)

. and again; '2 Rows' for 'Track Names' would be ideal. I love that concept, it allows for much better description of track titles and when I load a very old project I'll be able to see what is what without much guess work.... Oh look it's 'Jimi Hendrix -- Solo Guitar' whoo hoo LOL!!

At the moment Track Naming is severely limited due to the nature (hardware) design of the mixer channel strips (severely limited horizontal space)! The 'Boxed/Stacked' design allows for much more informative detail and available space for Track Names and Routing Names.....

-

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (mgh)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 18:52:02 GMT

As an alternative alternative, it'd be cool to have stem docking (or a sub mix console view); so you have yer multidock thing, and in it you can have tracks 2,3,4,5 and buss 1 (say guitars) in one small space (grouped, maybe) in one window, then tracks 6,7,8, buss 2 (violins) in another, 9,10,11, buss 3 (violas) in another;...

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (cake2010)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 18:34:37 GMT

@SongCraft: Looks informative, but IMHO not sure if it´s easy to read when there´s 30 channels.

But I totally agree that we should forget the hardware look and consept, and invent something more convenient. Best and useful ideas are usually very simple and possibilities with software are endless...

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:53:21 GMT

SongCraft

What about a totally different design; Instead of thin narrow channel strips that is so typical of hardware mixer,

. Have square boxed areas 8x8 boxed (channels) giving us 64 channels visible on one little monitor without ever having to scroll. Yet still be able to view all meters, track names, vol, pan, sends, routing, FX, EQ, ProChannel.

A few things such as the EQ Graph and Pro Channel can be expanded 'from minimized' allowing more closeup detail for editing ~ the toggle between minimized to expand are keybindable of course, without compromise in minimized view at least the parameters and graphs are still quite visible.

A totally innovative more practical UI design that be more suitable, functional in the software environment. Before anyone starts freaking out about my suggesting I would like to see a image example.

Like I said before; Trying to get a 'Hardware' mixer into a software UI environment is the problem because obviously with hardware mixers you can see all track whereas a software UI mixer is severely limited in that regard. That said; I've used hardware mixers since the 1970's, give me the real thing 128 channel 'Hardware' mixer and I'm happy :)

-

OK Here it is.....

Just out of curiosity I wanted to see what the CV would look like in a totally different layout.

Single Channel Example:

Very clear, easy to read!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To see full-size image with 30 channels: Click Here

Totally different concept of the CV, an 'Alternative' optional view. Put a whole new meaning on 'Stack' mode LOL!!

The Pro Channel can be expanded by clicking on it. The FX-bin Green = active whereas Gray = inactive. Sorry I may have left out other widgets (parameters) but IMO I would love to see full customization; display what you want to see and place anywhere by hold/drag when in customize mode!

-

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:01:57 GMT

What about a totally different design; Instead of thin narrow channel strips that is so typical of hardware mixer,

. Have square boxed areas 8x8 boxed (channels) giving us 64 channels visible on one little monitor without ever having to scroll. Yet still be able to view all meters, track names, vol, pan, sends, routing, FX, EQ, ProChannel.

A few things such as the EQ Graph and Pro Channel can be expanded 'from minimized' allowing more closeup detail for editing ~ the toggle between minimized to expand are keybindable of course, without compromise in minimized view at least the parameters and graphs are still quite visible.

A totally innovative more practical UI design that be more suitable, functional in the software environment. Before anyone starts freaking out about my suggesting I would like to see a image example.

Like I said before; Trying to get a 'Hardware' mixer into a software UI environment is the problem because obviously with hardware mixers you can see all track whereas a software UI mixer is severely limited in that regard. That said; I've used hardware mixers since the 1970's, give me the real thing 128 channel 'Hardware' mixer and I'm happy :)

-

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (Frank Haas)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:24:31 GMT

I didn't read through the 10 pages, so sorry if it has been mentioned before..
in narrow-mode you could place the volume-faders over or under the meters.
make the meters and faders selectable/visible from the menu like all the other elements.
then you could be able to kind of build a meter-bridge as well..

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (rbowser)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:21:52 GMT

Jim Kalinowski

Since we're offering suggestions for improvements to the CV:

After spending a couple of hours with X1, I've noticed that the MIDI activity "light" at the top of the MIDI meter in a MIDI channel strip is colored red, the same color as a clip overload. At first I thought, "Why do I have a bunch of tracks clipping?" Then I realized this was MIDI activity.

Related to this, it seems that in the new CV, it's harder to distinguish between MIDI and audio strips - they look a lot more alike in X1. I suggest that there be more of a difference between them (in 8.5, the MIDI meters were colored white and were solid, even if you used segmented meters).

Jim

Hi, Jim - Good feedback, both of your points. I had a fairly active thread going on this annoying "in the red" effect on MIDI strips, but this Forum moves super fast and topics get buried quickly. Here's that thread:

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2154678

And you are spot on about the MIDI and Audio strips looking too much alike. It's slowing me down to constantly be checking--hmm, now wait a minute, what flavor is this strip?

RB

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:11:35 GMT

cake2010

Thanks Songcraft.

SongCraft

Minor crits: The fader pointer needs to be a little larger to give us more area to click n drag...

My idea was that the whole meter area (including the pointer + most of the grey area) is clickable and the pointer is just a pointer.

That's cool! I like that idea. Best thing about the design is; simple, looks very clean and uncluttered ;)

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (Jim Kalinowski)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:06:03 GMT

Since we're offering suggestions for improvements to the CV:

After spending a couple of hours with X1, I've noticed that the MIDI activity "light" at the top of the MIDI meter in a MIDI channel strip is colored red, the same color as a clip overload. At first I thought, "Why do I have a bunch of tracks clipping?" Then I realized this was MIDI activity.

Related to this, it seems that in the new CV, it's harder to distinguish between MIDI and audio strips - they look a lot more alike in X1. I suggest that there be more of a difference between them (in 8.5, the MIDI meters were colored white and were solid, even if you used segmented meters).

Jim

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (cake2010)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:59:27 GMT

Thanks Songcraft.

SongCraft

Minor crits: The fader pointer needs to be a little larger to give us more area to click n drag...

My idea was that the whole meter area (including the pointer + most of the grey area) is clickable and the pointer is just a pointer.

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (SongCraft)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:36:37 GMT

cake2010

btw, here´s one channel 1:1 to see the narrowness.
I just like to have lot of channels visible." />
But yeah, Nord´s vision is great.

Nice! That's more practical for narrow view. I like:

. The 2 Rows for track naming. (Option: text and background color changeable)
. The Track Number above in it's own space
. Numerical values separated in their own space (no more overylay issue)
. The fader pointer > actually works well, shows more precise position.

Minor crits: The fader pointer needs to be a little larger to give us more area to click n drag, or add a small fader-handle to the left-side of the pointer. Add numerical values to the right side of the meter.

-

Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 (guitartrek)

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:16:55 GMT

Panning Knob verses old Pan control on Narrow Tracks:

I was working with X1 last night and realized how much faster I can see Pan's with the new Knob style rather than the old way. In an instance I can get a feel for where everything is panned. The old way, I'd always hover with the mouse to see the actual pan setting. I think the human Eye / brain can make a judgment on the Angle of the line of the knob much faster than old style. I know some people have said they think the old style is better, and the new knob takes up more space, but to me the knob style is superior when checking pans.

Just wanted to throw that out there.