Topic: New track layout
- This topic has 48 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 2 months ago by
jens.
-
January 26, 2006 at 22:21 #6015
PodianerParticipantThanks for all the answers. Looking forward to the screenshot. 🙂
Me too!! 🙂
January 26, 2006 at 22:27 #6016
Doug BParticipant@Zynewave wrote:
Sorry if my reply seemed offensive. Sometimes I read the 😕 smiley more as ‘disgruntled’ judged from the look of the smiley. I’ve spent a lot of time doing the redesign of the track layout inspired by yours and others valid arguments in the other topic. I guess I was hoping for a more supportive reply to my screenshot.
Please note that the 😕 smiley is called the ‘confused’ smiley. That is the accepted internet meaning and what the dev of this forum software intended. Just hover the mouse over the smilie and the caption that opens says ‘confused’ . Does that clear up the 😕 that you had?
😛 😉 8)
BTW-in terms of graphics-yes, the visuals are more distinct and easier to view. Upside down, but easier to view! 😆
January 26, 2006 at 22:53 #6017
MaxParticipantWell, more great ideas form Frits…
I like new GUI very much. But I must say, that –
@Zynewave wrote:This new design is more flat, but with a clearer outline of the controls. This has the added bonus of a more CPU efficient UI update.
– maybe tracks now looking too flat… Of course, usability going first, and in this case nothing can beat new tracks GUI. But don’t forget that almost all Podium’s GUI made in pseudo-3D, and tracks on the screenshot now look like they taken from the other program… Is it possible to make new track inspector a little more pseudo-3D’ish, without eating CPU power and loosing that great ideas that came with new GUI? I think that this will make it looks much better.
January 26, 2006 at 23:58 #6018
duncanparsonsParticipantLooking fwd to seeing what this is like to work with 🙂
DSP
January 27, 2006 at 00:56 #6019
darcyb62Participant@Zynewave wrote:
The argument was that the term “track” is a fallout from the tape days and doesn’t really adapt well with the new capabilities of PC based DAWs. Channel is a more appropriate term in that it better addresses signal flow. Would this help in explaining Podium? I think it would.
I’d be prepared to relabel ‘track’ objects if we can agree on a better word. As I’ve mentioned in another topic, a track in Podium is more like a node in the hierarchy which may or may not have timeline events attached to it. As for the word ‘channel’, I normally associate this with audio channels. The term ‘multichannel’ is also commonly used for describing surround sound. So I think there is a conflict with using ‘channel’ instead of ‘track’.
How about “path”?
January 27, 2006 at 01:52 #6020
ZynewaveKeymasterIs it possible to make new track inspector a little more pseudo-3D’ish, without eating CPU power and loosing that great ideas that came with new GUI?
I first tried replicating the 3D headers in the mixer, but it just didn’t look good. The new vertical bars does not blend well with the old ‘sunken’ track headers.
January 27, 2006 at 01:56 #6021ZynewaveKeymaster@darcyb62 wrote:
@Zynewave wrote:
The argument was that the term “track” is a fallout from the tape days and doesn’t really adapt well with the new capabilities of PC based DAWs. Channel is a more appropriate term in that it better addresses signal flow. Would this help in explaining Podium? I think it would.
I’d be prepared to relabel ‘track’ objects if we can agree on a better word. As I’ve mentioned in another topic, a track in Podium is more like a node in the hierarchy which may or may not have timeline events attached to it. As for the word ‘channel’, I normally associate this with audio channels. The term ‘multichannel’ is also commonly used for describing surround sound. So I think there is a conflict with using ‘channel’ instead of ‘track’.
How about “path”?
‘Path’ is a good suggestion. Anyone else want to comment on this?
January 27, 2006 at 08:59 #6022
super_crunchyParticipantI really like the new track layout look, veeery nice work. the left pointing arrows are also effective, indicating the signal flow up the heirarchy. I agree that the new layout looks different from the rest of the GUI, but nothing’s stopping you from tweaking the rest of the GUI one day to match the new look (eg. mappings/presets/paramters section at left could use the same thick lighter stroke in it’s design, just like the new track layout)
January 27, 2006 at 09:05 #6023super_crunchyParticipanti personally prefer the terms “track” or “lane”
January 27, 2006 at 09:13 #6024duncanparsonsParticipant‘Track’ will be more familiar to the majority of newcomers.. however, Podium is sufficiently removed from the reel:reel paradigm that ‘Path’ or ‘Lane’ might be better – since it would be rare to commit automation envelopes to tape [tho’ not unheard of].
For myself ‘Path’ is more indicative of signal flow, tho’ I can see scam’s point about a ‘Lane’ since that is what we see stretching latitudinally across our monitors..
I’d still go with Path at the end of the day (but understand it as a track in my head 😆 )
DSP
January 27, 2006 at 10:27 #6025
acousmodParticipantSince I am far from being able to understand all the subtelties of the english language, it is difficult for me to give an opinion…
But I prefer “Lane” to “Path” because path is an abstract word for me which is good to describe the sound flow but not visual things. The old “tracks” are something where to put objects : sequences, plugins, mappings etc.
“Lane” has for me the benefit of both meanings of track and path, while being more concrete.
It is also used in some video compositing softwares with the same meaning (if I remember well…).January 27, 2006 at 12:29 #6026
jensParticipant@Zynewave wrote:
You can argue that you want the complete hierarchy swapped upside down, to get a top down visual presentation of the signal flow
never dared to ask for it – but yes, sounds good…. 😆
January 27, 2006 at 12:32 #6027jensParticipantb.t.w.: it looks very good Frits, but it already did that before… – stop messing with the gfx and give us fade-handles and cross-fading for audio goodamit! 😀
January 27, 2006 at 13:02 #6028acousmodParticipantstop messing with the gfx and give us fade-handles and cross-fading for audio goodamit! Very Happy
In France there is a tradition called “le trou normand” which consists to drink a little glass of liquor in the middle of a dinner, in order to give more appetite for the next meats.
I think that this graphic subject is something like this for Frits, before going on the “serious well known hard needed features” !?
January 27, 2006 at 14:12 #6029ZynewaveKeymasterBut I prefer “Lane” to “Path” because path is an abstract word for me which is good to describe the sound flow but not visual things. The old “tracks” are something where to put objects : sequences, plugins, mappings etc.
“Lane” has for me the benefit of both meanings of track and path, while being more concrete.
It is also used in some video compositing softwares with the same meaning (if I remember well…).I was thinking of the word “path” as a label for the routing properties of the current track object. I am going to use the word “lane” to describe the horizontal timeline lane of a track. The new track design has a ‘hide track lane’ option in the track context menu. Since a track now is not always associated with a real timeline track, I was just considering if there were a more proper name for it. “Track” and “lane” are sort of the same thing in my mind. Anyway, I won’t change it anytime soon so we can discuss this again after the new track design has settled.
In France there is a tradition called “le trou normand” which consists to drink a little glass of liquor in the middle of a dinner, in order to give more appetite for the next meats.
I think that this graphic subject is something like this for Frits, before going on the “serious well known hard needed features” !?
Exactly 😆
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.