Conquistador's Forum Page

Profile  |  Topics  |  Replies  |  Favorites

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 1,598 total)
  • in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17058
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @thcilnnahoj wrote:

    A tad too extreme? 😛

    Lovely mock up. 🙂 Do you have a beta ready 😛 Or are you perhaps running a secret Wide meter beta™ for Frits? 8-[ 😛 Seriously that does look very nice. 8)

    Too extreme…? Not nearly. Quite normal. I think the more detail you have, the better. Meter Width is a very good thing for meters. Below is just one example of how wide meters can work very well indeed. Podiums mixer can be dragged upwards so your mock up in theory could achieve a comparable level of presentation and functionality as the meters in this image (but in Podium…)

    @Malcolm Jacobson wrote:

    I would suggest “Add Parameters”.

    Agreed. It uses fewer words and will encourage users to try it out. It makes a quick and short suggestion regarding what to do instead of telling them what they have not done…“No parameters are added to the rack editor”. I do think your suggestion is better I also think Frits will likely take it onboard. It uses less text and its more prescriptive than descriptive.

    in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17055
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @LiquidProj3ct wrote:

    No Conquistador, that was a bug report not a feature request. I don’t want those mini fonts! Try to replicate it 🙂

    Ok (sorry I misunderstood you) 😳 a bug report it is then 😛 🙂

    Funny enough…FWIW I cannot replicate it. I am running a 1900 x 1200 screen here and a font as tiny as the one in your image would be practically indecipherable at 1900 x 1200, so I would definitely notice it if I was able to replicate it here. I just thought I would try the “import plugin” bug you mentioned and I cannot replicate that either. Beta 5.

    Of course something is wrong somewhere if you are having those problems but I am just not seeing it here. It might be because I am on W7 x64. Not sure if you are running the same OS. :-k

    @ Frits

    Could you please detach the colour settings for the Editor Profile bar buttons from the Mixers Show / Hide buttons (Top left of Mixer) as any change a user makes to the colours affects both sets of buttons.

    The problem here is when a button is selected in the Editor Profile bar, white text appears. If you have a dark colour that is great and works well but…now the Show / Hide buttons above the zoom button are barely legible.

    Switch to a much lighter colour to see the show hide button text properly and now you can barely make out the text on any of the Editor Profile buttons when selected.

    Removing the link between the colour settings for the Editor Profile Bar and the Mixers Show / Hide buttons should solve that problem.

    Fuzzy text…

    More on this…I am seeing sharper text in the inspector (even smaller embedded parameter text is pin sharp and very clear) compared to the track or mixer…its like there is a slight fuzziness of fuzzy filter over the track and mixer strips.

    In Reaper for instance even though the text size for inserts looks exactly the same as Podiums mixer inserts text size, its definitely sharper and easier to read in Reaper. Smaller text actually works quite well in Reaper but it has some sort of strange additional text smoothing going on in Podium that does not really work well at all IMO. ❓ ❓ :-k

    in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17050
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @LiquidProj3ct wrote:

    I don’t know if you’re aware of this minismall font:

    To replicate add a mda DX10 (maybe any plugin), add all parameters and do the inspector the thinnest you can.

    Best regards

    If you are asking for smaller fonts in the Inspector then by all means yes if that is what you want, but only if it will be optional please (Frits). The text in the mixer and tracks is small enough as it is. I am quite happy for anyone to have smaller text wherever they want it (why not?) but don’t see any reason why it should be shrunk for everyone. 😉

    @Frits I asked this earlier…where has the option to increase the size of text in the mixer and / or tracks been moved to? I can’t find it anywhere.
    :-k

    in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17035
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Now that the zoom slider is available I would like to increase the size of the text in the mixer.

    Its a bit too small but was just about barely acceptable without the zoom control (although at times it looks like there is some sort of additional font smoothing going on causing a slight fuzziness) anyway where can I find that option to increase / decrease the the font size please? It used to be in the Mixer options but I can’t find it there anymore.

    Where has it been moved to???

    in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17021
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @Zynewave wrote:

    @Conquistador wrote:

    But what happened to all of those plans? (Based on your own comments) I thought it would surface in 2.21, then 2.22 then 2.23 now it looks like its fallen off the radar for 2.24 as well. Have you abandoned the idea or is it part of the scope for 2.24?

    It’s not abandoned. I just shifted priorities around. I thought that it would be best to get the new track header layout sorted out, before I started adding another feature layer on top of it. And then in the 2.23 preview topic discussion, the consensus was that it would be best to migrate the new layout to the mixer, for consitency. And that’s why I’m currently working on the mixer. I’ll get back to the track toolbar eventually.

    Ok thanks! 🙂

    in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17019
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @Zynewave wrote:

    Next on my schedule is adding functionality to the zPEQ display.

    It will be a nice addition as it will add a further layer of ease to Podium while also spotlighting the ZPEQ at the same time. Also the zoom slider is as slick as it gets, very smooth indeed in use. I think LP spoke about wider meters in another thread maybe that can be considered now that Podium can so easily offer wider strips..

    However….

    What about this from the 2.21 thread… ?????

    “I’m now going to start on the main 2.21 feature, which will be a new track toolbar. In the default setup it will sit right below the navigator. I’m considering several new toolbar elements, such as: New track, Marker lane toggle, Tempo lane toggle, global bounce/solo/mute/record buttons, and a new “track filter bar” which will behave similar to the 2.20 editor profile bar. More about that later”

    Of specific interest is the “global bounce/solo/mute/record buttons” I also think the rest of the Track toolbar features will fit in very well and add to Podiums workflow features as well.

    But what happened to all of those plans? (Based on your own comments) I thought it would surface in 2.21, then 2.22 then 2.23 now it looks like its fallen off the radar for 2.24 as well. Have you abandoned the idea or is it part of the scope for 2.24?

    in reply to: Preview 2.24: Embedded plugin editors in the rack #17006
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @Zynewave wrote:

    Thanks for the suggestions. I’m about to get beta2 ready, but meanwhile here’s a screenshot:

    Notice the embedded editors in the mixer :D/

    😯 The embedded editors in the mixer are some of the most delicious design work you have created yet! Simply exquisite.

    I guess for some people the ability to creatively and attractively design User interfaces is a gift. Brilliant. :mrgreen:

    in reply to: FR: Assign effects to specific parts of a track/audiofile #16953
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Hehe maybe he did not rate it too highly yes …:P

    Seriously though I think with so many FR’s he has to prioritize and this FR may still arrive at some point in future…just not yet. Frits no doubt also has to consider how best to implement features so perhaps its not easy to code. Also clearly other areas needed work (UI for instance) so he has been very busy there.

    In any case I think its a very good FR but it may be a bit more time before it surfaces in Podium. Either way I think its always worth at least posting an FR. 😉

    in reply to: 2.23 #16912
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @Zynewave wrote:

    Sorry about the rather undetailed release notes. Podium 2.23 is a huge update of the UI, and somewhere along the way I gave up on keeping a detailed record of every single change. Let me know if I forgot to include something important in the release notes.

    I doubt anyone here would need an apology from you for the lack of detailed release notes 🙂 Considering all the work you put into 2.23 I think we are quite happy with the summary as it is. Far more detail can be found by simply going through this thread for anyone who wants the finer details. 😉

    Well done! 🙂

    in reply to: FR: Assign effects to specific parts of a track/audiofile #16904
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Nice ideas. The FR’s discussed here sound a bit like this…

    in reply to: Preview 2.23: Redesigned group panel #16773
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Apologies from me too… >handshake< :)

    in reply to: Preview 2.23: Redesigned group panel #16770
    Conquistador
    Participant

    I’m sorry, but this post does not make sense to me.

    Ok…I think this discussion is sadly starting to slide a bit. You seem offended by my choice of words…”step backward” and feel the need to defend yourself… no need.

    I made the comparison with other host mixers, just to verify that hiding the bypass buttons by default would not be a catastrophic decision. If Logic Pro users can live without bypass buttons, then I feel confident that it is ok to have the bypass buttons hidden by default.

    Make the comparisions you want with other hosts we all do, I just think the comparison was and is strange but don’t take my comments so personally.

    Saying that this is “Taking a step back in functionality” is overreacting.

    But you saying “Catastrophic” is not?

    That is hardly the way I described it now is it?. Look a simple difference in opinion should not offend you. Its impossible for everyone to agree about everything all the time. No need to get upset. Really.

    I’ll leave this exchange of words with you here, as I just wanted to share my views on this forum about Podium (which AFAICT has not been a problem until now), not upset you. If you do not understand them or agree thats fine by me but please try and accept that without getting upset. Its just too small an issue for that.

    Peace. 😉

    in reply to: Preview 2.23: Redesigned group panel #16767
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @Zynewave wrote:

    I had a quick look at some other host mixers: The Cubase mixer seems to use two lines for each effect; one for the name and a second line for assorted buttons, including a power button. The Logic Pro 9 mixer does not have bypass buttons, but uses option+click to toggle bypass. I don’t see any bypass buttons in the Reaper mixer strips either.

    I would be very careful about looking elsewhere to see if something that was not a problem in Podium before 2.23, is mirrored elsewhere. Comparison has its merits but in this case Podium has a chance to offer easier access and functionality in this area (like it did pre 2.23) thats all.

    Taking a step back in functionality IMO and effectively saying they have the same setup is a bit puzzling. I would have thought even a small opportunity to make Podium easier and more pleasurable to use would be snapped up.

    . I wouldn’t call it a “step backward” just by having them hidden in the default setup 😉

    Call it what you will… 😉

    Step backward, a degree of added complication or simply a case of design / presentation over functionality…its a small part of the interface but one that is very important to access quickly and easily.

    The reason I would like to have them hidden, is to provide more space for the effect name. A lot of plugins have long names which will be truncated in the narrow buttons on the mixer strips

    FR alert…

    That is easily solved by having mixer strips one can drag to the right and having the FX buttons resize accordingly. Otherwise we have the current situation where a bypass button is removed to make way for plugin text. A user should not have to trade one for the other. Mixer strips need to be wider by default or…dragging them should resize fx buttons which should as a result make more text visible. Solved.

    A user will then be able to decide for themsleves how comfortable they are with a strips width versus the text they need to see on a button IMO.

    in reply to: Preview 2.23: Redesigned group panel #16760
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @Zynewave wrote:

    Is it really that often that the average user will be bypassing individual effects? I often don’t use bypassing at all. Perhaps other users can post whether they think single-click bypass is essential?

    At the end of the day any comment made about a users expectations are not 100% set in stone as I don’t know how everyone works but having one button less to look at compared to having the one click functionality I once had in the mixer taken away…for me the choice is easy.

    It could well be that everyone else thinks it is a fantastic move to remove the button…(maybe even likely) but thats ok with me as it is 100% ok to not agree from time to time. 😉

    Leave it as it is if you think its a minor issue or is better for the mixers current look…I just personally think its a step backward. If most people want it left alone then if you do not want to…don’t change it.

    in reply to: Preview 2.23: Redesigned group panel #16757
    Conquistador
    Participant

    @kyran wrote:

    As it stands now there is no quick way to bypass an effect using the mixer view (if I’m seeing things correctly).

    I think the current Shift+Left click should not be the default as a user would not immeadiately know that combo. Its too important IMO to have a user go through any click + button combo just to bypass a plugin every time. :-s

    A step backward here IMO. I personally think functions like this need to be as accessible and as simple to use as possible. I dont’t think having a visible bypass button crowds the mixer look and feel in anyway. That kind of button is needed IMO. There is only so much that can be hidden before it becomes a negative instead of a positive.

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 1,598 total)
© 2021 Zynewave