Flatbed Effect list request.

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

Just now, Will_Kaydo said:

No it' not cause you jave to move away from the place you're at to go and locate a plugin. 

You must have a hellishly low resolution set on your mouse 

[Will.]

2 minutes ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

Not when it's buried 700 plugins away

 

If you say so. Go and read the original post again. Who uses 700 COMPRESSORS? the flatbed is on the subgroup Dynamic, EQ Reverb etc. Not all effects on one page. READ! 

Edited March 30, 2021 by Will_Kaydo

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

1 minute ago, Will_Kaydo said:

If you say so. 

I know so I used 8.5 for a decade which has no Browser.

It's fine in 2001 when you've got 100 plugins...20 years later it's not really much use

Edited March 30, 2021 by Mark Morgon-Shaw

[Will.]

1 minute ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

I know so I used 8.5 for a decade which has no Browser.

It's fine in 2001 when you've got 100 plugins...20 years later it's not really much use

?

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

4 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

?

I mean look how far I would need to scroll to reach Waves VEQ ???  and mine are pretty organised

[Will.]

 

25 minutes ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

I mean look how far I would need to scroll to reach Waves VEQ ???  and mine are pretty organised

Oki - doki.

And with this you will have all your ompressors on one window. 

Edited March 30, 2021 by Will_Kaydo

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

7 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

 

Oki - doki.

And with this you will have all your ompressors on one window. 

[Will.]

48 minutes ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

You must have a hellishly low resolution set on your mouse 

And this makes you a straight up *****! 

Not everyone can affort big monitors - not that I dont have / but / here's guys out here working solely on Laptops. The world of workflow does not revolve around your selfish attitude. 

If you have the means of what it takes to afford these type of equipment great! Out here on the streets - the struggle is real! We work with what we have - so asking on behalf of those producers and where I will benefit - I WILL DO! 

[Will.]

I was there! And that is why I feel shit offended of that comment you've made. 

I've worked with what I had and in the living arrangements - until I got out of that lifestyle. 

The world dont need people like you in it. 

[Will.]

1 hour ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

You must have a hellishly low resolution set on your mouse 

My latest release is about struggles! So yeah! I'm hell offended right now!!!! 

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

4 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

I was there! And that is why I feel shit offended of that comment you've made. 

I've worked with what I had and in the living arrangements - until I got out of that lifestyle. 

The world dont need people like you in it. 

Lol you're welcome x x

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

10 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

My latest release is about struggles! So yeah! I'm hell offended right now!!!! 

I have never been offended by anyone in my life because there is nothing they could say that would ever bother me

[murat k.]

Guys, we all here to help for the development of the Cakewalk in the Feedback Loop.

Defending existing things is not about development. And I believe Cakewalk users deserves better than workarounds.

Also we need multi column feature for the context menus everywhere in the Cakewalk. Some plugins have a lot of Audio Output, we need multi columned visibility also there. Even if we use a different path for the Drum Maps, this is not solving the issue, only my Battery 4 Drum Maps exceeds the visible list.

When we get multi columned visibility it will be everywhere at the same time in the Cakewalk. I mean when developers add that feature to the Cakewalk, they'll able to implement it everywhere. So automatically we will also show Plugin Menus with multi columned state.

And please, be kind to each other. We make music.

[John]

Will Kaydo I agree with your request. I have often hoped for something a little better in listing plugins. However, there is no reason to get upset with other posters no matter how anti progress they may sound. Frustration due to people putting up arguments opposed to the idea is no reason to attack anyone. 

Consider this a warning.  The TOS forbids calling a member a name that is an insult.  

[Will.]

16 minutes ago, John said:

Will Kaydo I agree with your request. I have often hoped for something a little better in listing plugins. However, there is no reason to get upset with other posters no matter how anti progress they may sound. Frustration due to people putting up arguments opposed to the idea is no reason to attack anyone. 

Consider this a warning.  The TOS forbids calling a member a name that is an insult.  

Really dont care about warnings at this point. I will call someone out when they in the wrong! 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Will_Kaydo

[user 905133]

5 hours ago, murat k. said:

Defending existing things is not about development.

Are you saying and/or implying that if someone suggests/proposes a change and in so doing points out flaws with the status quo, it is out of place in this forum to address the advantages of the status quo and/or the fact that different people can have different preferences, workflows, etc.?

 

[murat k.]

14 hours ago, User 905133 said:

Are you saying and/or implying that if someone suggests/proposes a change and in so doing points out flaws with the status quo, it is out of place in this forum to address the advantages of the status quo and/or the fact that different people can have different preferences, workflows, etc.?

Thank you for the question @User 905133. I was wanting to elaborate the subject. Let me give you an example. Let's say I am not happy with the navigation in the Cakewalk compared to the other DAWs. Then I create a topic and request a feature for panning with middle button in the Cakewalk. When someone came with an argument like, no it is not necessary, there is a scrollbar, and you can also navigate from the time ruler etc. This is defending an existing thing and will never help to the Cakewalk development.

By the way I've made panning with the Middle Mouse Button with the Cakefolk already. ?

 

 

[Lord Tim]

3 hours ago, murat k. said:

Thank you for the question @User 905133. I was wanting to elaborate the subject. Let me give you an example. Let's say I am not happy with the navigation in the Cakewalk compared to the other DAWs. Then I create a topic and request a feature for panning with middle button in the Cakewalk. When someone came with an argument like, no it is not necessary, there is a scrollbar, and you can also navigate from the time ruler etc. This is defending an existing thing and will never help to the Cakewalk development.

 

Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, the downside to that is if everyone gets their preferred way of working, it can either cause inconsistency in how the UI works, or eventually become feature creep, and turns CbB into some kind of ad hoc REAPER knock-off.

That's not to say a lot of those ideas aren't good, or your utility isn't - there's some fantastic suggestions and ideas going on there - but there really needs to be a person guiding the ship and making some careful choices about what's in there, and unfortunately that might mean a way some of us would like to work isn't added.

Using the scrollbar thing as an example, adding something in to use the middle button to pan, that might sound good on the surface but it could affect much deeper functionality depending on how that control is exposed to the UI, etc. (just an abstract example, not specifically saying this is about the middle mouse thing). If it's not hindering a the use of anything, and the thing some users would like to see added is already being adequately covered by existing functionality, the dev team would have to be prioritising features elsewhere that will make a real meaningful difference to most users.  Saying something is fine as it is isn't hurting Cakewalk development necessarily. Adding something new isn't necessarily helping development either.

Again, not to say that the ideas people are suggesting aren't valid or good ones, but there's got to be a priority and a plan and it may not be what we would personally like to see.

I'd personally love to see a lot of additional .ini file config stuff to modify the behaviour of things, so it's out of the eye of the casual user but for those who really want to go deep, they can customise a lot of granular features to their liking.  Obviously that doesn't solve every issue, but there's got to be a long term plan to keep everything focussed while dealing with a small team and finite time to add/change things.

EDIT: For the record, I'm with you guys - I personally would like the menus to be better.

Edited April 1, 2021 by Lord Tim

[user 905133]

56 minutes ago, Lord Tim said:

Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment . . .

I think the only way a position of flexibility in the UI (such as the one I have advocated on my own behalf) can be remotely considered evil is if people believe there is only one path to truth.  ?   Honestly, I don't know why users are so stuck on saying that "THEIR WAY" of doing things is better than the ways others might choose to do them. But maybe that's because I am a pluralist and try to be understanding and tolerant of differences.  In fact, I have long appreciated SONAR/Cakewalk's flexibility / customizability.

As for (1) the allegation that a "flatbed list" is a new and/or improved UI design feature and (2) the implication that the failure of users to jump onto the bandwagon presented here (a) to abandon other structures and (b) to support a universal flatbed list design everywhere in Cakewalk is a sin as it flies in the face of progress, development, etc., please consider this (as an example):

(1a) Clearly the "flatbed list" is not a new UI design feature.  (1b) This particular list seems capable of accommodating 125+ items. (1c) It is activated by a simple button (1d) If all 6 banks (in this case) were in one flatbed list, some of us would find a flatbed list of 900-1,000 items overwhelming.

(2a) Personally, I like sliders (hardware and software), but I think it would be arrogant of me to suggest that sliders are superior for all people in all circumstances and ought to be implemented everywhere in Cakewalk.

(2b) And if I did request that Cakewalk implement mandatory sliders in places where there currently aren't sliders, I think it would be arrogant of me to suggest that people who have personal preferences for the status quo should have no voice in the discussion if they suggest that multiple options is a good thing.

Again, that's probably just me being a pluralist appreciating differences, flexibility, customized workflows, etc.

I understand that many people believe that there is only one path to truth--the "right" way to do something, etc.

BTW, insofar as your advocacy is supportive, thanks Lord.  ?

[Will.]

2 hours ago, User 905133 said:

I think the only way a position of flexibility in the UI (such as the one I have advocated on my own behalf) can be remotely considered evil is if people believe there is only one path to truth.  ?   Honestly, I don't know why users are so stuck on saying that "THEIR WAY" of doing things is better than the ways others might choose to do them. But maybe that's because I am a pluralist and try to be understanding and tolerant of differences.  In fact, I have long appreciated SONAR/Cakewalk's flexibility / customizability.

As for (1) the allegation that a "flatbed list" is a new and/or improved UI design feature and (2) the implication that the failure of users to jump onto the bandwagon presented here (a) to abandon other structures and (b) to support a universal flatbed list design everywhere in Cakewalk is a sin as it flies in the face of progress, development, etc., please consider this (as an example):

(1a) Clearly the "flatbed list" is not a new UI design feature.  (1b) This particular list seems capable of accommodating 125+ items. (1c) It is activated by a simple button (1d) If all 6 banks (in this case) were in one flatbed list, some of us would find a flatbed list of 900-1,000 items overwhelming.

(2a) Personally, I like sliders (hardware and software), but I think it would be arrogant of me to suggest that sliders are superior for all people in all circumstances and ought to be implemented everywhere in Cakewalk.

(2b) And if I did request that Cakewalk implement mandatory sliders in places where there currently aren't sliders, I think it would be arrogant of me to suggest that people who have personal preferences for the status quo should have no voice in the discussion if they suggest that multiple options is a good thing.

Again, that's probably just me being a pluralist appreciating differences, flexibility, customized workflows, etc.

I understand that many people believe that there is only one path to truth--the "right" way to do something, etc.

BTW, insofar as your advocacy is supportive, thanks Lord.  ?

You guys dont seem to get it. 

What you are showing is a "one list" page.

[Zoom in to check.]

Every EQ/Dynamic or what ever you want to use, will be in its own category. It will just be much easier to find,  instead of clicking 2mins to locate your favorite one right at the bottom. 

This will be a new feature to the DAW. Your example was that of a VST and not that of the DAW itself. So it will be new to Cakewalk.

Like in every other DAW - the user can switch this On or Off. 

Stop holding Cakewalk back in 1999. We're in the 21st Century. 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Will_Kaydo