Request : Fix The FX Button

[David Baay]

Write is a special case. It's not an enable/disable toggle; it's just a momentary switch (and indicator) to clear (and notify) of any existing Write enables.

As noted previously, I agree R! is not following the convention of other Bypass/Override/Defeat functions, but I'm okay with that.

Since it's all easily addressed with the Theme editor, and there's obviously no universal consensus to be reached, I propose everyone who cares sets it up as he/she/they prefer and leave the rest of us to our own devices. ;^)

[murat k.]

1 hour ago, User 905133 said:

You have now confirmed that you keep missing my point.  You say things like," You'd be right if . . . " and  "You're wrong."  Please note: Not once have I said such things about you.  To his credit, the OP framed his opinion in an open manner and solicited the opinions of others. I would encourage you to move on out of deference to the OP and to others who are also expressing personal preferences but without the personal antagonism.

Please stop it.  (Note: That's a polite request because I would really hate to see this thread closed.)  

Anyone can be wrong anytime. And nothing's wrong with that. You're doing wrong again. I say it if someone's wrong. I think it is right thing to do and nothing's wrong with that.

1 hour ago, David Baay said:

Write is a special case. It's not an enable/disable toggle; it's just a momentary switch (and indicator) to clear (and notify) of any existing Write enables.

As noted previously, I agree R! is not following the convention of other Bypass/Override/Defeat functions, but I'm okay with that.

Since it's all easily addressed with the Theme editor, and there's obviously no universal consensus to be reached, I propose everyone who cares sets it up as he/she/they prefer and leave the rest of us to our own devices. ;^)

We could do it anytime already. I think this topic is about what would be right for the Cakewalk.

Edited August 29, 2022 by murat k.

[David Baay]

2 minutes ago, murat k. said:

I think this topic is about what would be right for the Cakewalk.

Yes, but in the absence of a clear consensus, the answer has to be "leave it as-is " given how long the current convention has been in place and that the majority of users appear to be okay with it based on the dearth of previous discussions about it.

[User 905133]

1 hour ago, User 905133 said:

You have now confirmed that you keep missing my point.  You say things like," You'd be right if . . . " and  "You're wrong."  Please note: Not once have I said such things about you.  To his credit, the OP framed his opinion in an open manner and solicited the opinions of others. I would encourage you to move on out of deference to the OP and to others who are also expressing personal preferences but without the personal antagonism.

Please stop it.  (Note: That's a polite request because I would really hate to see this thread closed.)  

12 minutes ago, murat k. said:

Anyone can be wrong anytime. And nothing's wrong with that. You're doing wrong again. I say it if someone's wrong. I think it is right thing to do and nothing's wrong with that.

Fine.   I think you are wrong for blatantly refusing to honor my polite request (among other things). 

Edited August 29, 2022 by User 905133
to add "(among other things)

[murat k.]

4 minutes ago, User 905133 said:

Fine.  You win.  I think you are wrong for blatantly refusing to honor my polite request. 

There is no need to be offensive and take it personal. We are just making a conversation to make the Cakewalk better. That's all.

[User 905133]

3 minutes ago, murat k. said:

There is no need to be offensive and take it personal. 

You are wrong for saying I was offensive.  I did not say anything offensive.   

[murat k.]

9 minutes ago, User 905133 said:

You are wrong for saying I was offensive.  I did not say anything offensive.   

And this is not the place for a personal argument.

[murat k.]

?I think you're missing my point Steve.

4 hours ago, David Baay said:

Yes, but in the absence of a clear consensus, the answer has to be "leave it as-is " given how long the current convention has been in place and that the majority of users appear to be okay with it based on the dearth of previous discussions about it.

In the previous discussions Noel admitted that it's confusing. So this means icons of the Mix Module can be re-taken by the developers. And I think the developers can make a clear consensus with each other from the discussions we had here.

Edited August 29, 2022 by murat k.

[David Baay]

41 minutes ago, murat k. said:

In the previous discussions Noel admitted that it's confusing.

That discussion was about the PDC button, and the laughing-so-hard-I'm-crying emoji he included says a lot about whether he seriously thought it needed to be changed.

FWIW, I have never found it confusing in the least. But then I've been around since before the feature existed so did not come in with pre-existing assumptions about what a PDC button should do or how it should look.

[User 905133]

3 hours ago, murat k. said:

And this is not the place for a personal argument.

  Although you totally missed my original point and my reiteration and clarifications, I thought you finally got a tertiary point: 

5 hours ago, User 905133 said:

Please stop it.  (Note: That's a polite request because I would really hate to see this thread closed.)  

However, it is clear from your most recent post that you did not.  

I didn't reply to this earlier. I was thinking you had finally given it a rest.  You are like the proverbial fire calling the kettle black.

===================

For the sake of clarity, here's a post in this thread:

On 8/22/2022 at 12:26 PM, Canopus said:

As for the default PDC button being confusing, Noel actually agreed that it was in a recent post.

Here is the post that was linked:

On 10/26/2021 at 8:38 AM, Noel Borthwick said:

Yes that button is to OVERRIDE PDC. Is it confusing, yes ?

  Here is the thread it is from:

 

57 minutes ago, murat k. said:

?I think you're missing my point @User 905133.

In the previous discussions Noel admitted that it's confusing. So this means icons of the Mix Module can be re-taken by the developers. And I think the developers can make a clear consensus with each other from the discussions we had here. [emphasis added]

Clearly, the threads I am referencing are related to the PDC button.

Are you intentionally distorting what people have said to try to claim my original point was "wrong" in your opinion, or are you referencing a different statement where Noel discusses the FX Bypass button?  If the latter, I will happy to read that statement.

You seem to be playing a trolling game.  I asked you politely previously to stop it.  

Please keep in mind, that I was specifically addressing Matthew White.  He is someone I have interacted with previously and have much respect for what he contributes and for how he communicates respectfully in the forum.  That is why I felt comfortable posting my reply. 

 

Edited August 29, 2022 by User 905133
corrections: added missing words: "the," "you" and corrected "what" to "why"

[Matthew White]

On 8/28/2022 at 3:55 PM, User 905133 said:

The button labelled FX is not an FX on/off button.  It is a Bypass All Audio Effects button.

16 hours ago, David Baay said:

the answer has to be "leave it as-is " given how long the current convention has been in place and that the majority of users appear to be okay with it

17 hours ago, David Baay said:

Since it's all easily addressed with the Theme editor, and there's obviously no universal consensus to be reached, I propose everyone who cares sets it up as he/she/they prefer

 

Despite changing my mind about this previously, I think I have settled on the above opinions that it is a bypass button and so should be lit when in bypass mode but can be changed via Themes if so desired, I do however think the tooltip could do with changing to how the OP suggested if possible ('Enable All Audio Effects' when it's in bypass and 'Bypass All Audio Effects' when it's enabled.) to help the new or confused.

 

12 hours ago, User 905133 said:

Please keep in mind, that I was specifically addressing Matthew White.  He is someone I have interacted with previously and have much respect for what he contributes and for how he communicates respectfully in the forum.  That is why I felt comfortable posting my reply. 

 

@User 905133 Thanks for your kind comment, it's much appreciated!

[murat k.]

22 hours ago, David Baay said:

That discussion was about the PDC button, and the laughing-so-hard-I'm-crying emoji he included says a lot about whether he seriously thought it needed to be changed.

FWIW, I have never found it confusing in the least. But then I've been around since before the feature existed so did not come in with pre-existing assumptions about what a PDC button should do or how it should look.

Actually I'm having no problems with the icons because I get used to it. But is there a confusion, yes there is. 

If there were no confusion this topic and previous discussions never be created and the people, including you, won't change an icon on your Mix Module.

PDC and FX buttons shares the same logic and so the same issue. So if you say for one of them you say for the other one too. 

If we get rid of the confusion, this can be achieved by sharing the same logic for the icons. This is my solution.

And if developers also thinks there is a confusion, there is an open door to change.

Edited August 30, 2022 by murat k.

[murat k.]

23 hours ago, User 905133 said:

Are you intentionally distorting what people have said to try to claim my original point was "wrong" in your opinion, or are you referencing a different statement where Noel discusses the FX Bypass button?  If the latter, I will happy to read that statement.

I think I get the problem here: You have a thought that I'm trying to claim you are wrong. 

I'm just clarifying things. From the beginning there is nothing about you. It is about the topic we talk. 

23 hours ago, User 905133 said:

Please keep in mind, that I was specifically addressing Matthew White.  He is someone I have interacted with previously and have much respect for what he contributes and for how he communicates respectfully in the forum.  That is why I felt comfortable posting my reply. 

I read your posts and find the issues and pointed at you. There is nothing unrespectful here. You should re-consider of respect meaning of yours. 

On 8/29/2022 at 7:55 PM, murat k. said:

  On 8/29/2022 at 7:47 PM, User 905133 said:

Fine.  You win.

And this is not a game. 

[User 905133]

22 minutes ago, murat k. said:

I think I get the problem here: You have a thought that I'm trying to claim you are wrong. 

I'm just clarifying things. From the beginning there is nothing about you. It is about the topic we talk. 

I read your posts and find the issues and pointed at you. There is nothing unrespectful here. You should re-consider of respect meaning of yours. 

And this is not a game. 

There is plenty in the thread that already addresses these ^^^ comments.  No need on my part to rearticulate what I already said no matter how much you try to goad me into doing so. I have no respect for you.  Any respect I used to have has been wiped out.  If you disagree with my preferences and my accounts of my personal experience, that is your choice. I think your persistence in advocating your position has come across loud and clear.  If you want to say anything more as concerns me or anything I have posted, I can only encourage you say it to yourself in your own head or to a mirror.  Please cease and desist.  

 

[murat k.]

4 minutes ago, User 905133 said:

There is plenty in the thread that already addresses these ^^^ comments.  No need on my part to rearticulate what I already said no matter how much you try to goad me into doing so. I have no respect for you.  Any respect I used to have has been wiped out.  If you disagree with my preferences and my accounts of my personal experience, that is your choice. I think your persistence in advocating your position has come across loud and clear.  If you want to say anything more as concerns me or anything I have posted, I can only encourage you say it to yourself in your own head or to a mirror.  Please cease and desist.  

 

We are all friends here Steve. I'm not trying to win a game or something. 

If we had in a game here we would all in the same team, we use the same DAW.

You took it personal from the beginning. That's why you behave like that.

If you read everything after a while you'll see them with a different point of view.

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

Been away from the forum a few days and my thread has gone crazy  ?

So I think after reading all the back and forth that my preferred  way to deal with it would be :-

1. Update the tooltip as there seems to be a consensus this would be helpful so it's clearer whether the user is engaging or bypassing the FX

2. Leave the way it functions but try to label it more clearly as the " FX Bypass " button rather than it just saying " FX "

I think this would lead to less confusion without changing the way it operates. I suppose I could always put some masking tape on mine and write on it with a Sharpie.  

Edited August 30, 2022 by Mark Morgon-Shaw

[Lord Tim]

2 hours ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

  ? I suppose I could always put some masking tape on mine and write on it with a Sharpie.  

You know what, a "masking tape over beaten up live mixer" theme would be a lot of fun! Who's keen? ?

[Teegarden]

On 8/27/2022 at 7:52 PM, David Baay said:

 the lit state should still be  indicating whether the button is engaged or not,

Exactly, the button lit shows that FX is engaged, the button lit with strike through shows bypass is engaged... Thanks for making this point?

 

On 8/28/2022 at 10:55 PM, User 905133 said:

To reiterate: It is a Bypass button. 

Well, then it should say so (and not just the tooltip which needs extra mouse action).
When I see FX my (and I guess most others) first impression is that it is to enable FX. 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 5:43 PM, David Baay said:

As noted previously, I agree R! is not following the convention of other Bypass/Override/Defeat functions, but I'm okay with that.

Why would you not support efforts to improve a standard layout so new users can immediately understand what they are doing?

On 8/29/2022 at 6:45 PM, David Baay said:

but in the absence of a clear consensus, the answer has to be "leave it as-is " given how long the current convention has been in place and that the majority of users appear to be okay with it based on the dearth of previous discussions about it.

If Tesla had followed this same logic we would still be stuck with a future of gas-guzzling polluting cars?. 

 

It is normal that older users are used and have adapted to sometimes totally irrational workflows. However, if you want to attract many new (young) users in a fast changing world where many quickly abandon software and look for an alternative if it doesn't work the way they can figure out at first sight, it would be wise to have the courage and guts to change a system in such a way that it makes sense to most people.

 

For me, as a logical (at least trying to...) thinking person, the combination of  @Starship Krupa and @Canopus would make the (almost, I'm still trying to figure out whether a red lit button should do it, or that in bypass state the button should just not be lit without a strike through) perfect solution (thanks for that! The more logical buttons are being put in the themes the better CbB becomes!)
For the record: I also adapted to an illogical layout over time, having related muscle memory. That will never stop me from improving things and acquiring new muscle memory (nice therapy to combat neurodegeneration ?)

Standard FX and PDC are activated, so having the buttons lit indicates it's working. 
Bypass on FX and PDC activated: button lit red with strike through means bypass is working.

Of course, the tooltips need to be adapted to the state of the button...

If you want to make it clear the way the official layout works, the buttons should be renamed "FX Bypass" and "PDC Bypass". This seems to make the most sense to me. I guess that is mainly a bar space issue.
 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Teegarden

[David Baay]

4 hours ago, Teegarden said:

On 8/27/2022 at 11:52 AM, David Baay said:

 the lit state should still be  indicating whether the button is engaged or not,

Exactly, the button lit shows that FX is engaged, the button lit with strike through shows bypass is engaged... Thanks for making this point?

No you're misunderstanding me and (inadvertently?) misrepresenting what I said by taking it out of context. 'Engaged' is referring to the way a physical, latching button would work. It's engaged when depressed and latched, and only lit in that state. Physical engagement is independent of whether the effect is to enable or disable some function. Following your Tesla analogy, there are many examples of this in the automobile world. Many of my cars have had switches to disable ABS, traction control,  passenger airbags, passenger-control of power windows, etc.. I don't recall if they all consistently used iconogrpahy indicating they were defeat switches, but they all only lit up (or lit an indicator on the dash) when engaged/latched.

 

4 hours ago, Teegarden said:

On 8/29/2022 at 9:43 AM, David Baay said:

As noted previously, I agree R! is not following the convention of other Bypass/Override/Defeat functions, but I'm okay with that.

Why would you not support efforts to improve a standard layout so new users can immediately understand what they are doing?

Because I'd rather the precious development time be spent adding a missing feature or improving one that has significant shortcomings or does not work at all. And there will always be users who do not "immediately understand" something no matter how it's presented. Sometime you jreally just have to RTFM... or ask the forum. ;^)

 

4 hours ago, Teegarden said:

On 8/29/2022 at 10:45 AM, David Baay said:

but in the absence of a clear consensus, the answer has to be "leave it as-is " given how long the current convention has been in place and that the majority of users appear to be okay with it based on the dearth of previous discussions about it.

If Tesla had followed this same logic we would still be stuck with a future of gas-guzzling polluting cars?. 

In the universe of inane analogies this one takes the cake ?.  

[jackson white]

I take it there are no Acustica Audio users in this thread, who seem to take a perverse delight in applying their expertise in convolution technology to their UIs. Authentic emulations of actual gear brilliantly disguised with artistic re-interpretations of functional states. And manuals to go with it.

...

had the same issues with the FX/PDC buttons but sorted it out pretty quickly with a little RTFM. However, visual state indications were not "intuitive" for me and with a bit of forum exploration discovered the Theme Editor, which imho is an underrated but well appreciated solution here. Improved productivity with zero impact on core functionality/reliability and another first world problem solved.