>> V4 Theme : The Theme Team requests interaction discussion

[White Tie]

FYI : Meters are special, and always have been. You couldn't overlay hack over them in the past, and by the same token you can't put anything over them now. Think of the area the VU takes up as being a cordoned-off area of high importance - I believe it is redrawn at a higher rate than the rest of the interface, to be reflective of the audio, and so its not doing any transparent composition with the rest of the interface, and incurring the resulting CPU hit.

Meter images also cannot be changed by layout.

[vocalid]

Originally Posted by White Tie

FYI : Meters are special, and always have been. You couldn't overlay hack over them in the past, and by the same token you can't put anything over them now. Think of the area the VU takes up as being a cordoned-off area of high importance - I believe it is redrawn at a higher rate than the rest of the interface, to be reflective of the audio, and so its not doing any transparent composition with the rest of the interface, and incurring the resulting CPU hit.

Meter images also cannot be changed by layout.

Thanks for the info White Tie....

Just wondering, with modern graphic cards doing all the number crunching, shouldn't it be possible without the CPU taking a hit?

[karl]

Originally Posted by vocalid

with modern graphic cards doing all the number crunching, shouldn't it be possible without the CPU taking a hit?

Maybe, but not everyone has modern graphics cards.

[Mike Stop Continues]

Originally Posted by White Tie

FYI : Meters are special, and always have been. You couldn't overlay hack over them in the past, and by the same token you can't put anything over them now. Think of the area the VU takes up as being a cordoned-off area of high importance - I believe it is redrawn at a higher rate than the rest of the interface, to be reflective of the audio, and so its not doing any transparent composition with the rest of the interface, and incurring the resulting CPU hit.

Meter images also cannot be changed by layout.

But there must be ample reason to rework that meter bug now. It would be nearly as efficient if the meter AND the stuff above it was redrawn at a higher rate than the rest of the display. A meter+volume knob redraw is certainly not a crime against nature... Think of the children!

[vocalid]

Originally Posted by karl

Maybe, but not everyone has modern graphics cards.

True, but that shouldn't stop those of us with the right hardware from having that possibility. IMHO we should have themes for fast computers, multiple screens, notebooks, touchscreens, barebones.....

[vocalid]

Originally Posted by Mike Stop Continues

But there must be ample reason to rework that meter bug now. It would be nearly as efficient if the meter AND the stuff above it was redrawn at a higher rate than the rest of the display. A meter+volume knob redraw is certainly not a crime against nature... Think of the children!

I wouldn't go as far as calling it a bug, it's a design feature that was probably needed in the early reaping days. But I'm all for making (optional of course) it possible to have features combined, perhaps with a settable redraw rate? Sorry WT for having this discussion here..... where does one post requests in the alpha version....?

[Mike Stop Continues]

Originally Posted by vocalid

I wouldn't go as far as calling it a bug, it's a design feature that was probably needed in the early reaping days. But I'm all for making (optional of course) it possible to have features combined, perhaps with a settable redraw rate? Sorry WT for having this discussion here..... where does one post requests in the alpha version....?

You're right. It'd be unfair to call it a bug. This should probably be in the WALTER thread, but that doesn't seem right either...

Also, I'm as giddy as a schoolgirl about REAPER 4.0. I've got so many reaper forum tabs open, they don't have names anymore. I would imagine that's only one cause of the forum mush in this exciting holiday season.

[musicbynumbers]

(or perhaps it's not important)

When I have envelope lanes open, I can see that the master I/O button lines up perfectly with the envelope tracks button BUT, wouldn't it make more sense to have the automation button be the one that lines up with it?

I'm not that fussed and you probably already decided that it was more important to have the I/O button in a prominent place so no biggy, just thought I'd put it out there just in case!

[White Tie]

Lots of principles in play on what button has been put where, and I'd say we've yet to have the major discussion this needs. A regards the IO button, here was some of the thinking behind where it, like all the other bits, is:

• The more important the element, the less likely it is to be 'disappeared' at small panel sizes.
• The more important the element, the higher the row it goes in at any given size
• The more important the element, the less it changes position (or appears to change position) on size change (helps with searching).
• The more important the element, the more likely it is to be at either the extreme left or right of the panel.

Its not the most of exciting discussions (!), it's very detailed and difficult, its almost impossible to come up with an absolute 'right answer' on anything ...but its well worth the effort to get as close to ideal as possible.

[jdutaillis]

Originally Posted by White Tie

Lots of principles in play on what button has been put where, and I'd say we've yet to have the major discussion this needs. A regards the IO button, here was some of the thinking behind where it, like all the other bits, is:

• The more important the element, the less likely it is to be 'disappeared' at small panel sizes.
• The more important the element, the higher the row it goes in at any given size
• The more important the element, the less it changes position (or appears to change position) on size change (helps with searching).
• The more important the element, the more likely it is to be at either the extreme left or right of the panel.

Its not the most of exciting discussions (!), it's very detailed and difficult, its almost impossible to come up with an absolute 'right answer' on anything ...but its well worth the effort to get as close to ideal as possible.

The more I use the theme, the more i see this logic in place. You've really done a great job on it overall WT and Theme Team!

Any updates on when we may see further work on it?
Will it be rolled out with the various alpha releases?

It's all very exciting it's it

[Mike Stop Continues]

Originally Posted by White Tie

Lots of principles in play on what button has been put where, and I'd say we've yet to have the major discussion this needs. A regards the IO button, here was some of the thinking behind where it, like all the other bits, is:

• The more important the element, the less likely it is to be 'disappeared' at small panel sizes.
• The more important the element, the higher the row it goes in at any given size
• The more important the element, the less it changes position (or appears to change position) on size change (helps with searching).
• The more important the element, the more likely it is to be at either the extreme left or right of the panel.

Its not the most of exciting discussions (!), it's very detailed and difficult, its almost impossible to come up with an absolute 'right answer' on anything ...but its well worth the effort to get as close to ideal as possible.

You (and your team, as I understand it) have done an excellent job already. That said, here's my two cents on the question at hand...

I use REAPER for electronic music. Every instrument I use is synthesized. The only thing that gets recorded for a normal project is vocals, and though I do a LOT of vocal harmonizing, I still consider my projects at least 90% electronic.

I really do like the look of the joined Title-Meter, but it's not useful! It doesn't make sense. And I really do want to like it too...

For my workflow, here's things relative level of importance:

1. Track title
2. Track number
3. Folder compression
4. Mute/Solo
5. Meter
6. FX
7. Automation
8. IO
9. Volume
10. Pan/Width (no need for width display--keep volume)
11. Record
12. Arm
13. RARELY - Icon (more about selection than usefulness)
14. RARELY - Phase
15. NOT AT ALL - Extra input select
16. NOT AT ALL - Folder button

I believe that the buttons don't need names -- it's a little indulgent when the meter is like 30 pixels across at a reasonable width size. The whole point of icons is to convey information. That's why in medieval times they used paintings in place of tavern names. Think of it as retro.

The buttons can be clustered like this:
Volume-Text(vol/pan)
Pan/Width--Phase
Mute--Solo
Record--Meter--Arm
IO--Automation--FX--FX_disable

My inclination would be that the first-liners be (Ones on top less likely to jump):

• Track compress
• Track Number (PS-great placement--track icon should replace it when compressed and share the same box at larger sizes.)
• Track title (resizeable fluid width across folderdepth)
• R-Meter-A (resizeable static width across folderdepth)
• M--S
• IO-Auto-FX-FX_disable

And second line, nice and big (with plenty of room for overflowing button groups):

• Volume--Text (resizable)
• Pan/Width--Phase

On the very small widths, there should be a ton of rows, so that one could maximize a track, shrink the TCP, and still see everything.

Just a thought.

[dub3000]

Originally Posted by vocalid

Thanks for the info White Tie....

Just wondering, with modern graphic cards doing all the number crunching, shouldn't it be possible without the CPU taking a hit?

when you do that, you tend to break platform compatibility really badly. and open up huge cans of worms where the behaviour is slightly different on every system. and introduce weird latency issues.... it won't happen any time soon.

[WyattRice]

Overall, I'm starting to like the default theme colors. One little nitpick is that the + and - for zooming tracks could be more sharper, or more defined. I know where they are, but sometimes I find them a little bit hard to see. Here's the difference.

Version 4


Version 3

[zappa]

Originally Posted by White Tie

Lots of principles in play on what button has been put where, and I'd say we've yet to have the major discussion this needs. A regards the IO button, here was some of the thinking behind where it, like all the other bits, is:

• The more important the element, the less likely it is to be 'disappeared' at small panel sizes.
• The more important the element, the higher the row it goes in at any given size
• The more important the element, the less it changes position (or appears to change position) on size change (helps with searching).
• The more important the element, the more likely it is to be at either the extreme left or right of the panel.

Its not the most of exciting discussions (!), it's very detailed and difficult, its almost impossible to come up with an absolute 'right answer' on anything ...but its well worth the effort to get as close to ideal as possible.

Perhaps an appropriate focus for the discussion is use-cases rather than debating people's various aesthetic tastes for layout. Recognising that there is some overlap between the two, maybe there is value in participants giving some background about their primary use for and workflow in Reaper together with suggestions. The preference then is for "I would like this because it helps me to do X" discussion rather than "I like / don't like". MikeStop has done this nicely above; from such discussion emerges:

1. the ability to discern logical groups of users and a working layout for each.
2. a default layout that works for the majority of users
3. A set of preferences (config options) and layout templates (walter mcp/tcp layouts) useful for each major logical groups.

z.

[Evan]

Agreed 100% on the scrollbars. I prefer the v3 scrollbars, they appear more obvious and thicker, easier to handle.

Also, the vertical scrollbar is not resizable with the mouse, like the horizontal one is (dragging from the edges). The circles at the end of the horizontal scrollbar indicate to me that I can drag-resize with the mouse. For the vertical scrollbar, they are not needed, unless the drag-resize function is added in there as well.

[Mike Stop Continues]

Originally Posted by WyattRice

Overall, I'm starting to like the default theme colors. One little nitpick is that the + and - for zooming tracks could be more sharper, or more defined. I know where they are, but sometimes I find them a little bit hard to see. Here's the difference.

Version 4


Version 3

I agree. Just a little more contrast would fix it. The new sliders look great aside from that.