Old 11-24-2019, 04:44 AM   #1
tok_enterprises
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 8
Default Ver.6 Theme - feedback on ergonomics

EDIT: This feedback was using the 'Default V6 Theme' shipped in the DEV/RC versions of Reaper 6 development. The theme layout was truly wonky, as described below, and once I installed the Alpha versions of the theme and script as directed by White Tie, they appeared normal and functional. I want to keep this post up as a reminder so that as Reaper 6 enters its final stages, the developers ensure the shipped theme will work as intended on a fresh installation.
-----------------------original below--------------------

I commend White Tie on the development of the ver.6 theme, especially darkening the standard theme. As a user of 3 monitors, digital eye strain was becoming a real issue with the default 5 theme. I have tried over 100 themes from the repository, and currently use Inquasar because I have found no other theme was as ergonomically friendly as the default ver.5 theme, and this theme simply added a dark color scheme to the default.

Some notes from testing the default ver. 6 theme for several weeks, especially in regards to workflow:

A.) The placement of the Solo / Mute buttons to the far left of the TCP cause for additional mouse movement and eye movement. The purpose of the TCP is to work with the tracks. The S/M buttons are some of the most used features, and their placement slows down the workflow, and causes unnecessary momentary confusion in searching for which tracks are enable, etc...

B.) Similar to comment A, the level meter is also placed far from the workspace within the TCP.

C.) The name of each track is severely truncated in the TCP. With one full screen devoted to TCP, I am only able to read 3-4 characters of each track name when the track section is given 20% of the entire real-estate of the screen.

D.) A possible solution to alleviate the issues in comment C would be to reduce the size of certain icons that are of less importance to the workflow; specifically, the "ROUTE", "FX", and "TRIM" icons could take up less space, giving more room to the track title. Could the FX be more square, with a tiny 'LED' style light that shines green when on, red when inactive, and off when empty be employed? Could the 'ROUTE' icon similarly be square with three tiny 'LED' style lights above the text, with three different color lights turning on and off depending on utilization? 'TRIM' could also be a small square with the text and the automation graphic directly above it, lighting up when active, greyed out when not.

E.) Similar to comment A, the record input selector is the closest option on the track bar to the workspace, despite it being one of the least utilized functions. Once a track is armed with an input, there is little need to change the input again. Thus, the placement of this feature should be to the left of the screen, certainly further away than the Solo / Mute buttons, or the pan / fade buttons.

F.) The MCP tracks currently take up a lot of real estate. From a workflow standpoint, having to scroll more often and for longer slows down the rate of work.

G.) I LOVE the attempt to group the MCP folders by raising child track numbers above the level of the parent folder. Currently, it is a bit clunky, and takes up a decent amount of real estate in how things are staggered. Could the parent folders' colors be extended underneath the child tracks? For example, if the parent folder is red, could a red line exist underneath each of the child folders track number? If the child track is nested three deep, there could be three different colored lines underneath the track, designated each of the parents. This would be beneficial for two reasons: first, it allows the child track to be recognized as belonging to X number of parent tracks; second, it allows the eye to easily trace back the origin of the child track to the parent track, and makes for quick identification. An added bonus would be that each child track would not have to be raised as high as currently done in order to visually show the difference between parent and child.

So far, those are my only concerns. Great job. I like a lot of the direction this theme is going in, and only want to support the most ergonomic, friendly, yet visually appealing theme possible. Reaper is the most powerful DAW on the market, and it should enable serious users to work hours on end without fatigue.

Last edited by tok_enterprises; 11-24-2019 at 02:23 PM. Reason: Solved Issue after receiving input.
tok_enterprises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2019, 04:59 AM   #2
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

You haven't tried the script yet, have you? Prepare to be pleased, almost everything you've mentioned is actually a user setting in the script
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2019, 02:27 PM   #3
tok_enterprises
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 8
Default Resolved Issues with proper installation of Alpha Theme pack

White Tie, my issues were caused by using the supplied theme as shipped with the DEV/RC versions of Reaper 6. Once I installed the Alpha theme and script, as you supply them in your separate thread, the default theme appeared to be working as normal, and beautiful as you intended.

As I have installed several of the last iterations of DEV/RC, the wonky theme issue was a direct result of using the supplied version with Reaper, and not installing the additional themes and scripts supplied by White Tie. I want to keep my original post up to ensure the final version of Reaper 6.0 works as intended, and that a fresh install on a fresh computer displays White Tie's masterpiece as intended.
tok_enterprises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2019, 01:15 PM   #4
tzzsmk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Heart of Europe
Posts: 148
Default

for me, the "ergonomics" is good contrast ratio and well visible toggled buttons, faders, knobs etc..
for those reasons, right now my primary theme remains to be Inquasar Dark Matter v.1.0 - it retains all default layout, just the coloring is much more user-friendly imo

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=202903
__________________
M1 MacMini (16GB, 2TB), RME ADI-2 DAC, Kali IN-8 + WS-12, DELL AW3418DW
M2 Max MacStudio (64GB, 4TB), Sonnet xMacStudio rack, RME HDSPe AIO, RME UFX III
tzzsmk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2020, 09:38 PM   #5
Zoom_Wajaja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tok_enterprises View Post
EDIT: This feedback was using the 'Default V6 Theme' shipped in the DEV/RC versions of Reaper 6 development. The theme layout was truly wonky, as described below, and once I installed the Alpha versions of the theme and script as directed by White Tie, they appeared normal and functional. I want to keep this post up as a reminder so that as Reaper 6 enters its final stages, the developers ensure the shipped theme will work as intended on a fresh installation.
-----------------------original below--------------------

I commend White Tie on the development of the ver.6 theme, especially darkening the standard theme. As a user of 3 monitors, digital eye strain was becoming a real issue with the default 5 theme. I have tried over 100 themes from the repository, and currently use Inquasar because I have found no other theme was as ergonomically friendly as the default ver.5 theme, and this theme simply added a dark color scheme to the default.

Some notes from testing the default ver. 6 theme for several weeks, especially in regards to workflow:

A.) The placement of the Solo / Mute buttons to the far left of the TCP cause for additional mouse movement and eye movement. The purpose of the TCP is to work with the tracks. The S/M buttons are some of the most used features, and their placement slows down the workflow, and causes unnecessary momentary confusion in searching for which tracks are enable, etc...

B.) Similar to comment A, the level meter is also placed far from the workspace within the TCP.

C.) The name of each track is severely truncated in the TCP. With one full screen devoted to TCP, I am only able to read 3-4 characters of each track name when the track section is given 20% of the entire real-estate of the screen.

D.) A possible solution to alleviate the issues in comment C would be to reduce the size of certain icons that are of less importance to the workflow; specifically, the "ROUTE", "FX", and "TRIM" icons could take up less space, giving more room to the track title. Could the FX be more square, with a tiny 'LED' style light that shines green when on, red when inactive, and off when empty be employed? Could the 'ROUTE' icon similarly be square with three tiny 'LED' style lights above the text, with three different color lights turning on and off depending on utilization? 'TRIM' could also be a small square with the text and the automation graphic directly above it, lighting up when active, greyed out when not.

E.) Similar to comment A, the record input selector is the closest option on the track bar to the workspace, despite it being one of the least utilized functions. Once a track is armed with an input, there is little need to change the input again. Thus, the placement of this feature should be to the left of the screen, certainly further away than the Solo / Mute buttons, or the pan / fade buttons.

F.) The MCP tracks currently take up a lot of real estate. From a workflow standpoint, having to scroll more often and for longer slows down the rate of work.

G.) I LOVE the attempt to group the MCP folders by raising child track numbers above the level of the parent folder. Currently, it is a bit clunky, and takes up a decent amount of real estate in how things are staggered. Could the parent folders' colors be extended underneath the child tracks? For example, if the parent folder is red, could a red line exist underneath each of the child folders track number? If the child track is nested three deep, there could be three different colored lines underneath the track, designated each of the parents. This would be beneficial for two reasons: first, it allows the child track to be recognized as belonging to X number of parent tracks; second, it allows the eye to easily trace back the origin of the child track to the parent track, and makes for quick identification. An added bonus would be that each child track would not have to be raised as high as currently done in order to visually show the difference between parent and child.

So far, those are my only concerns. Great job. I like a lot of the direction this theme is going in, and only want to support the most ergonomic, friendly, yet visually appealing theme possible. Reaper is the most powerful DAW on the market, and it should enable serious users to work hours on end without fatigue.
With all due respect, I think that changing the locations of things like the mute, solo and folder buttons was the thing that ruined the workflow in Theme 6... Coming from Theme 5 I hate to be searching were things are...When You are mixing You act by instinct and if you change the most important buttons locations You only slow down the workflow and ruin that workflow based on instinct, I hope there was a Theme 6 with every button exactly were it was on Theme 5...
Zoom_Wajaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 07:36 AM   #6
Travesty
Human being with feelings
 
Travesty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 798
Default

The new position of the mute and solo buttons means that they are never obscured by shrinking track panel length. This is something I often run into in the v5 theme in complex bus structures, as the deepest tracks are too short to show the buttons
Travesty is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.