Recording

[liquidsound]

Agreed - keep it simple and consistent. In MU.LAB, step one is to forget about tracks. Step two is to right-click everything. Combining the two gives the solution Jo's proposing - no worrying about setting up tracks (which, for me, is generally an annoying nightmare), just tell the recording widget what I want to do and let the software sort everything else out. That's far, far simpler.

Yep!

[TheGuysanIdiot]

+1

OZ

[janamdo]

Agreed - keep it simple and consistent. In MU.LAB, step one is to forget about tracks. Step two is to right-click everything. Combining the two gives the solution Jo's proposing - no worrying about setting up tracks (which, for me, is generally an annoying nightmare), just tell the recording widget what I want to do and let the software sort everything else out. That's far, far simpler.

Well in my idea you can toggle on/off the trackheader in the recording options
So toggle off : you get the current Mulab
So toggle on : the software add a audiotrack header named what you monitor in the recordingoptions

[liquidsound]

An amazing thing is the fact that people manage to learn things like FL or Live or REAPER ( if they never get to the end without ping pong allover) and they can not manage a simple protocol in Mu.Lab that actually is an aspect of a wonderful new way of approaching Digital music.

Even though is different from the standard approach, it's not complex at all.
All you need to do is to go through it once or twice and.... you will understand what Mu.Lab is all about: freedom, flexibility, simplicity and, above all, power.

At last!

[pljones]

the software add a audiotrack header named what you monitor in the recordingoptions

What use is that? It really doesn't make anything any easier to understand. Recording is about inputs, not monitoring. If it was going to be of any use towards recording, it would have to do something radically different from what MU.LAB currently does and have track header input display. However, multi-track recording should be inherently trivial and not require any visual cues beyond "configure record" - which, in the MU.LAB paradigm, is done by right-click on the record widget. If Jo implements his idea, that's what we'll get. No need to change anything else at all.

[janamdo]

the software add a audiotrack header named what you monitor in the recordingoptions

What use is that? It really doesn't make anything any easier to understand. Recording is about inputs, not monitoring. If it was going to be of any use towards recording, it would have to do something radically different from what MU.LAB currently does and have track header input display. However, multi-track recording should be inherently trivial and not require any visual cues beyond "configure record" - which, in the MU.LAB paradigm, is done by right-click on the record widget. If Jo implements his idea, that's what we'll get. No need to change anything else at all.

misunderstanding ..what you fill in for monitoringname will be the name for the trackheader
My solution is the same Mulab + optional showing a auditrack header
In my opinion more userfriendly, but it is not sure if it easy to program

But ok only the recordingoptions screen will be improved and the musicians are satisfied..so let it be

[janamdo]

An amazing thing is the fact that people manage to learn things like FL or Live or REAPER ( if they never get to the end without ping pong allover) and they can not manage a simple protocol in Mu.Lab that actually is an aspect of a wonderful new way of approaching Digital music.

Even though is different from the standard approach, it's not complex at all.
All you need to do is to go through it once or twice and.... you will understand what Mu.Lab is all about: freedom, flexibility, simplicity and, above all, power.

At last!

You cannot understand that people who has used other Daws are confused if the don't see a audiotrack?
The disadvantage form the current MUlab audiosytem is that when the user has trouble with his pc or audiodriver there is no audiorecording to see (nothing as the new user has stated in a thread on this forum)
When there is at least showing up a empty audiotrack in the composerscreen than the user has something

[sorohanro]

I will put it in my own words:

Let's say that you like a black girl. You like her because she is black. You like her curly hair, her dark skin, her more generous shapes and that makes you crazy in love.
Then all your family goes ... "errrr we like her... if you like... but she have too dark skin... can't she make a cosmetic treatment to be white ? Look at Michael Jackson, he did it and was so nice after".
Then your friends go "well, we are rational and tolerant people, but can't she make her hair straight ? come on, even Beyonce have it stretched straight".
Then finally, her co-workers tels her to lose some kilos and eventually have breast surgery to get those smaller... not to intimidate them...

Now, how would that make her ?

--------------------------------
Forgive me for that long post that maybe don't make sense to many
--------------------------------

People should get the idea that Mu.Lab is a different DAW. If they want a clone of something else, then they are on the wrong place.

[liquidsound]

An amazing thing is the fact that people manage to learn things like FL or Live or REAPER ( if they never get to the end without ping pong allover) and they can not manage a simple protocol in Mu.Lab that actually is an aspect of a wonderful new way of approaching Digital music.

Even though is different from the standard approach, it's not complex at all.
All you need to do is to go through it once or twice and.... you will understand what Mu.Lab is all about: freedom, flexibility, simplicity and, above all, power.

At last!

You cannot understand that people who has used other Daws are confused if the don't see a audiotrack?
The disadvantage form the current MUlab audiosytem is that when the user has trouble with his pc or audiodriver there is no audiorecording to see (nothing as the new user has stated in a thread on this forum)
When there is at least showing up a empty audiotrack in the composerscreen than the user has something

So, how come I and many others did not have that problem?
It may be a surprise the first time things do not work "for some reason or another", but when they work, an audio track appears after recording and even an Ameba gets it.
How many time can anyone be a Vergin!

[sorohanro]

How many time can anyone be a Vergin!

You have no idea... you have no idea...

[liquidsound]

How many time can anyone be a Vergin!

You have no idea... you have no idea...

[pljones]

misunderstanding ..what you fill in for monitoringname will be the name for the trackheader
My solution is the same Mulab + optional showing a auditrack header

So, unlike every other track in the composer, a track for recording is something very, very special because, rather than telling me its target, it tells me its source. And can I see its target as well? Or do I have to guess that it's a "recording track"? This just seems even more confusing and complicated.

You cannot understand that people who has used other Daws are confused if the don't see a audiotrack?

By your argument, all software should emulate the lowest common denominator and there should never be change or progress. It also requires the software to be prescient to ensure people always get what they're expecting.

It's like saying it's too complicated to set up a 24 track mixing desk, so mixing desks should only have four tracks. Or because many people are used to using four track desks, everyone should use a four track desk.

And it's pretty insulting to the many intelligent people who would benefit from the different way MU.LAB works to tell them they will not be able to understand it.

[janamdo]

And it's pretty insulting to the many intelligent people who would benefit from the different way MU.LAB works to tell them they will not be able to understand it.

I am wondering if you read/understand my idea ..its optional(toggle on/off)
You don't have to use the automatic track header.. so not than you have the original Mulab.

So who is insulting someone ?..not me
In my view i could see that you are pretentious

Note: Imagine on all those people from Asie, Russia, America (the whole world in fact)those millions who never have a seen a DAW before and that they now see a audiotrack in the composerscreen..that discovery...

[janamdo]

Recording audio does not always result in a new track. So always automatically creating a new track beforehand is not right, imho.

So you make a condition that only creating a new track beforehand is allowed
only if there is a empty track ( the audio recorder is empty ! )

Besides this: What's the advantage of doing that? Making things clear to the user? I don't think this will help a lot. Once the user is at the Recording Setup panel, he/she knows already how things function, i think.

Yes, it is because audio recording is now focussed only on (pure)audio and there is no hybride mixing of Midi events and pure Audio.
It is optional and in the recording options screen it is a on/off

And, janamdo, please note that tracks don't have an input/output thing. This would mean an big reorg in MU.LAB. Also about MIDI recording etc. as messaged before.

Ok let forget the input/output because than the automatic track header looks like the top 4 tracks .. so the automatic added tracks headerlooks the same as you make a audiotrack without first adding a audiotrack

[liquidsound]

OK janamdo, you still Virgin