by DHR53; Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:35 am
by plutonia; Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:34 am
by plutonia; Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:16 am
sl23 wrote:+1 I liked the way Muzys had that R-click Toolbox.
yep, was using muzys the other day and like used in cubase/logic right click toolbox is good system to my way of thinking. can't see jo going back to toolbox though, and menu shortcuts in mulab just as good though when comes down to it.
by DHR53; Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:19 am
And it's a large part of what I do with a DAW...
by robenestobenz; Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:38 am
I have to say, I detest the toolbox way of working. Mode switching is a cost in any interface or system, and I believe that it's never necessary with good design. Horses for courses.plutonia wrote:aye, i do agree with you on this but if you look at how it's implemented with start and end loop points etc, it is geared towards non-destructive editing and i reckon we're in the minority in wanting this feature changed unfortunately. it is the one part of mulab i really don't like cos i have to work around it though. it's got me thinking that the early days of using cubase on atari were much quicker and easier for midi editing with its implementation of toolbox functions, 'delete doubles' etc that was quick an easy to use and allowed me to move on swiftly to recording next part or track. return to right click toolbox choices, anyone?
I another shortcut for destructive/literal split would be cool though, the current behaviour does cause problems if you often merge stuff later, as some of you have said.
by pljones; Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:54 am
MuLab has parts and sequences. Parts refer to sequences. More than one part can refer to the same sequence. It's not one to one. (Similar to the way more than one track can target the same rack or other module.)
If you split a part, by default, the two new parts are sharing the sequence. If you copy a part, you can either copy-shared or copy-as-new - either sharing the sequence the part uses or getting a second copy.
If you understand that currently when you split, you are not operating on the sequence data, you'll see that it cannot make sense to affect that data when you do a split. What you could have is something akin to the two versions of copy: split-as-new (each part after the split references a new sequence) or split-shared (as it is now). Split-as-new could "tidy up" but then you'd need to make two copies of the original sequence so each was unique (as there could be another part already using it that you didn't want affected).
by mutools; Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:58 am
I'm thinking about splitting the sequence part's "Split" function into "Split (Shared)" and "Split (Unique)". Then both are available in the context menu and everyone can choose which one to assign a shortcut to.
Edit: Yes, as pljones also wrote (crossed posts).
by mutools; Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:05 am
pljones wrote:Split-as-new would could "tidy up" but then you'd need to make two copies of the original sequence so each was unique (as there could be another part already using it that you didn't want affected).
The new "Split (Unique)" function would not cleanup anything. I would leave that to a separate function (eg "Trim To Played"), cfr http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 15#5253215
by mutools; Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:19 am
Apart from that, also this note: There will always be functions/steps that take a couple of mouse-clicks/human interactions. That will be the case in any (music) app. And even if things can be automated by using scripts or whatever, then you still have to build those scripts. Bottomline: Don't forget to focus on the Music, maestros
by mutools; Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:02 pm
by DHR53; Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:12 pm