MUTON alpha 2

[> DiGiT <]

dood, chill the f**k out please! i was giving my opinion, just like you gave yours. am i bound by what your opinion is? what will inform jo better: one idiot not willing to do some reading of the manual, or a variety of opinions on the subject?

[xylyx]

I have to agree with original flipper on this...I did not find Muzys to be easy to get started with despite having used a number of other sequencers before trying it...the only other host that I found (and still find) more difficult to get started with is Podium. I do recall that a number of other people posted at various times about difficulty getting to grips with Muzys...the regular tutorials in CM certainly helped a lot of people get a handle on it. My recollections (may be wrong) are that the Muzys manual wasn't particularly brilliant either.

On the subject of the new alpha: how do you close the piano roll view and get back to the track view? I can't seem to find a way of doing it!

[> DiGiT <]

fine you can agree as long as im allowed my opinion too, sheesh.

[pljones]

Original Flipper, you're accusing > DIGIT < of something you did yourself. Whilst your message said more than "I did not find it easy to use", by saying "because ...", the reason you gave really didn't mean anything much. As I said in my reply, we all start with base assumptions. What's "easy to use" is based on those - not on the tool you're currently trying to use.

Now, "transparently obvious" is good. Tooltips help. Guided modes and "wizards" help. But at some point, you'll have to have a task in mind and you have to want to find how to do it with the tool you've got. But all tools are different. And there should not be convergence and loss of consumer choice. That's a bad thing, not a good one.

Further, choice can be achieved inside one tool, if it's sufficiently configurable and provides easy ways of accessing those configurations.

On the subject of the new alpha: how do you close the piano roll view and get back to the track view? I can't seem to find a way of doing it!

Reported bug.

In my experience of helping on the CM forums and here, Muzys seems to be easier for people who have no preconceived notions of how sequencers work. They find it easy. (Music sequencing is inherently non-trivial, so I'm not saying they find it trivial.) They usually find other sequencers fairly easy, too, but somewhat inflexible and frustrating, and revert to Muzys.

[> DiGiT <]

In my experience of helping on the CM forums and here, Muzys seems to be easier for people who have no preconceived notions of how sequencers work. They find it easy. (Music sequencing is inherently non-trivial, so I'm not saying they find it trivial.) They usually find other sequencers fairly easy, too, but somewhat inflexible and frustrating, and revert to Muzys.

you have a way with words, sir.

[xylyx]

Reported bug.

In my experience of helping on the CM forums and here, Muzys seems to be easier for people who have no preconceived notions of how sequencers work. They find it easy. (Music sequencing is inherently non-trivial, so I'm not saying they find it trivial.) They usually find other sequencers fairly easy, too, but somewhat inflexible and frustrating, and revert to Muzys.

Ah...I thought I had managed to close the piano roll in alpha 1

As to the ease of use...maybe people totally new to the music sequencer game did find it easy to use, maybe the experience I had with other sequencers is what made it seem odd when I first used it.

Still not sure about this whole assign VST to part rather than track thing though...although Jo has said that the benefits of this will become increasingly apparent as the app progresses, so I will reserve judgement for the time being.

[> DiGiT <]

flipper: what software do you find easy enough for a fool that is also a popular choice? what ingredients went into its success story?

[muzycian]

Sascha, lion_cub, please send me an email regarding testing MUTON.

[muzycian]

On the subject of the new alpha: how do you close the piano roll view and get back to the track view?

2 ways for now:

->Double click the background

or

->press Enter, Return or Escape

I'm thinking about adding an "Close Editor" in the right-click context menu.

[xylyx]

On the subject of the new alpha: how do you close the piano roll view and get back to the track view?

2 ways for now:

->Double click the background

or

->press Enter, Return or Escape

I'm thinking about adding an "Close Editor" in the right-click context menu.

Yep...I tried the right-click context menu in the hope that there would be such an option, so it might be a good idea to have it there

[muzycian]

Hi all,

Interesting thoughts swirl around here

Now it is explicitly the intention to make MUTON a simple, easy and fun2use host.

A "No Manual Required" musical application.

Simplicity = Usability = Fun!

And Fun = FUN

I have no doubt that once we have such simple & fun musical framework, there will be plenty of opportunities to enrich the application with more advanced features.

It's much more easy/logical to (carefully) enrich an easy program with advanced options, than to make a complex program easy.

I am very aware of that.

So that's why i really want to give enough attention to the basic framework (technical and musical) BEFORE adding more advanced features.

As i wrote in the Alpha 2 email, MUTON is not yet a usable application.

It's only the first assemblage of the freshly coded modules like GUI system, Disk IO system, Audio Engine, MIDI Engine, Sequencer Engine, VST Engine etc...

That's why it's an alpha version, and why it is only available for a limited group of testers, who have experience in audio software.

OK, what i want to say is: MUTON's musical concepts are not yet fixed. They are still very fluid.

Now FYI: I'm focussing on a less-track-based approach, because imho being track-based has severe disadvantages.

The very first being: You HAVE TO work per track. And you HAVE TO choose a track type for each track.

I personally never liked that, because it's already complicating things. As i HAVE TO setup a track before i can do anything.

I thinking about a more free approach. One in which our musical objects (parts, sequences, sounds, ...) are more independent, and more re-usable.

Let's say: more PART based instead of TRACK based.

Now about the Player Panel:

The experiment is that the Player Panel is a combination/integration of

-> a synth rack (choose-load-save program, edit synth etc...)
-> the part property page (i.e. the part's player property)
-> setting the MIDI input player

...the comfort zone for a host - for many people it will be how quickly they can get a VSTI loaded, their midi keyboard producing sounds from that VSTI and recording a few takes, dropping in some VST FX and generally doodling - if they can automate this stuff without any major problems they will be half sold ... and all of this will probably require that they do not have to read a manual.

So that's why i tried to make a very obvious place where to load/select your synths

But i'm not yet fully happy about the experiment in alpha 2, as many among us (including myself) had confusing experience with it.

Especially: if a part is selected, and you change the Player Panel, then the player for that part is changed too.
That's a good thing, but can be a confusing thing too.

So a possible improvement could be:

Let the Player Panel only define the Player-On-The-MIDI Keyboard (and not affect any part)
Initially a Part defaults to the Player in the Player Panel.
A Part's Player can be changed via the Part's context menu (right-click in Windows)

Mmm, that sounds better.

Anyway, it's something to brainstorm on...

...be welcome to join!

MUTON's skeleton is still fluid!

Cheers,

Jo

[muzycian]

flipper: what software do you find easy enough for a fool that is also a popular choice? what ingredients went into its success story?

Yes, flipper, i wanted to ask you the same thing.

As you wrote

and that is coming from someone who has used with relative ease: Logic, SX, Live, XT, Tracktion, Orion and P5 to name a few)

and

I believe the market place needs an EXTREMLY accessable, easy to grasp traditional horizontal tack based host that is intuitive to the point of being (almost) foolproof.

So what's wrong with Logic, SX, Live, XT, Tracktion, Orion and P5?

[muzycian]

Yep...I tried the right-click context menu in the hope that there would be such an option, so it might be a good idea to have it there

OK

[original flipper]

HI

I am sorry if my words disturb people - I stated that IMO the 'player' could be confusing, my comment to '> DiGiT <' was meant to highlight the fact that I spent some time detailing this along with some thoughts on how a program might be recieved by users who often will make a decision within a few minutes of installing a program.

I don't see that going into some detail on an extended bunch of thoughts can be realistically responded to with a paragraph response which states "I found it easy ... don't you think that over simplicity is likely to be unappealing to Pro-users?" - if my questioning that is classed as trying to enforce my opinion then I must have totally misunderstood the post.

I really don't know any fools; so I am lost to what I would recommend them if I had to point them in a particular direction.

There is nothing wrong with ANY of the programs I mentioned, they all have their 'way' of getting to the same end.

FWIW I have stumbled at some point in using most host programs: Tracktion gave me a headache setting up my midi keyboard, Orion loads individual VSTI's up with 'their' own piano-roll, rather than a generic one, Logic can be elusive in getting a VSTI loaded to a first time user, XT has a modular make-up that means everything has to be 'wired up' so to speak ... an so on; this is all just my view of things, though.

Oh yes; P5 had a confusing way of using VST fx - I struggled with that.

FL, Podium, Sonar, SX, Samplitude ... almost every host will confound a new user ... at some stage ... my point throughout has simply been to illustrate this - there is probably no way you are going to get it right, all I have tried to point out is; consider how a new user will respond to those first few minutes of use ... to not concern yourself with that could be a missed opportunity.

Good luck.

Flipper.

[muzycian]

I stated that IMO the 'player' could be confusing, my comment to '> DiGiT <' was meant to highlight the fact that I spent some time detailing this along with some thoughts on how a program might be recieved by users who often will make a decision within a few minutes of installing a program.

Thanks for this feed back!

there is probably no way you are going to get it right

Groarrrr, that makes it an even more attractive challenge

(besides the musical aspects )

consider how a new user will respond to those first few minutes of use ... to not concern yourself with that could be a missed opportunity

Well, i ask myself that very often!

It's in fact one of my main directives!!

Good luck.

Thanks!

Hope you'll continue being critical!

It absolutely helps!

Cheers,

Jo