Howie is currently busy preparing a herd of Zebras for Angels & Demonshakey wrote:(Whilst I'm talking about presets, can we have some more please Howard?)
Improvements!
-
- u-he
- Topic Starter
- 30188 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Yep, Preset Management is a neverending, ongoing story and a major field for improvements. I'm not a fan of tagging though, but I'm evaluating possibilities to easily retrieve meta data and stuff without needing to wade through all patches etc. - not quite sure what and when though.
-
- KVRAF
- 5234 posts since 25 Feb, 2008
Fair enough.Urs wrote:I'm not a fan of tagging though, but I'm evaluating possibilities to easily retrieve meta data and stuff without needing to wade through all patches etc. - not quite sure what and when though.
Out of curiosity, what are the disadvantages associated with tagging?
-
- u-he
- Topic Starter
- 30188 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Phewww... there were some...hakey wrote:Fair enough.Urs wrote:I'm not a fan of tagging though, but I'm evaluating possibilities to easily retrieve meta data and stuff without needing to wade through all patches etc. - not quite sure what and when though.
Out of curiosity, what are the disadvantages associated with tagging?
Mostly I think it was about patches that fit no category. The ones you find properly via the cliche metatags are also the most boring ones. While everybody subjectively sorts the really interesting and unique patches into different spaces.
The problem is, taste is just highly subjective. It doesn't help to be presented with 300 patches which are objectively lead sounds when you're actually looking for some kind of pad sound that fits the melody. Or, I've used bass sounds as percussion instruments in the upper registers.
My major idea is to make it easy for everyone to tag patches as their favourites. Like, every now and then you wade through the banks and pinpoint the patches you dig. These would come up in a virtual directory (like a playlist in iTunes). In the same way you can drop those patches that start to bore you from the same list. This could be done in 2 or 3 levels ("wow", "keeper", "crap") so that you can also permanently hide the ones you definately don't like today (but might like in 10 years or so).
We'll see... havn't done it yet...
Urs-
- KVRAF
- 5817 posts since 8 May, 2008 from ssssskipping ......... I left you there
In case that some tagging feature is adopted , the tags must be fixed by the developer , not created by the sound designers at ramdom .
If not , it will lead to nonesenses like those in Arturia's CS80V where there are different folders for Bass , BASS , bass , Basses , basses , BASSES ... and so on .
Urs idea is similar to that in Rhino . It seems nice to me .
If not , it will lead to nonesenses like those in Arturia's CS80V where there are different folders for Bass , BASS , bass , Basses , basses , BASSES ... and so on .
Urs idea is similar to that in Rhino . It seems nice to me .
-
- KVRAF
- 4197 posts since 23 May, 2004 from Bad Vilbel, Germany
...some of the spin-offs will add to a collection of "cinematic" sounds I made after the previous film job. I'm looking at February for release.Urs wrote:Howie is currently busy preparing a herd of Zebras for Angels & Demonshakey wrote:(Whilst I'm talking about presets, can we have some more please Howard?
Any suggestions for a good TITLE to such a soundset are welcome!
-
- KVRist
- 239 posts since 5 Apr, 2004 from Ireland
Cinemagic.
Kind regards.
Kind regards.
Dave Bourke
- ideation -
- ideation -
-
- KVRAF
- 5234 posts since 25 Feb, 2008
Well, my opinion, for what it's worth, on its own the ability to add just 2 or 3 tags doesn't really excite me a great deal. I'd really like to be able to descriminate between different types of sound rather than just whether I like them or not - if that was what I wanted I could fairly easily sort the presets in to 3 different files myself.
Tagging need not be the only way to access or manage the preset database. But it might be a nice and powerful feature for those who wish to use it. And there's no reason that one particular preset couldn't be tagged as both 'bass' and 'percussive' at the same time. I think that that's the way that it's implemented in Kore - you can tick any number of attributes, say - 'bass', 'analog', 'percussive', 'distorted' and the preset database would be filtered to present only those presets that match all of those attributes.
Tagging need not be the only way to access or manage the preset database. But it might be a nice and powerful feature for those who wish to use it. And there's no reason that one particular preset couldn't be tagged as both 'bass' and 'percussive' at the same time. I think that that's the way that it's implemented in Kore - you can tick any number of attributes, say - 'bass', 'analog', 'percussive', 'distorted' and the preset database would be filtered to present only those presets that match all of those attributes.
-
- KVRAF
- 5710 posts since 24 May, 2004 from []1
"Who Let the Zebes Out?"
-
- KVRian
- 527 posts since 12 Dec, 2007 from Belgium
-
- KVRAF
- 26943 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
I don't particularly like NI's system... I would rather Zebra not be organized that way. NI's whole database thing is annoying.hakey wrote:Well, my opinion, for what it's worth, on its own the ability to add just 2 or 3 tags doesn't really excite me a great deal. I'd really like to be able to descriminate between different types of sound rather than just whether I like them or not - if that was what I wanted I could fairly easily sort the presets in to 3 different files myself.
Tagging need not be the only way to access or manage the preset database. But it might be a nice and powerful feature for those who wish to use it. And there's no reason that one particular preset couldn't be tagged as both 'bass' and 'percussive' at the same time. I think that that's the way that it's implemented in Kore - you can tick any number of attributes, say - 'bass', 'analog', 'percussive', 'distorted' and the preset database would be filtered to present only those presets that match all of those attributes.
I prefer the old fashioned directory structure. I can make a folder called basses, leads, etc. I like that I can organize them outside Zebra. I can select a bunch and move them etc.
-
- KVRAF
- 26943 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
Urs wrote:
My major idea is to make it easy for everyone to tag patches as their favourites. Like, every now and then you wade through the banks and pinpoint the patches you dig. These would come up in a virtual directory (like a playlist in iTunes). In the same way you can drop those patches that start to bore you from the same list. This could be done in 2 or 3 levels ("wow", "keeper", "crap") so that you can also permanently hide the ones you definately don't like today (but might like in 10 years or so).
We'll see... havn't done it yet...
I like the playlist idea, but why make it only 1 playlist then?
I like the idea of playlists to keep a bunch of presets handy on a per project basis. Then an option to make them a set of independent presets if I want to archive the project...
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 13 May, 2003 from Mostly in NSW Central Tablelands, Australia
To be honest, this is pretty much all I'd want from a preset tagging system, because most of the existing preset collections already organise their folders into categories.Urs wrote:My major idea is to make it easy for everyone to tag patches as their favourites. Like, every now and then you wade through the banks and pinpoint the patches you dig. These would come up in a virtual directory (like a playlist in iTunes). In the same way you can drop those patches that start to bore you from the same list. This could be done in 2 or 3 levels ("wow", "keeper", "crap") so that you can also permanently hide the ones you definately don't like today (but might like in 10 years or so).
But...
...this is also a good point. At the moment I tend to end up with several variations of the same preset when I'm working on a particular project, so this would help organise things.pdxindy wrote:I like the playlist idea, but why make it only 1 playlist then?
I like the idea of playlists to keep a bunch of presets handy on a per project basis. Then an option to make them a set of independent presets if I want to archive the project...
But none of this is reducing the need to also have collapsible folders for the presets, because there are just so many available...
-
- KVRAF
- 5234 posts since 25 Feb, 2008
Do we have to make a choice between tagging and a more traditional preset directory? Couldn't we have both at the same time? It seems to me that tagging is something that could be provided as an adjunct to the kind of system that we have now. It need not interfere at all with the way that it is used at present, but it would be a powerful and efficient system for those of us who would use it.
It neatly solves the sorting problem that arises where a preset may equally belong in 2 or more categories. And anyway I really don't want to have to manually sort 100's of different presets into different folders. It would be a whole lot easier for me to be able to append tags to presets as I use them.
I'm not claiming tha tagging is perfect, by any means. Urs, your objections seem to be about the subjectivity of categorisation in general and of course this is a problem with whatever system one uses, but some degree of categorisation is useful isn't it? The benefit of tagging is that one can (subjectively) place a preset into many categories and that the user can easily do this without having to manually move presets around the directory.
It neatly solves the sorting problem that arises where a preset may equally belong in 2 or more categories. And anyway I really don't want to have to manually sort 100's of different presets into different folders. It would be a whole lot easier for me to be able to append tags to presets as I use them.
I'm not claiming tha tagging is perfect, by any means. Urs, your objections seem to be about the subjectivity of categorisation in general and of course this is a problem with whatever system one uses, but some degree of categorisation is useful isn't it? The benefit of tagging is that one can (subjectively) place a preset into many categories and that the user can easily do this without having to manually move presets around the directory.