Would it make sense to make the Open sequence button a toggle--a way to close the seq too?

[Jake Jackson]

I always find myself clicking on the button that I used to open the sequence when I want to close it. Seems odd, to me, as a fairly new user, that the Close button is all the way on the other, far left side of the interface. I remember having to search for some time to find it, the first time I opened a sequence...

Just noting things here, in the spirit of a beta.

[MuTools]

You mean the sequence edit button in the Part Property Panel at the top right?

[Jake Jackson]

You mean the sequence edit button in the Part Property Panel at the top right?

Yes. It just seems natural to click on it again to close the sequence. (And to have the Open and Close controls near each other in the interface.) The Edit Target Plugin button, also on the Part Properties Panel, might also be a toggle, letting it close the rack as well as open it.

And actually, I had another worry, there: Is that Edit Target Plugin button really needed? It opens an exact duplicate of the rack that is already visible at the bottom of the screen. I understand that it may be desirable to offer ways to open the controls for the rack and the sequence close to each other. However, having the same control element open twice on the same screen seems redundant, and worse, confusing. Or at least it was when I first clicked on that button. It was as though I wanted to control the font, say, in a word processor, and two dialog boxes for setting the font opened on the screen at the same time. You're immediately unsure if they do the same thing or not. Of course, you quickly find out that you can use either, but it's worrisome and confusing at first.

The Target Plugin Menu button is also almost redundant--it drops down a menu with some of the same choices as given on the menu that drops down if the user right-clicks the Track panel at the left of the track. (How about just making the Track panel a button that opens a menu with all of the choices on it when you left-click on it? Now, left-clicking does nothing, there.)

The Part Mute button on the Part Properties Panel is also redundant, since there is a Mute button on the Track panel at the far left of each track. (True, the Track panel is hidden when one opens the sequence, but does the user need to mute the currently open track when using the sequencer?)

I guess I'm suggesting too much, but the more I think, the more I think that there's a more general problem--there are three separate sets of controls for the track (on the Track panel, the Part Properties Panel, and the Rack). Some of the controls are redundant, and some are exclusive to each panel. The interface makes the reader go to three widely separated areas to work on a track. I like the look of the interface, but it's not as simple to use as it is pleasant to the eye.

Sorry if I'm seeming to nitpick, here. Mulab is very, very good. I'm just now having some time to examine it in more detail, however, after using it off and on for about a year, and list things I've noticed or gotten lost in.

[liquidsound]

The Part Mute button on the Part Properties Panel is also redundant, since there is a Mute button on the Track panel at the far left of each track. (True, the Track panel is hidden when one opens the sequence, but does the user need to mute the currently open track when using the sequencer

The Part Mute button is for the Part only not for the entire track. This allows you to isolate (Mute) parts from the track if you need to focus.
Also if you have SubTracks and you mute the Parent Track you mute all the subtracks. The Part Mute button gives you the option to mute all the Parent track parts (instead of the track itself) leaving the subtracks playing.

Sometimes you want to mute while in the key editor to listen to the background harmony or whatever without having your new part playing...
Mu.Lab flexibility....

[MuTools]

Yes. It just seems natural to click on it again to close the sequence. (And to have the Open and Close controls near each other in the interface.) The Edit Target Plugin button, also on the Part Properties Panel, might also be a toggle, letting it close the rack as well as open it.

There is a note on the wishlist about this.

And actually, I had another worry, there: Is that Edit Target Plugin button really needed? It opens an exact duplicate of the rack that is already visible at the bottom of the screen...

Yes, it's ok it's there, imho.

It could be that you've chosen to hide the rack desk.
Or maybe the rackdesk is on another screen and not scrolled to the rack you instantly want at that point. So it's a handy shortcut to have.
Of course, if you don't want/need it, then just don't use it. It won't popup from itself.

The Target Plugin Menu button is also almost redundant--it drops down a menu with some of the same choices as given on the menu that drops down if the user right-clicks the Track panel at the left of the track. (How about just making the Track panel a button that opens a menu with all of the choices on it when you left-click on it? Now, left-clicking does nothing, there.)

The Part Mute button on the Part Properties Panel is also redundant, since there is a Mute button on the Track panel at the far left of each track. (True, the Track panel is hidden when one opens the sequence, but does the user need to mute the currently open track when using the sequencer?)

Tracks and Parts are 2 different things!

The panel at top-right is for parts!

I guess I'm suggesting too much, but the more I think, the more I think that there's a more general problem--there are three separate sets of controls for the track (on the Track panel, the Part Properties Panel, and the Rack). Some of the controls are redundant, and some are exclusive to each panel. The interface makes the reader go to three widely separated areas to work on a track. I like the look of the interface, but it's not as simple to use as it is pleasant to the eye.

I agree with you that there is room for further improving/streamlining the user interface.

To be honnest, that's without doubt one of the top priorities for M4.
But more on this lateron, when the M4 dev cycle starts. (around mid june i hope)

Sorry if I'm seeming to nitpick, here. Mulab is very, very good. I'm just now having some time to examine it in more detail, however, after using it off and on for about a year, and list things I've noticed or gotten lost in.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

I'm looking forward to go deeper into this conceptual topic, say in about 6 weeks or so. I first need to finish some other tasks.

[Jake Jackson]

Thanks. Sorry if I'm still trying to wrap my head around the difference between parts and tracks. I'm seeing it now.

My problem, I think, is that I do very simple things, like recording a piano on one track or piano and vocal, with each thing, of course, on separate tracks. Working in this simple way, there is no need for parts, so interface buttons seem to be duplicated, since they have the same effect, even if they are actually controlling the one part on the one track instead of the track...

Thanks for your patience.

[MuTools]

My problem, I think, is that I do very simple things

Hey that's not a 'problem', that's just a very ok way of working!

You, the user, are the boss. MU.LAB should be an easy and comfortable tool so to realize your musical dreams.

Of course not all users work the same and/or have the same demands.

It's one of my personal challenges for M4 to further streamline/simplify things conceptually, while preserving or even expand the functional palette.

Hope you will participate in the M4 talks, lateron.

[pljones]

...Working in this simple way, there is no need for parts...

I will give you a challenge here. You'll find parts come in very useful if you're comping (putting takes together).