MuLab UI etc...

[DHR53]

I've been working on completing some compositions using "my" workflow, to try and find everything that makes me go Hmmm... Ha. So here's a couple things...

I have 4 busses in my template which I route tracks to. I usually collapse all the racks for space consideration, anyway, but it would be useful if there was an even smaller setting... like a single strip for busses, so I could have those busses, not taking up as much space as racks. Plus it would serve as a visual reminder they were busses too?



When I save from a template... I get this dialog which shows a long serial number/session thing which on my (Mac) is hard to highlight to write over? I keep thinking it should be blank, like I'm going to type into it... or highlighted for me to type in. I definitely don't want MuSession 2315679--- etc.



Also, this may be one of those modularity type everything to everything things, but it seems like when I name a track that's connected to a rack, I shouldn't have to name both of them? I know I could have something else routed to that rack or a buss or whatever but generally I have a track that has a rack attached to it because I added an instrument... Or an audio file etc. Just seems to take a lot of extra time naming, and deleting stuff that was simply connected.

Things that make me go Hmmm...

[DHR53]

Idea When you right click to insert a track, if you select the "instrument" option, it stays connected to it's rack (which can be disconnected of course)... and when you rename the track it also does the rack. BUT when you select the "track" option it is not connected to anything specific, rack or otherwise. Audio creates it's own rack, and creating a rack in the mixer section remains independent. If the rack is later connected, than the link affects naming etc.

Not sure if that's a problem to implement, but it does seem the anything to anything paradigm is behind some of this stuff. Which has it's merits, but an option seems like it would be more flexible and would make sense?

Hmmm...

[pljones]

it seems like when I name a track that's connected to a rack, I shouldn't have to name both of them?

I think it works like this: if you create the track by creating a rack, the rack name gets set to whatever you created the rack with (plus "rack"); if you rename the rack, the trackname should follow: however, if you rename the track the assumption is you no longer want them tied. It think...

[DHR53]

Er, if you click on the rack + sign a track is not created... at least in my version. Mac latest...

[MuTools]

it seems like when I name a track that's connected to a rack, I shouldn't have to name both of them?

I think it works like this: if you create the track by creating a rack, the rack name gets set to whatever you created the rack with (plus "rack"); if you rename the rack, the trackname should follow: however, if you rename the track the assumption is you no longer want them tied. It think...

Indeed.

[MuTools]

Er, if you click on the rack + sign a track is not created... at least in my version. Mac latest...

Indeed that's how it works. If you want a new track + rack, click the [+] track button.

[sl23]

All good ideas. +1

@ pljones:
Exactly how I thought it should work too!

[> DiGiT <]

I have 4 busses in my template which I route tracks to. I usually collapse all the racks for space consideration, anyway, but it would be useful if there was an even smaller setting... like a single strip for busses, so I could have those busses, not taking up as much space as racks. Plus it would serve as a visual reminder they were busses too?

ditto

i would also love to see a higher resolution meter available that could take up the entire right 1cm of the screen... perhaps make it so you could monitor any track at the touch of a button. realistic?

[DHR53]

But that only works if you create an instrument track... It still doesn't change the name of the rack when you name the track? ...So MuLab "automatically" creates the rack for you, names it with the preset/program of the VST selected, but somehow isn't connected enough that when you name the track, the rack is also named? Does that make sense???

Seems to me their connected... but somehow "not connected." Can we have some connection between the track and rack at least on the named instrument track?

[pljones]

But that only works if you create an instrument track... It still doesn't change the name of the rack when you name the track? ...So MuLab "automatically" creates the rack for you, names it with the preset/program of the VST selected, but somehow isn't connected enough that when you name the track, the rack is also named? Does that make sense???

Exactly as I said: it's the rack name that sets the track name -- if you choose to change the track name, MuLab takes this to mean you do not want the rack name to set the track name any more. If you do not rename the track but rename the rack instead the track name changes. Unless, of course, you've already broken the link.

[DHR53]

Not exactly as you said... You said: "if you create the track by creating a rack," which is not possible. At least not by clicking the "+" sign in the rack/mixer section. I'm not sure what you mean by that?

But, I see that changing the rack name does change the track name "IF" it was created by selecting the + sign in the track area... I'd still like to have the connection work both ways since I'm starting with the track... not the other way around. Would I just naturally asume that I need to change the rack name when I started by creating a track?

Also deleting the rack leaves a blank track. Which may be o.k. if I want to hook something else up, but still seems a little back-around...

[pljones]

You said: "if you create the track by creating a rack," which is not possible. At least not by clicking the "+" sign in the rack/mixer section. I'm not sure what you mean by that?

I meant if you create a track by creating a rack. Clicking "+" creates a rack without creating a track, so it's not what I meant... Hmm, and neither does dropping a VSTi onto the "+" down there. OK, so you have to create the rack by creating a track, so I have to agree that it feels slightly upside down. I guess it would make more sense if creating a rack created a track with a linked name or, as creating a track by dropping a VST creates the linked rack, that the link stayed in that direction. I guess I'd taken in the direction of the link was the opposite from the "obvious" -- which is what we're talking about here, after all! Good point.

[MuTools]

But, I see that changing the rack name does change the track name "IF" it was created by selecting the + sign in the track area.

No, it's "If the track is connected to that rack". How that connection is made is not important. It could als be done by drag-dropping a rack on a track.

[pljones]

I think the surprising thing is that the user feels that if the point of creation is the act of dropping a VSTi on the track area and a rack is created, the rack is dependent upon the track, rather than vice versa (which is actually the case). Noting also that a track is not created by dropping a VSTi on the rack area reinforces this confusion.

Now, to make it more obvious, you could stop creating the rack for the track and create a track for a rack instead... whether that's more useful is a different question...

Once the connection is made, of course, all else would work as it does now.

[sl23]

If you do not rename the track but rename the rack instead the track name changes. Unless, of course, you've already broken the link.

I think it should work like this but instead of the link being broken, if you renamed the track giving Rack/track seperate names, then renaming rack should reinstate the link.