Thank you for the detailed response and especially for the picture analogy. It really helps clarify the reasoning behind your decision. The comparison resonates with me because, when working on visual projects like game scenes, movie effects, or animations, we often deal with a similar concept in layers, much like tracks in music.Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Fri Dec 06, 2024 6:35 am As a result, the synthesizer behaves differently—it’s not just a matter of higher quality like sharpening a pixelated photo. The content of the “photo” itself changes.
When composing or arranging scene layers, we frequently work with something far from the final result, such as wireframes, reduced colors, or limited geometry. These are optimized for the workflow but look drastically different from the finished product.
The crucial point is that rendering the composed layers is an expected step where we anticipate drastic changes for the better. If the result doesn’t look great, we revisit the wireframes and make adjustments.
That said, I would like to kindly ask you to reconsider its priority.Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Fri Dec 06, 2024 6:35 am This is why we’ve deprioritized this feature for now.
This functionality is essential for certain workflows, particularly for movie and game cues, which often require a higher track count and uncompromised quality to meet industry-standard results.
I understand the challenges involved in balancing quality modes, but having this option would make a significant difference for users with demanding projects.
