I just tried out Logic 7 and I must say its really nice to be able to load\save a line of effects directly into a track.
Should be very easy to implement in Tracktion also,, as its possible to do so in the racks.
Saving\Loading effect lines
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 33 posts since 8 Sep, 2002 from järfälla\sweden
Tracktion should be an intiutive application. A nice effect line is something you come up with on the fly, while working.
As it is now you have to rebuild it in the racks, thats not at all intuitive.
A user interface isnt just about what you can do, functions should be implented to be available when the user wants it, and react from how the user works with the application.
As it is now you have to rebuild it in the racks, thats not at all intuitive.
A user interface isnt just about what you can do, functions should be implented to be available when the user wants it, and react from how the user works with the application.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Rebuild?
If you were already aware of the Racks' existence, you'd have done it to begin with, and there'd be no "re" about the "building".
Racks are not difficult, and nor are they counter-intuitive. And, if you REALLLLlllly just want to replicate an effect line that you already have put into the normal 'filters' area, it's a quick drag'n'drop procedure. Is it as easy as highlighting them all and clicking "make into an effects line"? Nope. But it's still less than a minute of work. I mean, for crying out loud, you can't be THAT lazy!!!!
I think a more appropriate reaction would be-- "Logic's linear effects 'groupings' are a great feature, but they don't really compare to the power and flexibility of Tracktion's racks. Why don't they allow modular routing?"
I think this is an area in which other sequencers should be emulating Tracktion, and not the other way around.
I wouldn't argue if it was put in -additionally- to the racks, and yes, I WOULD use it and find it useful. But the basic functionality's already present, easy to use, intuitive, and ultimately "better" than Logic's implementation
If you were already aware of the Racks' existence, you'd have done it to begin with, and there'd be no "re" about the "building".
Racks are not difficult, and nor are they counter-intuitive. And, if you REALLLLlllly just want to replicate an effect line that you already have put into the normal 'filters' area, it's a quick drag'n'drop procedure. Is it as easy as highlighting them all and clicking "make into an effects line"? Nope. But it's still less than a minute of work. I mean, for crying out loud, you can't be THAT lazy!!!!
I think a more appropriate reaction would be-- "Logic's linear effects 'groupings' are a great feature, but they don't really compare to the power and flexibility of Tracktion's racks. Why don't they allow modular routing?"
I think this is an area in which other sequencers should be emulating Tracktion, and not the other way around.
I wouldn't argue if it was put in -additionally- to the racks, and yes, I WOULD use it and find it useful. But the basic functionality's already present, easy to use, intuitive, and ultimately "better" than Logic's implementation
-
- KVRAF
- 3364 posts since 16 Feb, 2004 from atop a katamari
i do agree though; ultimately it IS still a 'long way round'. generally i prefer to have my stuff on the tack's end so it's always visible, so i'd certainly prefer to be able to do that.
Kick, punch, it's all in the mind.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Yes, it's a longer way around... but relatively speaking, not all that long. 
Not as long as almost any other individual step in bringing a song from idea to product. 
Greg
Not as long as almost any other individual step in bringing a song from idea to product. Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 3364 posts since 16 Feb, 2004 from atop a katamari
but again still it doesn't achieve the same thing, so not only is it the long way round, but you are resigned to having to open the rack to view the individual filter arrangement, or to access the filters themselves. which means having the rackfilters pane open, which obscures part of the screen.
so i agree further, it's not just a little more effort, (although it is only a little more effort) it is still a limitation that could be improved with the addition of the suggested feature
so i agree further, it's not just a little more effort, (although it is only a little more effort) it is still a limitation that could be improved with the addition of the suggested feature
Kick, punch, it's all in the mind.
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
Also, it is quicker to change the order of plugs that are hanging on the end of tracks than ones in racks.. I find I leave my plugs out of racks unless I need parallel signal processing, or input from other tracks for side-chaining etc. as it makes me more likely to try things like swapping the order of a compressor and an EQ..haydxn wrote:but again still it doesn't achieve the same thing, so not only is it the long way round, but you are resigned to having to open the rack to view the individual filter arrangement, or to access the filters themselves. which means having the rackfilters pane open, which obscures part of the screen.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Fine, it's a feature that will make or break all of us and drastically affect our workflow.
You win.
You win.
-
- KVRAF
- 3745 posts since 29 Sep, 2002 from Killafornia
You know you can drag plug-ins in and out of racks right?haydxn wrote:but again still it doesn't achieve the same thing, so not only is it the long way round, but you are resigned to having to open the rack to view the individual filter arrangement, or to access the filters themselves. which means having the rackfilters pane open, which obscures part of the screen.
Use them as a collection of plug-ins you dont even have to wire them up. Then just drag them onto the track you want.
