V5 THEME: REA-2-D (in progress)

[ramses]

Beautiful! I cannot wait for release!

[cyrilfb]

Really like this. Would love to have a better look at the TCP (arrange view) because I rarely record anything. I compose in the arrange view.

It would be awesome to test this with my next project.

[Commala]

This looks really good, love the style and the single line of lighting you've added to give it definition. Goes a long way.

Two things:

- in that last screenshot, the layout for tracks 22 & 23, the mute and solo buttons should exchange positions so that mute comes first reading down just as it does reading left to right. I've found that most Reaper themes follow this convention

- the line of light on the left side of the light layouts (tracks 2-6) seems slightly too bright to me? Maybe not but at first glance it stood out a bit from the other lines for some reason

Great job so far

[pinksoir]

Originally Posted by Commala

This looks really good, love the style and the single line of lighting you've added to give it definition. Goes a long way.

Two things:

- in that last screenshot, the layout for tracks 22 & 23, the mute and solo buttons should exchange positions so that mute comes first reading down just as it does reading left to right. I've found that most Reaper themes follow this convention

- the line of light on the left side of the light layouts (tracks 2-6) seems slightly too bright to me? Maybe not but at first glance it stood out a bit from the other lines for some reason

Great job so far

Thanks! I really like your work too, I've been using your theme as a reference.

You're probably right about the M and S buttons, but I might change their positioning in that layout a bit anyway so as they're horizontally aligned instead of vertical to maintain the logic. If not I'll try what you suggest, but my thinking was to have the mute button change position and keep the solo on the right. Otherwise both are moving.

Yes, the highlight is too bright! Thanks for pointing that out!

[Lestat66]

Originally Posted by pinksoir

It's coming along. In order to have the elements look their best it was necessary to add some subtle 3D-ness. I think a totally flat theme would be cooler but it would require a total reworking. Still, it's low enough contrast and really nice to use for long periods - no more eye strain!! Lots of work still to do...

Yes, it looks epic!

[lowellben]

Dear God This theme looks amazing.

[vanhaze]

Incredible work !

[pinksoir]

MCP folder indents!!

[crimsonmerry]

That subtle 3D depth addition is what comes in my mind the first time i saw this theme. Flat designs doesn't have to be boring. Nice.

[OPI]

Very nice separation. Easy to see. Good job.

[Marquez]

Awesome!!! Congrats, I´ve been waiting for a cool flat theme like this :-)

Maybe a green or blue VU meter color instead of red (unless it´s clipping)?

That´d be great.

Anyways, thanks for your efforts and contribution to the Reaper community :-)

Cheers

[Thalamus]

For me, what makes or breaks a theme is the way parent/child folder tracks are represented in the TCP.

To be useful, that has to be very readable at a glance. Alberts protools x theme does it well, as does the default theme. Really need to see that hierarchical relationship boldly.

Quite a few themes suffer, in my view, from making it too subtle. This is why, for example, I could never get into 'Imperial'.. more is the pity.


Cheers
Thal

[+NRG]

Nice job! B)

[+NRG]

Originally Posted by crimsonmerry

That subtle 3D depth addition is what comes in my mind the first time i saw this theme. Flat designs doesn't have to be boring. Nice.

I agree!

[Endisol]

Originally Posted by pinksoir

MCP folder indents!!

Super job looking forward to this!

[noise_construct]

Some randon feedback:

- those knobs are awesome, super legible while not shouty, nice job.

- the open plate design looks sweet, but lacks clarity. Unfortunately those thin dividers break the sweet looks but still aren't enough to make it clear. I wonder if there was some other way.

- the gap between the button columns in the TCP top section make my honkers go bonkers and definitely hurt my sensibilities. What is it for? What made you select that width for the buttons?

- graphics in the buttons are misaligned vertically

- I wonder if fully coloured backgrounds for lit buttons (instead of just colour frame) would look more modern and thus fit the rest of the theme better

- there's something off with the cyan/green hues (routing squares, FX, "read" text), they're too close to each other

these aside, tons of potential, very nice work!

[Commala]

MCP indentation ftw!

It's looking better and better, although I think there is a disconnect between the lines of the upper section and lower section - they are very different in value. Seems to me that the upper section should have lower value lines (the ones between tracks, and around the record input and sends/fx section), so as to match the lines around the knobs, buttons and lower half. Either that or push the contrast of those lighter lines a bit more to make it more consistently weighted

I'm also not sure if the embossing around the meter is necessary, and at a glance that small effect gives a bit too much of the 3-D vibe, that I think looks out of place against the sections of panel above and below the meter

Is it just me or is there an errant pixel on tracks 8 and 12, just under the recinput? Looks like a gap between the pan and width label bgs?

[Dstruct]

Originally Posted by Commala

Is it just me or is there an errant pixel on tracks 8 and 12, just under the recinput?

It's dust on your screen I think


Nice theme! How do the level meters look active?

[Commala]

Originally Posted by Dstruct

It's dust on your screen I think

It does need a bit of dusting, it's true, but no I meant this:

[pinksoir]

Thanks for all the feedback!

Originally Posted by noise_construct

Some randon feedback:

- the open plate design looks sweet, but lacks clarity. Unfortunately those thin dividers break the sweet looks but still aren't enough to make it clear. I wonder if there was some other way.

I dunno, I like it how it is now and think it definitely helps with the clarity, and an open design isn't really feasible with mcp folder indents. But I'll think about it. What other way did you have in mind?

- the gap between the button columns in the TCP top section make my honkers go bonkers and definitely hurt my sensibilities. What is it for? What made you select that width for the buttons?

Just part of the original design which never went through any revisions cos it works for me. I'm used to it but I wonder what it is that you don't like. Should they be closer together? Wider? Skinnier?

The thinking behind having them that way so is that all the elements line up the full length of the channel and the gap between them is a result of that. It also helps split up elements into groups - eg., rec and mon on one side.

- graphics in the buttons are misaligned vertically

Some are which was a trade off between sharpness and line height. Some of that perceived misalignment might be to do with the highlight/lowlight lines on the top/bottom which creates an offset. Trick of the eye, as it were. Nearly all are dead centre.

- I wonder if fully coloured backgrounds for lit buttons (instead of just colour frame) would look more modern and thus fit the rest of the theme better

Agree with this and it's something I'm going to implement for sure.

- there's something off with the cyan/green hues (routing squares, FX, "read" text), they're too close to each other

I hear ya. Will prob change the FX-In button surround colour thingy.

Originally Posted by Commola

MCP indentation ftw!

It's looking better and better, although I think there is a disconnect between the lines of the upper section and lower section - they are very different in value. Seems to me that the upper section should have lower value lines (the ones between tracks, and around the record input and sends/fx section), so as to match the lines around the knobs, buttons and lower half. Either that or push the contrast of those lighter lines a bit more to make it more consistently weighted

I agree. Vestigals of the original design which will be rectified in due course!

I'm also not sure if the embossing around the meter is necessary, and at a glance that small effect gives a bit too much of the 3-D vibe, that I think looks out of place against the sections of panel above and below the meter

That was a bit of a trade-off due to the fact that the meter repositions itself in the lower section depending on mixer height. Because the lower section is covered by the mcp_idx, the meter_bg yellow stuff won't show through so it was necessary to define the edges of the meter somehow. I would have preferred some other way but I kept it subtle enough for the reason you mentioned.

Is it just me or is there an errant pixel on tracks 8 and 12, just under the recinput? Looks like a gap between the pan and width label bgs?

You, sir, have the eyes of an eagle! Because both pan_label_bg and width_label_bg have a dark line on the right side it was necessary to hide the edge of the pan_label_bg behind the width_label_bg when both are active. This appears to have resulted in both of their white lines opacity combining. *adds to list of stuff to correct*

[Dstruct]

Originally Posted by Commala

It does need a bit of dusting, it's true, but no I meant this:

Ok, confirmed

[pinksoir]

Originally Posted by Dstruct

It's dust on your screen I think


Nice theme! How do the level meters look active?

Meters are still being worked on but they're green-yellow when normal, red-orange when armed. Currently interlaced, but that's user selectable.

[Dstruct]

Ok, keep on Really a great concept!

Can users disable folder indents? Personally I don't like to have this in the MCP (TCP yes).


Suggestion: Width knob should have some difference to the Pan knob.

[Commala]

Originally Posted by Dstruct

Can users disable folder indents?

In some themes it can be disabled by commenting a few lines in the rtconfig, I don't think there is a more direct way.

Pinksoir, with regards to the indentation, I noticed just now that the faders go the full length of the track, and are adjusted up as the tracks are indented.

Are you considering making the faders all aligned to the length of the fader of the deepest level of indentation? This keeps the faders all the same length project wide, at the expense of a bit of wasted space. Personally I find it's very important for faders to be the same length, so that the position of the fader can be compared across tracks and directly related to the relative levels of the mix. I find this is worth a slight waste of vertical space to have the overview.

Thoughts?

[Dstruct]

Originally Posted by Commala

Are you considering making the faders all aligned to the length of the fader of the deepest level of indentation? This keeps the faders all the same length project wide, at the expense of a bit of wasted space. Personally I find it's very important for faders to be the same length, so that the position of the fader can be compared across tracks and directly related to the relative levels of the mix.

This.

Any pictures of the MIDI editor?

[pinksoir]

Originally Posted by Commala

In some themes it can be disabled by commenting a few lines in the rtconfig, I don't think there is a more direct way.

Pinksoir, with regards to the indentation, I noticed just now that the faders go the full length of the track, and are adjusted up as the tracks are indented.

Are you considering making the faders all aligned to the length of the fader of the deepest level of indentation? This keeps the faders all the same length project wide, at the expense of a bit of wasted space. Personally I find it's very important for faders to be the same length, so that the position of the fader can be compared across tracks and directly related to the relative levels of the mix. I find this is worth a slight waste of vertical space to have the overview.

Thoughts?

I started with that way of doings things but changed to the way it is now for a couple of reasons.

The first being that the length/volume of the faders becomes relative once they are in folders. The children tracks within the folders should have an equal fader length for comparative purposes, and the parent tracks of successive folder groups should also be easily compared. But because the relative volume of the children is affected by the settings of the parent, it doesn't seem logical to have all faders equal length for comparative pruposes. There is a volume readout to compare the volumes of tracks overall, but these volumes become misleading because of the effect of parents on the relative volumes of the children.

Having the children's fader throw reflect the fact that their relative volumes are affected by the parent just seems more logical to me.

If ya get me!

The second is for design purposes. I like my children and parents to be clearly distinguishable and an offset in fader length is a clearer way to do this than indent alone. That alternative could be to have all the elements of the channel move up which would maintain equal fader length but shorten the upper area. For design purposes I decided against this because of the 'resizeability' of the elements based on track height and, especially, the minimum track height. The other layouts (Sidecar, Big Meter, Fx Send) do behave this way though.

That being said, different strokes and all that. It's pretty easy to change it to the behaviour you've described and I can add a bit of ;'d out code into the rtconfig if folks want that behaviour (equal fader length regardless of folder depth).


@Dstruct: no MIDI editor yet, I'm working on the TCP at the moment. Not sure about different pan/width knobs either. Maybe...

[pinksoir]

Some progress on the tcp default layout:

[OPI]

Yes. It's looking good

[tack]

Originally Posted by pinksoir

Some progress on the tcp default layout:

Looking very clean! Although I prefer to see the entire track tinted. I quite like the tabs on the left -- Cubase-esque -- but visually I need to see more color to quickly find the track I'm looking for.

Something like this? (Sorry I'm lazy and only colored a few tracks to make the point.)

https://helix.urandom.ca/public/REA-...-colorfied.png

Or is that all just controlled by the tint options? Is it possible to have the different shades as depicted?

[pinksoir]

Originally Posted by tack

Looking very clean! Although I prefer to see the entire track tinted. I quite like the tabs on the left -- Cubase-esque -- but visually I need to see more color to quickly find the track I'm looking for.

Something like this? (Sorry I'm lazy and only colored a few tracks to make the point.)

https://helix.urandom.ca/public/REA-...-colorfied.png

Or is that all just controlled by the tint options? Is it possible to have the different shades as depicted?

Not possible as is, unfortunately. You'd have to edit the theme yourself to get that behaviour. Something like adjusting the opacity of the tcp_idxbg would allow for tinting but it'd change the overall appearance of the default tracks too. They'd no longer be greeny-grey but whatever the default track bg colour is set to.

It would certainly be possible to create layouts with full track tinting but I'm not sure if I will do it. Someone else can!

[ramses]

Originally Posted by pinksoir

Some progress on the tcp default layout:

Really, really clean and nice. Keep it up, can not wait!

[Commala]

Originally Posted by pinksoir

I started with that way of doings things but changed to the way it is now for a couple of reasons.

The first being that the length/volume of the faders becomes relative once they are in folders. The children tracks within the folders should have an equal fader length for comparative purposes, and the parent tracks of successive folder groups should also be easily compared. But because the relative volume of the children is affected by the settings of the parent, it doesn't seem logical to have all faders equal length for comparative pruposes. There is a volume readout to compare the volumes of tracks overall, but these volumes become misleading because of the effect of parents on the relative volumes of the children.

Having the children's fader throw reflect the fact that their relative volumes are affected by the parent just seems more logical to me.

If ya get me!

The second is for design purposes. I like my children and parents to be clearly distinguishable and an offset in fader length is a clearer way to do this than indent alone. That alternative could be to have all the elements of the channel move up which would maintain equal fader length but shorten the upper area. For design purposes I decided against this because of the 'resizeability' of the elements based on track height and, especially, the minimum track height. The other layouts (Sidecar, Big Meter, Fx Send) do behave this way though.

That being said, different strokes and all that. It's pretty easy to change it to the behaviour you've described and I can add a bit of ;'d out code into the rtconfig if folks want that behaviour (equal fader length regardless of folder depth).

That makes sense, I can definitely see it working that way too

[Nantho]

I don't come here very much, and I'm not a big Theme fan...

But man, this one looks awesome !

Can't wait to give it a try !

Keep on the good work man

[pinksoir]

More progress. It's weird, once you add a little bit of 3D-ness it can get away from you. This isn't how I wanted the theme to turn out - I wanted it totally flat - but I don't think it looks too bad. I will probably do a totally flat version but it'll need to be different colours for clarity. Aaaanyway...

[Thalamus]

Really nice, useful stuff.

I like the looooooong text fields on the tracks.

[obstgegenrechz]

Looks very very good and promising!

Would like to see a Mixer Panel Layout that features the Volume Knob in order to make it more usable on laptops. Or make it dependent on mixer height whether fader or knob is used...

Have a good day!

[statue]

Looks really nice, simple and efficient!
And don't worry too much about getting away from flatness.
Nothing should be flat just for the sake of being flat, but for making the interface better.

[Lestat66]

It's looking great, but you wont be able to please everyone's request. I hope you maintain the original character and not sway too far.

[ivansc]

A thought:

I use a couple of Korg Nanokontrols and the colour strip that you have to the left of your tcp is exactly where Reaper likes to show me which 8 tracks I am controlling with each Nano.

I will try this out and see what takes priority!

[cyrilfb]

Looks very usable. I like that it does not try to look like hardware. I like faders instead of knobs.
I will be happy to work with it as soon as it is available!