Vertical meters

Marah Mag · 05-27-2009, 02:01 PM

Like what's being talked about here.

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=33669

StepOne · 05-27-2009, 05:31 PM

super srs

Gadd23 · 05-28-2009, 11:08 AM

Yes Please....

joe2 · 05-28-2009, 11:32 AM

This, and configurable TCP elements.

I'm getting excited again.

+a lot

Marah Mag · 06-08-2009, 02:08 AM

A weekly bump.

(Oh to wake up and find this in Reaper 3.03.)

mio*star · 06-09-2009, 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marah Mag

(Oh to wake up and find this in Reaper 3.03.)

... +1 !

this one would be so neat.

Reverbio · 06-09-2009, 10:38 AM

+1 from me

StepOne · 06-09-2009, 10:39 AM

*cough*+1*cough*

beingmf · 06-09-2009, 11:15 AM

yesyesyse (oh!)

labyrinth · 06-10-2009, 08:46 AM

Definitely would be nice.

Banned · 06-10-2009, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marah Mag

A weekly bump.

(Oh to wake up and find this in Reaper 3.03.)

Reaper 3.03 should have a Bassline plugin included. ;-P

SiKo · 06-10-2009, 08:58 AM

+1 for vertical mini meters

Tallisman · 06-10-2009, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StepOne

super srs

that would be perfect.
though for me, it would spell the death of the horizontal meters.

++1
.tallis

StepOne · 06-17-2009, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallisman

that would be perfect.
though for me, it would spell the death of the horizontal meters.

++1
.tallis

I agree, death to horizontal meters!

The TCP should also slim down enormously by using knobs instead of sliders.

Evan · 06-17-2009, 01:40 PM

+1 very much for this...

However this also speeds up the need for configurable TCP buttons, because of screen space. (I would knock off the folder and phase buttons because I rarely use them). And the volume slider still looks too fat, I wish WT made an alternate thinner version.

synth · 06-18-2009, 09:50 PM

Vertical meters rock!

+1

kiloman · 06-20-2009, 05:26 PM

yep definitley much better than the horizontal. they should implement it

joe2 · 06-21-2009, 09:04 AM

FR in the new tracker system:

http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=227

Vote, vote, reply, reply!

Cheers.

Marah Mag · 06-21-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe2

FR in the new tracker system:

http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=227

Yay! You beat me to it! Was gonna put it in the tracker today. Really, I was!

Vote!

StepOne · 09-13-2009, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StepOne

*bump for Knob interest*

Could be huge space savers when used for pan/volume

Audition's interface is so lovely

vertical meters and vol/pan knobs...gotta keep this FR a movin'!

wallace · 09-13-2009, 01:56 PM

Verticle meters +1

Pryzma · 09-14-2009, 12:49 AM

here is my +1 for this feature %)

SiKo · 09-14-2009, 01:42 AM

Is there an official FR thread to support with voting and making this elevated?

adXok · 09-14-2009, 02:23 AM

Yes! Knobs are perfect if optional for replacing faders!

Jeffos · 09-14-2009, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiKo

Is there an official FR thread to support with voting and making this elevated?

Already "elevated":
http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=227

0xi63n · 11-07-2009, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StepOne

vertical meters and vol/pan knobs...gotta keep this FR a movin'!

YEAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

musicbynumbers · 11-07-2009, 07:59 AM

Maybe vert meters will get put in when we get multi channel meters. not much point doing one without the other in a devs point of view might as well do both

(I hope)

WOK! · 11-07-2009, 12:41 PM

+1 (including showing MIDI activity)

Marah Mag · 11-07-2009, 01:12 PM

I sense a groundswell for this.

Can't believe it's not in the pipeline.

Seems an odd thing for Reaper not to have.

Will be interesting to see exactly how it's implemented, what options, and other related functions (Go To Peak!!!) it arrives with.

toot · 11-07-2009, 04:08 PM

I am very much against replacing the horizontal meters with vertical meters in the tcp - of course optional arrangement is fine as people can have what they want. Why oppose replacement? Because vertical meters do not allow visually aligning metering information across tracks whilst simultaneously looking at the waveforms. You are removing a capability for overview comparisons.

Marah Mag · 11-07-2009, 04:16 PM

I doubt that horizontal metering will be lost.

Ideally it should be pos to select vert or horiz (or both?) on a per-track basis.

Related (more or less), it would be nice if tracks (or items) could display a height-proportional db scale.

(Vertical meters, goto peak, and a per-track db scale are just about the only things I miss from Sonar.)

Lawrence · 11-07-2009, 04:48 PM

My Preference: (not that it's any more valid than anyone else's)

1. Hardware input metering which is separate from track metering. Metering input levels regardless of the status of any project audio tracks.

2. Once you have item #1 above all you really need on the TCP is "activity metering", small vertical meters for audio and midi activity.

My 0.02...

rossh · 11-07-2009, 07:45 PM

I whipped this up after pondering the situation with track alignment issues, track icon disturbances and of course the ongoing knobs and vertical metering suggestion.

Please note:

1. The dedicated track icon column. If a user enables this feature, they give up the screen real estate while preserving track alignment.

2. The knobs instead of faders. It still utilises the same info field between the knobs.

3. The vertical metering. Meters will extend down to perhaps 3 lines and extend no further thus no meters as high as the page when maximising the track.

4. See how the use of folders is accomodated by compressing the space between the knobs on the left and button cluster on the right.

5. Importantly, the saving of space due to the use of knobs and vertical meters allowed for the dedicated track icon column without giving up any real estate to the right of the TCP.

Perhaps this is worth a seperate post and FR. Perhaps not. Let me know what you think.

Cheers.

Lawrence · 11-07-2009, 07:54 PM

Let me add that this all goes back to the "tracking levels" conversations. If people are tracking at proper analog gain staged levels and these tiny vertical meters are their only reference in the DAW... levels shouldn't ever approach full scale anyway so it's not really that important.

If people want a reference perhaps the fine coders at Cockos could draw a line at a common reference point like the line in the graphic below.

I intentionally clipped the signal about halfway through the video below to show that on these tiny meters TCP meters and even the mixer channel meters you only need to mark actual clips and hold the reference in case you happened to not be looking when it happened. The other stuff is generally unnecessary. If I want to see the actual hardware level I view the bigger and more detailed input meters.

http://dawsession.com/pics/input_metering.swf

toot · 11-07-2009, 08:12 PM

I don't use the mixer at all - I do everything in the main window. I don't track bands at all. I imagine there are others who work the same way, I seem to recall people saying so in the past. Vertical metering would be counterproductive for me. At the moment the main problem I have with metering is the lack of a clear visual relationship between meter values and rendered output.

Lawrence · 11-07-2009, 08:17 PM

Sure. You can do that with tiny TCP meters and no mixer view at all. If you peak with a signal a little over halfway up that tiny meter without even viewing any other DAW meter you'll be fine. The problem is that people need to personally come to grips with the fact that doing that - tracking while peaking at -12 or even lower - is perfectly fine. It will sound the same... just as good. The only thing that changes is where your faders will be in the mix... that's all.

Again, it's only critical (input metering in 24-bit) for people who think "more" is better. It's not... it's just more.

The only other thing an input meter really needs is a "holding" clip indicator so when you hear that really loud stray transient you'll know if it actually clipped or not when you look at the meter 1 second later. If it - the tiny meter - falls back to green and doesn't leave a red indicator, you won't know if it actually did or not.

My last 0.02...

Peanut gallery closing...

toot · 11-07-2009, 08:26 PM

I'm not talking about input metering (tracking live input) for my uses though. I understand that others are.

Lawrence · 11-07-2009, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toot

I'm not talking about input metering (tracking live input) for my uses though. I understand that others are.

Oh, ok. I only talked input because after that they're even more irrelevant... the meters and what they show.

Under normal circumstances in floating point with normal audio levels.

Thanks man...

nofish · 11-07-2009, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rossh

Me likes a lot !

@ Lawrence:

vertical meters are not only about imput metering (at least for me).

Example:
The other day I had a big project involving several self-resonating delay FX. Going nuts with automation and stuff, I created (unintentionally) some huge delay buildups. In that situation I wished for small vertical meters on the TCP to instantly notice where the track activity was, instead of scrolling through all the tracks in the mixer.

So yeah,
+1.

NAS · 11-08-2009, 01:30 AM

Customisable TCP FTW
This combined with the custom menus and the custom toolbar
Man i will seriously be in dreamland (Well until the next idea comes along anyway)

NAS