Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon
FX chain windows can already be docked.
|
Yes, but then you have the left side of the FX chain window that cannot be closed.
I end up with this result:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z3w3g3l958...54.02.png?dl=0
It would be perfect if I could set it to THAT one plugin. Instead, I end up losing more space that I gain.
I put the FX chain window in a floating docker:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/78jffkyzz6...00.28.png?dl=0
This way I can get rid of the top window bar, but still I see the FX chain window, as a total, less the FX itself. And of course, unless I select another docked tab, there's no way to move the window as I can't grab onto it anywhere, but that's what I expected. Definitely not a solution.
I'm trying to have something like this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/v28f7lt3h8...06.56.jpg?dl=0
The good thing about this would be for example if I wanted to just toggle show the mixer (I have Cmd+D for this), the Freq Analyzer would disappear with it - more place to edit. Then, if I want my mixer, I could automatically have the Analyzer there, or a loudness meter, oscilloscope etc, which I think are essential tools for mixing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon
The area you're showing is normal in any DAW - for preset management, input/output setup, etc. It's not meant to be hidden, ever.
|
I don't think you're 100% right there. I know it is a standard in other DAWs (more or less), that's why I dared to share my idea to get rid of it, because it's not at all always necessary. The closest I saw though is Logic's way of handling plugins - you can minimize any plugin window's I/O setup + preset management part on the right upper corner - the whole thing ends up being way cleaner.
I made a screenshot of it:
Initial window state in Logic:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zcndfihbuh...23.00.png?dl=0
Closer upper part:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9z5rdbuvrg...22.48.png?dl=0
Even this would be a bit better I think. Am I explaining this right? Or would this really be something nobody else used? Cause I can see then why it's such a weird request.
Anyway, thanks for the input