Old 11-12-2010, 04:41 PM   #121
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

A vertical version, emulating the MCP with a bit more room.

____

and of course Brice's mockup, which for me squeezes a bit too much in to very little space, but that may just be me.



What none of this stuff takes in to account is multichannel routing with one send. Not just two channels but up to 7.1 at least.

That kind of configuration needs to be addressed in the dropdown menus of the source and target channel count.

Multichannel sends can happen the following way :

Pre-FX
This could be one to 64 channels of source material, mapped either straight or through a panner to a send.

Post-FX Pre-Fader
Same here. Both the source and the target channel count needs to be flexible.

Post Fader also Post-Panner
This ones channel count could begin at two or more channels. If a 5.1 panner was used, the user needs the option of mixing down the channels for a send, to a reverb for example.

Bloody complicated, but well worth the effort.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom

Last edited by airon; 11-12-2010 at 04:49 PM.
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 06:02 AM   #122
Evan
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Greece
Posts: 3,519
Default

I prefer Brice's mockup the most. But it could use some breathing space (margins between UI elements). That would make the UI larger, but still smaller than the other mockups.

a remark about airon's mockup: I don't like the fader as it is in the middle of each strip. And since it reaches all the way to the bottom, it's also as if it's splitting it in two.
Evan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 06:51 AM   #123
brice
Human being with feelings
 
brice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: france
Posts: 354
Default

I win
brice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 07:08 AM   #124
AdamWathan
Human being with feelings
 
AdamWathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cambridge, Ontario
Posts: 2,644
Default

Eek someone needs to merge the two threads for this, haha...

I like this one:

[img]http://img507.**************/img507/8489/routing2.png[/img]

Or brice's!
AdamWathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 10:19 AM   #125
brainwreck
Human being with feelings
 
brainwreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The 90's
Posts: 19,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamWathan View Post
Eek someone needs to merge the two threads for this, haha...

I like this one:

[img]http://img507.**************/img507/8489/routing2.png[/img]

Or brice's!
i like that one, too. maybe ditch the send/recieve numbers, bold the labels only, and move the add/remove. actually, if the labels were bold, the numbers wouldn't be so bad.
__________________
The media are misleading the public about...pretty much everything.
brainwreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 01:01 PM   #126
run, megalodon
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,053
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamWathan View Post
Eek someone needs to merge the two threads for this, haha...

I like this one:

[img]http://img507.**************/img507/8489/routing2.png[/img]

Or brice's!
Gets my vote as well.
run, megalodon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2010, 10:13 AM   #127
todd_r
Human being with feelings
 
todd_r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamWathan View Post
Eek someone needs to merge the two threads for this, haha...

I like this one:

[img]http://img507.**************/img507/8489/routing2.png[/img]
Yup, def this one for me too
todd_r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2011, 02:30 AM   #128
spikemullings
Human being with feelings
 
spikemullings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: East London
Posts: 1,697
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamWathan View Post
[img]http://img507.**************/img507/8489/routing2.png[/img]
I was making a template for a headphones mix track recently, I thought of this thread, and so now I'm bumping it
__________________
Cloth-Eared Hobbyist
http://www.reverbnation.com/spikemullings
spikemullings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2012, 09:26 AM   #129
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

Good grief. The last mockups we posted are OVER TWO fracking years old !

Badbing badabump.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2012, 10:27 AM   #130
Sexan
Human being with feelings
 
Sexan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 2,013
Default

+ infinity !
Sexan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2012, 02:09 PM   #131
brainwreck
Human being with feelings
 
brainwreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The 90's
Posts: 19,555
Default

I wonder if the devs ever saw this thread.
__________________
The media are misleading the public about...pretty much everything.
brainwreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 02:06 PM   #132
mikeroephonics
Human being with feelings
 
mikeroephonics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,446
Default

The I/O window really could benefit from these requests!
+1
__________________
Please check out these MIDI requests: http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=103192
Thanks.
mikeroephonics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 01:43 PM   #133
Sigilus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
Default

Quote:
Quote; airon-

and of course Brice's mockup, which for me squeezes a bit too much in to very little space, but that may just be me.



What none of this stuff takes in to account is multichannel routing with one send. Not just two channels but up to 7.1 at least.

That kind of configuration needs to be addressed in the dropdown menus of the source and target channel count.

Multichannel sends can happen the following way :

Pre-FX
This could be one to 64 channels of source material, mapped either straight or through a panner to a send.

Post-FX Pre-Fader
Same here. Both the source and the target channel count needs to be flexible.

Post Fader also Post-Panner
This ones channel count could begin at two or more channels. If a 5.1 panner was used, the user needs the option of mixing down the channels for a send, to a reverb for example.

Bloody complicated, but well worth the effort.
YES, I will vote on this if it has:
1. Vertical structure
2. MULTI-CHANNEL SENDS properly configured! I HATE having to send 1/2-1/2, 3/4-3/4, 5/6-5/6, 7/8-7/8, 9/10-9/10, 11/12-11/12, 13/14-13/14, 15/16-15/16. And then double check them all, and scroll through the huge and jumbled list.

Why can't I just select 1to16-1to16?
Sigilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 02:00 PM   #134
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

The last version of the 'other' design was actually this:

__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:19 PM   #135
Sigilus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
Default

too messy, imo. I liked the clean look of the previous mockups.

What might be the hurdle that is keeping this from being implemented?
Sigilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 08:25 PM   #136
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

Lots of WALTER work and implementation.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 04:48 AM   #137
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,050
Default

I also find that last mockup a bit busy, but it might just be because I am no fan of tinting the whole track. Sure it would obey the preference .

I don't know whether it has already been mentioned: I would appreciate a way to quick switch to any other track's I/O window, maybe via a dropdown in the header. That's a thing I'd love to see in FX windows (and others where it's appropriate) as well. And a way to switch to the receiving track's I/O from a send (and the sending track's I/O from a receive). That could probably be done with double click the name fields, but it might be not obvious enough. An additional name field context menu perhaps where the option to double click could be mentioned?.
gofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 08:33 AM   #138
Sigilus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
Default

gofer - great idea!

some of the other software I work with has a little blue/white arrow in a circle to indicate sends and receives. Clicking the arrow transports the user to that location's controls. Reaper could do something similar - have the relationship hotlinked
Sigilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 03:40 PM   #139
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamWathan View Post
Eek someone needs to merge the two threads for this, haha...

I like this one:

[img]http://img507.**************/img507/8489/routing2.png[/img]

Or brice's!
I can't understand how this pure genius idea was born more than a year ago and still not implemented...
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 06:41 PM   #140
James HE
Human being with feelings
 
James HE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,414
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reno.thestraws View Post
I can't understand how this pure genius idea was born more than a year ago and still not implemented...
It's not that great really.

(this is of course my opinion)

I've worked a lot with the track IO of late doing different multi channel routing setups. The above layout would be even MORE cumbersome than what we have now. And it would not help clarify the routing at all.

I don't even like the horizontal faders, Vertical faders are 21 times worse in their space inefficiency.

A level Knob and small pan sliders would be my choice. I'll mock something up... probably to be torn apart, but whatever... lol
James HE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 04:04 PM   #141
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gofer View Post
I also find that last mockup a bit busy, but it might just be because I am no fan of tinting the whole track. Sure it would obey the preference .

I don't know whether it has already been mentioned: I would appreciate a way to quick switch to any other track's I/O window, maybe via a dropdown in the header. That's a thing I'd love to see in FX windows (and others where it's appropriate) as well. And a way to switch to the receiving track's I/O from a send (and the sending track's I/O from a receive). That could probably be done with double click the name fields, but it might be not obvious enough. An additional name field context menu perhaps where the option to double click could be mentioned?.
Or a small arrow button or something.

A dropdown to pick the track whose I/O is currently being displayed. I could try and construct a new mockup with these ideas.

A horizontal layout(as it is now) could make it easier to display parameters like the source and destination channels in more of a list fashion. It may take a wider I/O window overall, but in this case that might be ok. We'll see.

Might take a day.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 04:43 PM   #142
gpunk_w
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,184
Default

Just out of interest Airon,how much time have you spent on all the awesone mock ups over the years and how much ever got implemented or even acknowledged by the devs ?
__________________
Reaper scripters, that is all !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
gpunk_w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 05:50 PM   #143
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gpunk_w View Post
Just out of interest Airon,how much time have you spent on all the awesone mock ups over the years and how much ever got implemented or even acknowledged by the devs ?
I don't really know for sure. Lots of requests were ideas coming from many people. The project bay is one of the big ones though. They took it much further(and left out certain aspects). Video stuff, which Plush2 posted, but I didn't do mockups for that.

The tape-style editing had the most impact for my work. Endless mockups.

That's about it for mockup stuff I think.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 06:22 PM   #144
James HE
Human being with feelings
 
James HE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,414
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post

Might take a day.
give it two.. lol

I started drafting something up myself, but man it is cumbersome to work out a way to show so much potential information - but still keep it simple when you don't need it.

What I would like to see is a per channel sends view, and / or an overview of different sends / receives organized by channel.

I do know one thing, the window should change depending on the number of channels, maybe tabs perhaps.
James HE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 06:36 PM   #145
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,196
Default

All those mockups look good to me. Anyway...

When I think about the I/O dialog the first thing I think about is what (if I were doing it) to get rid of. The next thing I think about is where does it go then. When I do that the answer to the first question is "the dialog" and the answer to the second question is "on the work surface".

So how might that happen? A couple of ways. Sliders and buttons can go anywhere and they don;t have to be that big, so if Reaper had an inspector you could really display the per-track I/O routing in a vertical panel there, and have all that potentially always showing, following the channel, when you need to see it like that. No dialog.

Similarly, you could really do the same in a vertical docker, show a ton of sends and receives with more reasonably sized graphics right in the docker.

Generally speaking, all of the mockups try to make a better design of the same dialog. I've yet to see a single one in a vertical docker or inspector. Not sure why you couldn't have a vertical panel with a tab for sends and a tab for receives and why any of it would actually ever have to be so big and/or why those routings could't just stay open there, in a vertical docker or inspector, when it's beneficial.

I do think - respectfully - the first inclination is maybe often "Need to set or change something so, make a new dialog for it..." - without maybe considering a different or potentially better way to reach the same things.
__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 06:51 PM   #146
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,196
Default

Let me expand on that ^^ in case anyone wants to mock it up. I'm approaching this from a "workflow" point of view and when doing that what I see 'subjectively kinda bad' with the I/O dialog design is that it combines everything in one place for developer (design) convenience... and gets ... well really huge.

Sends | Receives | Midi Routing

So why is it necessary to actually see all those things at once? I would suggest that it's actually not, that those things can work the same way they do now but be split, partitioned, tabbed, whatever, and work just as well and take up much less space (live in the same vertical space, stacked, docked) and even have more focus when attacking any one of them.

So if someone wants to mock up a stacked / docked vertical routing panel, I'd be interested in seeing what it might look like.

Keep the sliders small - a send doesn't need emulated faders with fader caps and fader grooves and all that for such a simple thing, they're just sends after all, a simple and small slider will do. A drop down list doesnt have to be 4" wide to select a destination. Actually, it doesn't need a drop down list box at all... a popup menu would do the same thing and save tons of space.

Look how small (for example) the send sliders are in Cubase's inspector. You don't really need a big fader for that, it's kind of a waste of space imo. You can vertically stack up a ton of those - more than anyone would ever use - in a vertical panel, along with their accompanying buttons... if the design was thought out. And of course, there's nothing stopping a vertical panel from scrolling in place if the number of sends exceeds the screen height.

You could still have a big routing dialog for times when routing gets insane, a big dialog that fills the entire screen.

Anyway, that's my general $0.02, that changing the graphics and layout doesn't really solve the problem of a really potentially huge I/O dialog with too much information on it, it only kinda puts a new coat of paint on it.
__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".

Last edited by Lawrence; 08-28-2012 at 07:03 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 07:05 PM   #147
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

Since the I/O sends and receives requires a considerable amount of options and information to be displayed, I can think of one or two designs to do so in a compact way. I'll spell out a basic design further down in text form.

The I/O window or panel could appear below the track TCP, which would be a good solution for folks who just need to access it temporarily or when they're focusing on a single track.

Code:
|TCP PANEL______|
|_______________|
----------------------------.
|I/O panel pops             | This will not obscure the actual track contents
|open under TCP             | or its TCP
|if possible                |
----------------------------'

Here's a basic design I'll try to put together soon. Track stuff, then sends, then receives, then the rest(H/W sends and Midi H/W). Double-click on Send/Receive-Track-Name calls up I/O for that track.
Code:
Track stuff and track dropdown for I/O panel
like master/parent and m/p channel sends and channel count
--Add Send Dropdown--------------------------------------------------
Send-Track-Name    |Fader|Pan-Knob|Src-Ch|Dest-Ch|Midi-Src|Midi-Dest|Send-Type
Send-Track-Name    |Fader|Pan-Knob|Src-Ch|Dest-Ch|Midi-Src|Midi-Dest|Send-Type
Send-Track-Name    |Fader|Pan-Knob|Src-Ch|Dest-Ch|Midi-Src|Midi-Dest|Send-Type
--Add Receive Dropdown-----------------------------------------------
Receive-Track-Name |Fader|Pan-Knob|Src-Ch|Dest-Ch|Midi-Src|Midi-Dest|Send-Type
Receive-Track-Name |Fader|Pan-Knob|Src-Ch|Dest-Ch|Midi-Src|Midi-Dest|Send-Type
--Add HW Send Dropdown-----------------------------------------------
--Add Midi HW Send Dropdown------------------------------------------
The column view of this kind mirrors the TCP method, lets users locate their sends very quickly based on almost any setting. One line per send/receive is the key to make this list view easy to manage.

Maybe the sends could even be selected for temporary grouping or linking. More permanent linking/grouping might be better in a dedicated matrix or resource view, maybe part of a third view in the matrix window(Routing and Groups being the first two).

Send/Receives-Track-Name is highlighted when mouse is above any of the rows controls as well.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom

Last edited by airon; 08-28-2012 at 07:12 PM.
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 07:19 PM   #148
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,196
Default

Cool Airon, Interested to see what else you come up with.

What got me thinking about this was doing a mental analogy with Cubase / Logic / Sonar/ DP, etc, and taking all of their channel audio sends and midi routing sends and simlar and cramming it all into a single big dialog window, and how much worse that would be then it is now on an inspector or whatever... a panel... whose contents follows track selection by default.

That's kinda the Reaper I/O window but it's worse because it has even more stuff than that crammed in and it uses much bigger graphic controls.

Respectfully (and i'll leave it alone) the properties window has the same design, it crams a ton of stuff into a single big dialog when a good bit of it could be spread around a bit more concisely, and some of it placed on the work surface.
__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".

Last edited by Lawrence; 08-29-2012 at 10:39 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 11:00 AM   #149
jnif
Human being with feelings
 
jnif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,039
Default

I think it would be waste of time and development resources to change only the GUI of I/O window. New features should be added at the same time. Here are some features and operations that should be considered when designing the new UI
- Send meters
- Use channel names instead of 1/2, 3/4, etc.
- Change send target
- Copy or move send to another track
- Easy way to compare sends on different tracks. User should be able to view sends of multiple tracks simultaneusly.
- Multichannel/surround panning of sends

Many of those are already included in the mockups. Still, all those mockup designs are quite close to the current I/O window design. They are quite complex and busy. Maybe a completely different UI design could make all those routings more manageable and user-friendly.


jnif
jnif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2012, 08:19 AM   #150
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

I've thought about making another mockups, but won't bother. Maybe they'll be changing some fundamental stuff about the I/O window at some point, so it's probably a waste of time.

Everyone can kinda imagine what the text-based thing up there might look like based on the current look of the elements in the I/O window anyway.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2012, 10:09 AM   #151
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,196
Default

I'm not much of a graphic artist so any mockup I did would certainly kinda suck. But when I look at the track manager docked right, it makes me wonder why sends and recieves couldn't also do that. That window space would easily show a lot of them if the sliders and buttons weren't big, and could detach and float and stay open when you want it to, and follow channel selection.

It's only showing one channel's routing at a time anyway. At any rate, one of the reasons it's so big (imo) is that it's kinda pretending to be a mixer, instead of just being send routing.

__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2012, 01:10 PM   #152
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

That was the idea.

The TCP with the smallest height, but all the necessary controls and little dropdown menus for channels, send mode, destination for sends source for receives, in a list format.

Track stuff (two rows or three perhaps, containing the track dropdown menu to change I/O panel contents)
Sends
Receives
HW stuff

The section headers could be as small as tabs are, with a little PLUS button to make more. It'll just pop a dropdown.

And perhaps the Destination/source track names could be right-clicked on to duplicate them. Then all you do is change the track-destination/source, which is a dropdown menu anyway.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:21 PM   #153
mr_spine
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 41
Default

Absolutely awful. All these 'solutions' are awful. perhaps I should be able to select a tracks hardware outputs like every other DAW on the planet.

And why do we have to see midi outs on audio tracks?

And maybe if reaper had a better bussing / aux system we wouldn't need those ghastly 'sends' in the i/o window (yet another reaper window).

How about seperating the hardware output to a simple drop down menu, and within the same dropdown menu have the 'send' sub menu.

Stop all these windows, whats wrong with you all. You are all the reason why reaper will always be a mess.
mr_spine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:31 PM   #154
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,120
Default

ALT + R
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:54 PM   #155
James HE
Human being with feelings
 
James HE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,414
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_spine View Post
Absolutely awful. All these 'solutions' are awful. perhaps I should be able to select a tracks hardware outputs like every other DAW on the planet.
It would be great to be able to switch the output on a send. And if there was a (none) option, you could just setup that send as a track default.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_spine View Post
And why do we have to see midi outs on audio tracks?
Because there are no track types. I have suggested there be some sort of filter in the IO window however, but I don't think it's big deal, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_spine View Post
And maybe if reaper had a better bussing / aux system we wouldn't need those ghastly 'sends' in the i/o window (yet another reaper window).
IF you show the sends in the extended mixer, you mostly will not ever have need to open the IO window. REAPER's routing has a lot of potential that other DAWs simply do not have. There simply is no blueprint for what is possible. Try to break out of the console mindset.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_spine View Post
How about seperating the hardware output to a simple drop down menu, and within the same dropdown menu have the 'send' sub menu.

Stop all these windows, whats wrong with you all. You are all the reason why reaper will always be a mess.
The IO window is the best place to get an overview, and often the easiest place to set up sends / recieves. You can also just use drag and drop in the mixer, or use the routing matrix.
James HE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2013, 10:15 PM   #156
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,113
Default

If Reapers user interface for input/output/routing is to be redesigned, we should collect requirements.

JNif listed some above, so I'll start with those:
Send meters
  • Use channel names instead of 1/2, 3/4, etc.

  • Change send target

  • Copy or move send to another track

  • Easy way to compare sends on different tracks. User should be able to view sends of multiple tracks simultaneusly.

  • Multichannel/surround panning of sends


Dunno what else I need. I've gotten used to Reaper, so I honestly don't care much any longer.

__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.