@Boingy It’s such a BUMMER that I’m not able to side-scroll in Studio One 4.5 on Win10

I can solve this. everyone is wrong except me.MannequinRaces wrote: ↑04 Aug 2019Oh man threads like these are cringeworthy, lol. A small minuscule portion of the Reason user base arguing over who is right and deciding who Reason should be developed for. Get over yourselves people. Go make some music.
Haha, I think there won't be enough features in R11, just like R10, and everybody will complain. I hope I am wrong!boingy wrote: ↑05 Aug 2019I can solve this. everyone is wrong except me.MannequinRaces wrote: ↑04 Aug 2019Oh man threads like these are cringeworthy, lol. A small minuscule portion of the Reason user base arguing over who is right and deciding who Reason should be developed for. Get over yourselves people. Go make some music.![]()
Now, please can we get back on topic.
The topic is not what you want in R11 or what you think should be in R11.
The topic is what you think WILL be in R11.
Yeah, something like that:
new users have nothing to do with the young/old debate (unless you define “new” as “young”).OverneathTheSkyBridg wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019Also regarding the earlier "old vs young" debate earlier in the thread: I think Reason would do well to consider the kind of things that seem to attract new users to platforms like Live and FL Studio in future updates. One of these things IMO is the tediousness of the Rack. Flipping to the back of the Rack is one more tedious thing you have to do to custom configure relationships between different devices. I propose having Rack wiring exist on the front panel, perhaps in a way where all patchpoints are on an extension on the right side of the device (think Behringer Neutron, Moog Mother 32) that can be cross wired without having to flip to the back. Make viewing this optional as well (by pressing TAB) and stick with the current auto routing paradigm.
Fairly speaking, it's time consuming when you have an instrument at the bottom of the rack that you want to flip and connect to the top of the rack when you have many instrumnets. Of course it is up to you to better organize yourself. But for me for example when I'm inspired I get very messy and it is after the energy's gone that I start cleaning up my work template.guitfnky wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019new users have nothing to do with the young/old debate (unless you define “new” as “young”).OverneathTheSkyBridg wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019Also regarding the earlier "old vs young" debate earlier in the thread: I think Reason would do well to consider the kind of things that seem to attract new users to platforms like Live and FL Studio in future updates. One of these things IMO is the tediousness of the Rack. Flipping to the back of the Rack is one more tedious thing you have to do to custom configure relationships between different devices. I propose having Rack wiring exist on the front panel, perhaps in a way where all patchpoints are on an extension on the right side of the device (think Behringer Neutron, Moog Mother 32) that can be cross wired without having to flip to the back. Make viewing this optional as well (by pressing TAB) and stick with the current auto routing paradigm.
rack wiring exclusively on the front panels is a terrible idea. it’s literally one keystroke to flip the rack—I really don’t see how that’s in any way “tedious”.![]()
Great idea.
And with Vilma's assistance in our rack this option is easy. Just speak into the computer and say: Vilma, split rack mode please dear.OverneathTheSkyBridg wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019Goddam Momo!
One of these things IMO is the tediousness of the Rack. Flipping to the back of the Rack is one more tedious thing you have to do to custom configure relationships between different devices. I propose having Rack wiring exist on the front panel..
I agree. Sounds awful. The way it is now is perfectly fine and as if Propellerhead are going to change the whole rack paradigm that they've had in place for 19yrs, not to mention 400+ Re's that would need recoding and all the video's on You Tube that would then not be based on this new method etc etc
The way around long scrollings for wiring on the back of the rack would be (I read this from a different thread ages ago) to allow the use of the scrollbar at the right hand side when dragging cables long distances.owlymane wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019Fairly speaking, it's time consuming when you have an instrument at the bottom of the rack that you want to flip and connect to the top of the rack when you have many instrumnets. Of course it is up to you to better organize yourself. But for me for example when I'm inspired I get very messy and it is after the energy's gone that I start cleaning up my work template.
Just how in recent versions dragging and dropping an instrument and then effects or utilities for it automatically does the wiring, it wouldn't be a bad idea at all to have efficient shortcuts on the front panel![]()
sorry, I’m not following...the difficulty in connecting devices that aren’t near one another seems like a totally different problem than thinking it takes too long to flip the rack. if the connections were all on the front, but your devices were still the same distance apart, it wouldn’t save you any noticeable amount of time to drag the cable from point A to B.owlymane wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019Fairly speaking, it's time consuming when you have an instrument at the bottom of the rack that you want to flip and connect to the top of the rack when you have many instrumnets. Of course it is up to you to better organize yourself. But for me for example when I'm inspired I get very messy and it is after the energy's gone that I start cleaning up my work template.
Just how in recent versions dragging and dropping an instrument and then effects or utilities for it automatically does the wiring, it wouldn't be a bad idea at all to have efficient shortcuts on the front panel![]()
No I didn't say anything about having cables in the front panel! Like you said that wouldn't speed things up at all. More about finding a faster way for cables to route. Just like the recent drag and drop and automatic cabling since reason 6 or 7.guitfnky wrote: ↑08 Aug 2019sorry, I’m not following...the difficulty in connecting devices that aren’t near one another seems like a totally different problem than thinking it takes too long to flip the rack. if the connections were all on the front, but your devices were still the same distance apart, it wouldn’t save you any noticeable amount of time to drag the cable from point A to B.owlymane wrote: ↑07 Aug 2019
Fairly speaking, it's time consuming when you have an instrument at the bottom of the rack that you want to flip and connect to the top of the rack when you have many instrumnets. Of course it is up to you to better organize yourself. But for me for example when I'm inspired I get very messy and it is after the energy's gone that I start cleaning up my work template.
Just how in recent versions dragging and dropping an instrument and then effects or utilities for it automatically does the wiring, it wouldn't be a bad idea at all to have efficient shortcuts on the front panel![]()
what am I missing?
I do think the cable scrolling slowness is something that should be addressed though. certainly would be more helpful (and a bigger time-save) than putting connections on the fronts of devices.
That's also a good idea!Creativemind wrote: ↑08 Aug 2019The way around long scrollings for wiring on the back of the rack would be (I read this from a different thread ages ago) to allow the use of the scrollbar at the right hand side when dragging cables long distances.
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], eusti, Trendiction [Bot], WarStar and 16 guests