What's Happened To the ReGroove Mixer?

[Creativemind]

I would argue that it's called the ReGroove Mixer. OK, there's no hardware equivalent of a ReGroove Mixer but it is called a "Mixer" so would argue that the parameters on there should look like real mixer faders and parameters which is what the old one looked like. I suppose it all just boils down to personal preference but for me that old one was Meghan Fox and that new one, well insert whichever actresses name you deem as not very attractive lol! (sorry for girls add Tom Hardy instead of Meghan Fox lol!)

[Creativemind]

I haven't noticed but will check later. Is that Funkey D a sample pack or VST?

Hey Creativemind - Funkey D is a FSB ReGroove patch in the Vinyl folder. Just tried it again now. Light OFF = Funky. Light ON = NO Funk! I'll try them on virtually anything... I preferred the old ReGroove - cheers, Jamie

Thanks!

[Creativemind]

The new Regroove mixer is a sneak peak (to test the water) of the design format which a new updated sequencer will replicate in terms of look I reckon.

I'd bet money on it.

I hope so and don't at the same time. If the sequencer get's this treatment it will be even worse lol!

[Creativemind]

It's not just an aesthetic choice, it directly impacts workflow. For example, there is no way for a user to see that Sweeper has multiple filter modes, because the filter menu looks like a static printed label on a device which otherwise uses "real" knobs to change the parameters.

Yes, I've only just noticed actually that Sweeper has parameter design inconsistencies. Why is the top part "very nice!" and the bottom part, well, flat and crap? or Ableton looking.

Sweeper.PNG (123.4 KiB) Viewed 2254 times

[guitfnky]

because it’s a f%#ing computer program you’re looking at on a 2d screen. it doesn’t need to look like a 3d piece of trash.

[jam-s]

I must admit, like with Blocks (is that even still a thing?!) I hardly ever use ReGroove.

I use blocks all the time to sketch out the basic sections of a track and then quickly arrange them via the sequencer. Sometimes it's just a single block which contains all the elements and just gets the right tracks muted in song mode and some FX and extras sprinkled on top.

Some recent examples:
* https://demozoo.org/music/282434/
* https://demozoo.org/music/294381/
* https://demozoo.org/music/298134/

ReGroove on the other hand does not get as much use, but when I work with MIDI drums instead of Rex loops I also use it for some additional swing.

[joeyluck]

It's not just an aesthetic choice, it directly impacts workflow. For example, there is no way for a user to see that Sweeper has multiple filter modes, because the filter menu looks like a static printed label on a device which otherwise uses "real" knobs to change the parameters.

Yes, I've only just noticed actually that Sweeper has parameter design inconsistencies. Why is the top part "very nice!" and the bottom part, well, flat and crap? or Abl;eton looking.



Sweeper.PNG

Aside from making those flat elements look like they are on displays, what it does it help break up the device so it's not just a bunch of knobs—it draws your eyes to the main controls. That and all the controls shift around with each effect type, so the entire thing should probably be a display...

[chaosroyale]

Yes, I've only just noticed actually that Sweeper has parameter design inconsistencies. Why is the top part "very nice!" and the bottom part, well, flat and crap? or Abl;eton looking.



Sweeper.PNG

Aside from making those flat elements look like they are on displays, what it does it help break up the device so it's not just a bunch of knobs—it draws your eyes to the main controls. That and all the controls shift around with each effect type, so the entire thing should probably be a display...

I've explained 3 times now and still nobody gets it!! The problem is inconsistent design language, not "flat vs 3d".

To use sweeper as an example, again, the filter type control is just typography, and it has no logical connection to the flat "display" or the 3d "hardware" used on the device. This kind of random mixing of conventions/paradigms is used on other devices too.

[chaosroyale]

because it’s a f%#ing computer program you’re looking at on a 2d screen. it doesn’t need to look like a 3d piece of trash.

Then why make 80% of the device look like "3D trash"? Shouldn't they re-do everything as fast, easy-to-render flat designs? That would probably be better than the weird mix they have now. And they would still need to fix their design paradigm; even a flat design needs to show you which parts of the typography are just typography and which parts are active parts of the interface. Right now there is no way to tell the difference.

[guitfnky]

because it’s a f%#ing computer program you’re looking at on a 2d screen. it doesn’t need to look like a 3d piece of trash.

Then why make 80% of the device look like "3D trash"? Shouldn't they re-do everything as fast, easy-to-render flat designs? That would probably be better than the weird mix they have now. And they would still need to fix their design paradigm; even a flat design needs to show you which parts of the typography are just typography and which parts are active parts of the interface. Right now there is no way to tell the difference.

it looks nice the way it is unless you’re worried about “inconsistencies” that don’t mean anything. even the OP “only just noticed” this so clearly it’s not all that important—even to some people who purportedly care about such things—unless we’re looking for something to complain about.

you’ll notice I put the word inconsistencies in quotes—because I have no doubt RS graphic designers are well aware that they’re borrowing from real world and software designs. the only place it’s inconsistent is in certain people’s minds. again, it’s software—insisting it has to look like a real device OR a piece of software, and not both is silly.

[Creativemind]

because it’s a f%#ing computer program you’re looking at on a 2d screen. it doesn’t need to look like a 3d piece of trash.

So you could argue why are films the way they are, watching them on a screen, may as well watch a stick man cartoon lol!

[guitfnky]

because it’s a f%#ing computer program you’re looking at on a 2d screen. it doesn’t need to look like a 3d piece of trash.

So you could argue why are films the way they are, watching them on a screen, may as well watch a stick man cartoon lol!

not sure what point you’re attempting to make here. films have used both 2d and 3d to great effect since forever. have you ever seen Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

[orthodox]

I like this one:

[EdwardKiy]

So you could argue why are films the way they are, watching them on a screen, may as well watch a stick man cartoon lol!

not sure what point you’re attempting to make here. films have used both 2d and 3d to great effect since forever. have you ever seen Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

I have. In Who Framed Roger Rabbit the cartoon aspect is expertly drawn and matches the overall narrative, it's not a stick man cartoon, like the ReGroove mixer would be in this analogy. That was the point Creativemind was trying to make, I believe.

I'd rate the current one 1/10, mimicking Ableton (which looks dated) but is, in fact, much worse, because
1) in Ableton it's drawn expertly
2) in Ableton you can pick-and-match the colour schemes and resize any element - it's customizable
3) Reason one looks like the lowest possible effort drawing - poor visual separation with poor contrasts. It feels like a "whatever, this will do" kind of job.
4) it DOESN'T match the overall narrative of the DAW ("feel") like it does in Ableton where the key word is "efficiency"

[guitfnky]

not sure what point you’re attempting to make here. films have used both 2d and 3d to great effect since forever. have you ever seen Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

I have. In Who Framed Roger Rabbit the cartoon aspect is expertly drawn and matches the overall narrative, it's not a stick man cartoon, like the ReGroove mixer would be in this analogy. That was the point Creativemind was trying to make, I believe.

I'd rate the current one 1/10, mimicking Ableton (which looks dated) but is, in fact, much worse, because
1) in Ableton it's drawn expertly
2) in Ableton you can pick-and-match the colour schemes and resize any element - it's customizable
3) Reason one looks like the lowest possible effort drawing - poor visual separation with poor contrasts. It feels like a "whatever, this will do" kind of job.
4) it DOESN'T match the overall narrative of the DAW ("feel") like it does in Ableton where the key word is "efficiency"

cool.

[avasopht]

Consistency can be broken when it's unpragmatic or conflicts with more important objectives.

[Ottostrom]

Just wanted to flag this: is anybody finding that when the Re-Groove mixer light is ON - ie. orange, the groove is in fact OFF?

I've only tested this on channel A1, because I have FUNKEY D on some Drums on A1, and they become considerably less FUNKY when the light is ON...

Finding this a bit puzzling, TBH

Cheers,


Jamie

Searched this thread to see if anyone else had pointed this out already.
Who the hell decided that it would be a good idea to indicate that the groove channel is OFF by having the ON button be lit up? The overall design difference doesn't matter that much to me but this change just doesn't make any sense.

[helmutson]

I like the new look, hopefully the whole DAW get that look asap ... in HD

[EpiGenetik]

I understand the style argument that is being made by some, but the old ReGroove looked extremely dated. The new one is far easier on the eye.

[david1806]

I had not even noticed. Just had a quick peek and indeed, the Groove panel is...flat.

Couldn't really give a toss either way, to be honest. Is there anything else that has changed so dramatically?

[Creativemind]

not sure what point you’re attempting to make here. films have used both 2d and 3d to great effect since forever. have you ever seen Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

I have. In Who Framed Roger Rabbit the cartoon aspect is expertly drawn and matches the overall narrative, it's not a stick man cartoon, like the ReGroove mixer would be in this analogy. That was the point Creativemind was trying to make, I believe.

I'd rate the current one 1/10, mimicking Ableton (which looks dated) but is, in fact, much worse, because
1) in Ableton it's drawn expertly
2) in Ableton you can pick-and-match the colour schemes and resize any element - it's customizable
3) Reason one looks like the lowest possible effort drawing - poor visual separation with poor contrasts. It feels like a "whatever, this will do" kind of job.
4) it DOESN'T match the overall narrative of the DAW ("feel") like it does in Ableton where the key word is "efficiency"

Yeah number 4, it now (with quite a lot of things not just graphics in Reason) is inconsistent in it's graphical design. You have beautiful looking instruments / devices like SubTractor, ReDrum, Thor and Kong and then this. Also think 3 is on the money too.

[Creativemind]

And yet, the overwhelming majority still prefer the new look. Wow!

I know, I don't get it. I can barely look it I find so damn ugly. If I ever do move back to full time Reason from Reaper, I doubt I could use it. I'd just want to use it as quickly as possible and move on. If they adopted the same design for the Main Mixer I think I'd sell Reason.

[Creativemind]

Eh, I'm not too hung up on absolute realism. None of those issues stop me from using or enjoying Mimic. There's always a little suspension of disbelief, if that's the right term to use. Like, what's the hardware equivalent of a drop down menu? Why aren't we using rotary encoders to select everything? What kind of Tardis magic is the Combinator?!

Furthermore, "looking good" should never be understated. It is one of the most important elements of not only marketing but also user satisfaction. And it shows, in classic instruments and tools. Really well-designed usable UI's are also timeless and good-looking, because the rules they follow are pleasing to pattern-seeking animals like us. See the thread on the MiniMoog UI for a really nice example.

Yeah it's one of the major things Reason has going for it. Great gui.

[Stamatz]

I would like to know if the on/off light on the regroove mixer will be fixed witht the next update. Can anyone confirm this?

As it stands now, the mixer is enabled when the light is off and disabled when it's on.

Unless of course that's is how it was meant to be.

[Oper-8]

Ouch, it's really ugly indeed ! And the On/Off colour scheme is a total nonsense. I don't know how they take their new design decisions... So right now, we have three types of visual aspects within the same program :
- a new HD design for devices,
- a flat, barely readable ReGroove Mixer,
- a Tool window left untouched.
I don't know what their plan is actually, but if they want users to stay on board, they should really think about how not to destroy everything, and maybe test their stuff before release, or really ask users what they think...

@joeyluck's suggestion to move the settings from the Tool window to ReGroove's empty area is excellent, by the way !