Different graphics for Multi-lane selection please

[joeyluck]

This is something I find that I struggle with, but also as I try to teach friends and colleagues how to use Reason, this is one of those things that comes up every time and seems very unintuitive. It's not presented in a way that you would know how to use it without a manual. And even when I know how to use it, I'm straining my eyes to focus on what exactly I'm looking at.

This is how multi-lane selection is presented currently:



What that shows is this:
- The top two are selected to be viewed in multi-lane
- The bottom one is not
- The top-most one is selected for editing

But also imagine that amongst many tracks. And in order for it to function, you have to click in those boxes with the triangles, or else you lose your selections. However, those boxes are not inviting to be pressed. By just looking at them, I wouldn't know what they are. I don't have to look in the manual to know what "M" or "S" does. And the representation of the automation button is helpful too.

I'm proposing a couple solutions.


OPTION 1: Graphics that resemble what you see in the sequencer



What that shows you:
- The color lines represent the notes you are editing (still using each track's color here)
- The grey lines are the 'ghosted' note lanes (like ghosted notes in the sequencer).
- And then the empty box is implied that you aren't seeing those notes at all


OPTION 2: Eye symbols indicating what you see



What that shows you:
- The color filled box with the open eye is what you are editing
- The grey box with the open eye is the ghost lane
- The eye with the strikethrough is the lane you don't see


What do you think? I think something could be done with the multi-lane edit selection to make it much more intuitive and I hope these inspire something. I like option 1—it's the most obvious and best type of representation IMO. I feel like you can look at that and know exactly what you're looking at and what it does.

[deeplink]

I must say, I struggle with figuring out where i am in the sequencer many times.. I actually avoid the sequencer as much as possible and work soley in sequences until I got an idea fleshed out

[joeyluck]

I must say, I struggle with figuring out where i am in the sequencer many times.. I actually avoid the sequencer as much as possible and work soley in sequences until I got an idea fleshed out

Are you referring to the Sequences player by Robotic Bean?

[deeplink]

I must say, I struggle with figuring out where i am in the sequencer many times.. I actually avoid the sequencer as much as possible and work soley in sequences until I got an idea fleshed out

Are you referring to the Sequences player by Robotic Bean?

I am indeed I have considered making the polystep move tho

[joeyluck]

Are you referring to the Sequences player by Robotic Bean?

I am indeed I have considered making the polystep move tho

Cool, well that's a good review at least for Sequences if you prefer it to using Reason's sequencer.

[guitfnky]

that is definitely confusing. personally, I like option 2, since it can’t get more clear than an eyeball to indicate whether it means you’re looking at something.

another infuriating thing with multi note lanes is that if you’re editing in one lane, that is NOT necessarily the lane you’ll be recording into. can’t tell you how many times I’ve been editing a kick drum track and ended up recording my kicks on, say, a crash cymbal track instead. definitely starting to see why many would like to see the MIDI editing overhauled.

[joeyluck]

that is definitely confusing. personally, I like option 2, since it can’t get more clear than an eyeball to indicate whether it means you’re looking at something.

another infuriating thing with multi note lanes is that if you’re editing in one lane, that is NOT necessarily the lane you’ll be recording into. can’t tell you how many times I’ve been editing a kick drum track and ended up recording my kicks on, say, a crash cymbal track instead. definitely starting to see why many would like to see the MIDI editing overhauled.

Yeah and I think the highlighting could use some help as well. It's either grey (not selected) or a slightly darker shade of grey (selected).

It's easier to see in my examples because they are small and simple. But when you have a big project and a track selected at the top, one selected in the middle, and another at the bottom...it's damn hard to see what you have selected

Overall I think the sequencer items could be presented better. Maybe something they will do with a graphics overhaul.

[Boombastix]

Agree with both of you. I often record on two channels by mistake cause you don't really see well what tracks are armed.

And the multi lane selection needs several improvements.

Besides the visuals your mention another problem is: if one of the tracks has notes in a different octave the multi lane is not very useful, your still have to sit and count your way and with no clear octave separation in the piano roll, it is very uninspiring.

[ProfessaKaos]

This is something I find that I struggle with, but also as I try to teach friends and colleagues how to use Reason, this is one of those things that comes up every time and seems very unintuitive. It's not presented in a way that you would know how to use it without a manual. And even when I know how to use it, I'm straining my eyes to focus on what exactly I'm looking at.

This is how multi-lane selection is presented currently:



What that shows is this:
- The top two are selected to be viewed in multi-lane
- The bottom one is not
- The top-most one is selected for editing

But also imagine that amongst many tracks. And in order for it to function, you have to click in those boxes with the triangles, or else you lose your selections. However, those boxes are not inviting to be pressed. By just looking at them, I wouldn't know what they are. I don't have to look in the manual to know what "M" or "S" does. And the representation of the automation button is helpful too.

I'm proposing a couple solutions.


OPTION 1: Graphics that resemble what you see in the sequencer



What that shows you:
- The color lines represent the notes you are editing (still using each track's color here)
- The grey lines are the 'ghosted' note lanes (like ghosted notes in the sequencer).
- And then the empty box is implied that you aren't seeing those notes at all


OPTION 2: Eye symbols indicating what you see



What that shows you:
- The color filled box with the open eye is what you are editing
- The grey box with the open eye is the ghost lane
- The eye with the strikethrough is the lane you don't see


What do you think? I think something could be done with the multi-lane edit selection to make it much more intuitive and I hope these inspire something. I like option 1—it's the most obvious and best type of representation IMO. I feel like you can look at that and know exactly what you're looking at and what it does.

Great idea and much needed. I always find myself trying to figure out how to view multiple lanes of different instruments at once and when I get it to work I still really don't know what I did to get it to finally work. The way it is at the moment is not inviting at all, I tend to steer away from it, trying to get it to work as it is total ruins momentum and vibe for me.

[joeyluck]

Thanks! Yeah I think another issue as I mentioned is the highlighting. There should definitely be more contrast or stronger indicator.

I've often moved, deleted, recorded over tracks that I did not intend to because I didn't realize they were selected. It's hard to view even with a handful of tracks. But then within a large project? It's impossible.