| || |
totally agree with this one.
pattern names and "live tweaking" adds much to the overall usability of the product.
you just enter your notes, you do basic tweakings, then you could switch to machines, and record all the subtleties you need - just like in buzz.
we had a discussion with Jaz on whether present tweakings are good or bad or live tweakings are good or bad. my point, i suppose, that they are both ways good when they are both implemented so you may twk twk twk if you're a hardcore tweaker or you could "livetweak" if you like it or you could even mix your approaches, finding more suitable ones for your particular need.
imagine big reaktor synth with like 150 parameters. now imagine tweaking 30 of them - that's VERY possible situation - testing which knob maps to which number, then going to pattern, then entering numeric values. it would be a real pain in the arse. recording that value to the pre-selected track (just like in Buzz) could save shitloads of time.
again, guys. i see that nowadays psycle has all the basic features it should have as a usable tool. now i see that the rest is usability issues and interface problems, and they should be fixed first, not just another "implement this / implement that". if we have flexible keyboard shortcuts, for example, everything could be re-mapped to suite your personal tastes, but what if we just simply don't have those shortcuts at all ?
the message is, "first - usability, then - everything else". if automation saves time, why not implement automation (sample browsing, vsti tweaking, keyboard shortcuts - you name it)
Last edited by frown on 22.12.2001, 17:56 o'clock.