no doubt the Disk browser and Track scopes are vital, however I’m wondering if it is necessary to have Masterscopes and spectrum view accessible permanently on the main interface (it could be possible to groupe these, ie have just Disk browser, and Scopes > track / master / spectrum).
Please vote on the poll to show how much you use these 3
This is an attempt to simplify the interface and make it more user friendly.
Also, if anyone has any suggestions about the rest of the interface (things that dont seem vital on the main interface) or could be grouped to make things more ergonomical
I can understand that some people use the track scopes for muting/soloing, but once the mixer gets implemented these things should be done with the mixer.
if I need a scope of the master I use the oscilloscope plugin from dfx, the scope view is not useful. I never use the spectrum-view at all, I cant get any information from it.
Let me ask you guys something: What do you use the Track Scopes for?
If you use them only to solo/mute tracks, could the mixer view with such functions replace these scopes?
The scopes give you a complete overview of which tracks are active and if they are active, wether the instruments do play or not.
So not only for mute/unmute but also a bit of bugtracking (Why is that note of that instrument triggered, but does not produce any sound?)
Please do not remove the trackscopes.
The stereo-scopes are only usefull when checking specific panning operations.
But i won’t see any reason why the level meters couldn’t do the same.
The spectrum analyser i never used.
If it could be transformed to produce a static image to snapshot a specific area selection or even arranger selection range for overall frequency analysis, then i might use it for mastering / mixing.
Also, the frequency range indication lacks the specific end-value above 12K.
What does it supposed be 14, 16 or 20 Khz?
Trackscopes gives me a nice overview to quickly solo/mute tracks without changing any views. And I often click the trackname in scopes when I wanna jump to a track.
I couldn’t use Psycle more than a few months because it lacked trackscopes. I really need them in trackers, they are my only REAL overview when tracking or/and listening to tracked work. Collecting XM’s and watching them in FT2 was a nice little hobby of mine, only keeping the tunes I really liked. Limited my collection to a gig or so.
But, on topic, I never use the spectrum analyzer. Though I feel I should.
Oh, and O.T. again, nice to see you posting again, Celcius.
I always use track scopes. The master scopes are also useful, but for me personal I don’t need the spectrum view. I liked the vu meters in the old version more.
Hmm, seems like i’m the only one which likes the spectrum view until now. I’m mainly switching from Trackscopes for muting to Spectrumview to place sounds within a given frequency range with a filter. Also the Spectrumview reacts very fast compared to eg. Voxengo Span.
If the Spectrum View was more similar to SPAN I might use it, but right now, IMHO, it’s not very useful.
Also, about the Track Scopes: I noticed that muting/soloing the track(s) puts the tracks on OFF, not MUTE. I’d much prefer to have them on MUTE, since then the before-triggered sounds could be unmuted somewhere in the middle.
Since i don’t have studio monitors, i use the spectrum view to make sure i don’t have any unseemly and obvious frequency peaks. It’s not OVERLY useful but it does assist quite a bit when all you have is shit headphones. I do wish it had better resolution and the ability to focus on certain frequencies. As it is the highend gets all bunched up and you get the low/midlow spread out so far it’s hard to get a consise comparison at a glance.
I use the trackscopes all the time. They give me a visual representation of the activity on all tracks, though i might be inclined to say i’d appreciate some kind of vertical bar that show the peak out rather than the oscilloscope.
