That's just it....I sometimes have all 12 cells controlled by one controller. I have taken a great deal of time to organize my workflow in this manner and have an automation feature i have written in cubase that uses this layout...So without a fix i esentially have to re-write all my presets and my plugin in cubase.

It is obviously not impossible to figure out what these percentages are, but it just makes things extremely inconvenient for me. If all the cells are equally subdivided, the task is quite easy...but if not, its esentially a matter of trial and error.

I just don't understand why functionality that was already present in the previous version has been removed. Like you said, it doesn't seem to be a difficult thing to add back in. Those whose workflows do not require this feature can simply ignore it.

All best,
-Ron

+1

Without the numbers, how do you set the same "switching threshold level" between different matrix/presets ?

Good point. When programming, It's always helpful to see settings represented by numbers rather than having to set control positions by eye.

Good point, I agree totally. It helps the workflow.

Herb , could you please at least explain why it has been removed?

IF it´s not a big deal, it would be nice to have the numbers back in an further update.

Thanx

Oliver

If you are using controller values to switch between matrix cells divide 127 by the number of cells and pick corresponding values for the controllers. I do this all the time.

I miss the numbers, also. It really saves an extra step and thought process which are easily multiplied when hundreds of such mental calculations accumulate and takes one's mind off more creative streams of consciousness.

I am curious as to why this feature was deemed unnecessary, because i've only found slower methods of working without it.

It occurred to me that the numbers might have been removed because they look a little intimidating to new users who haven't yet figured out what they represent. However, it's always frustrating when perfectly good features mysteriously disappear in an upgrade. I'd urge the designers to have the strength of their original conviction and restore this useful display!

Why not display "0<->127" values instead of % when CC are used ?

any word on this from Vienna??

For speed control values from 1-127 do not make sense, and for midi controller % values do not make sense.
It's only possible to display one kind of values, and I think
that's the main reason the programmers dropped the value dipslay.

best
Herb

Thanks Herb. I understand the conceptual difficulty, but still feel that when setting up thresholds it's more helpful to see numbers (albeit slightly meaningless ones) than to have no numbers displayed at all. Maybe a one-size-fits-all 1-127 is the way to go? (When applied to speed, we can pretend it means miles per hour.)

@Another User said:

When applied to speed, we can pretend it means miles per hour

... and obey the speed limit .... (sorry, *duck&run*)

didn't know there were speed limit when you're playing on your keyboard...



... sorry too...

I don't really miss the numbers.
Most of the time I'm working with a Midi guitar or a sequencer.
% does not really help if the original scale goes from 0-127.

[:)] Jovan

I think it should be a user preference. We could choose for example :

[] No numbers
[] Percentages
[] Values (0-127)

We get used to a specific way of working, then an updates comes out, features just disappear and we have no other choice than to comply and change our ways of working.

I think the best would be, if the VI developpers really want to remove a feature, to give "old" users the option to put it back on.

Old features that you turn on in a preference pane don't confuse new users, and they make long-time users happy. Everybody wins!

I understand the need for making your software simple for new users, but don't understand why this has to be done by penalizing long-time users.

Jerome

I'm a beginner at programming, but honestly, I don't understand why the programmers could not display the correct value related to the used controler.

Je suis bien d'accord avec toi !

J.

Hi Christian and Jovan, thanks for your comments. Forgive me if I'm labouring the point, but just to clarify - the main reasons why I need to see the H and V settings displayed as numbers are:

1. I can program CC commands (etc.) into sequences knowing in advance what values will trigger a switch, rather than having to guess where the switch point is.

2. It makes it easy to copy settings precisely from one instrument to another.

Strength in numbers!