UI of M50 Software

[newtonlkh]

I've given up using M50 Editor because the page layouts are quite similar with what we've got on board, the same complicated page system... To me using the software don't speed up things much...

Does anybody think so?

Is there any guys who can program a new software for that? Maybe we can come up with ideas of a better UI collaboratively....

Newton

[Moonshine]

What kind of software would you prefer then? I think the software both in M50 and in the editor is very logical and easy to use. The menus are simple and it's easy to locate different things.

[outsider9]

I would like just a couple things:

1- In the arp programming part, the grid and dots are ridiculously little, almost making it impossible to program arp patterns by pointing at them. Just make them bigger.

2- It has been reported before, and I have this problem too: in many popular DAWs (such as Cubase, Pro Tools, FL Studio) when you change from Seq page to any other page and go back, program in channel n°1 will reset to A001. This happens in the VST and RTAS version. Standalone is ok.
Also, in Reaper, VST works fine.

[guillex]

I've given up using M50 Editor because the page layouts are quite similar with what we've got on board, the same complicated page system... To me using the software don't speed up things much...

Newton

I am absolutley agree with you...I've started editing the sounds only in the M50, not with the editor. The reasons:

1- I have 24 inch screen, and the editor looks so tiny...dont become bigger with higher resolutions...I have also onother flat screen of 19" and the editor looks the same, good but small....Why not to use a full resolution? Will be really more practically than nowadays..

2-The editor is not very comfortable to use for me because of the TABS system that they are used to explore each "page" of each sound... I dont like them, I prefer more scenes...

3-The Arp Programming mhhhh sucks....

ANYWAY THE M50 ITS STILL A GREAT DEAL!!!!!

[adamskii]

IMO, I thought the editor was next to useless. I wasn't too keen on the layout of the M50 editor software, it would have been alot better if they kept the same layout as the M50's touch screen. Also, I found that some features were missing from the editor software, compared to the M50's touch screen.

[newtonlkh]

i think a UI similar to modern-day softsynths are better
if possible, there should only be a few pages, and the important parameters are all within that page

a matrix-style modulation grid is also prefered!
at least by me!

newton