Maschine 1.8.1 Sample Edit Issue!

This seems to be what people are missing, we are specifically talking about the Sample Edit screen.
It's more to this than meets the eye, even using the mouse isn't as smooth as it was in 1.7.

 

sure, i understand your points and it is definitely down to a preference thing. maybe for some reason how it is now really suits my workflow better.

so, in 1.7:
from zoomed out... change start - oh it overshot where i wanted, zoom in, shift zoom out, scroll, change start again, oh it overshot back, zoom in a lil bit, shift zoom out a lil bit, change it really slowly, maybe shift+start to get it in place.

in 1.8:
from zoomed out... change start - ok it is in the ballpark, lets tidy it up. Zoom + Start. Bam on the transient! done!
occasionally, if it isn't on 0, zoom all the way in, move start to catch the waveform close to 0.
next chop!


to further clarify:
1.7 - smoother movement but took me longer to dial in the setting. we are talking lots and lots of turning the knobs. lots of back and forth

1.8 - using zoom + start together gets you where you want to be in one twist of the knobs.
---
ok, i will keep the conversation just to sample edit mode.

 

I feel just the oposite. Maybe your knobs where tripping out but I used the same zoom + sample start in 1.7 just now on the same samples and got where I needed faster. Yes getting in the ball park was a little slower because it required more turns but dialing in the precise point was way faster and less back and forth. I never needed to use shift. I still agree that the other areas are a bit better with the knobs in 1.8

 

yeah i feel ya man. initially i was surprised that some of you dudes aren't getting into it but after thinking about it, you are right in saying there needs to be some kind of switch or sensitivity control so users can dial in exactly that kind of responsiveness they want, otherwise this wouldn't be under contention.

but for other users out there, i reckon you should at least give it a go and play with it to see if you end up preferring it like i did. its so easy to dismiss a change as a bug when it might actually work for ya. i'm guilty of that sometimes, myself!

 

We are doing exactly the same thing we did in 1.7 and it sprints like a race horse.
If you zoom in it no longer jumps it just makes you turn the encoder a millions times just to move a small amount.

It really has nothing to do with the zooming since even when you zoom in the behavior is unusable.
This is far beyond preference itr's a broken function.

I will say it again if 1.8 is working better in the Sample Edit screen then you have something wrong with your encoders.

I had to make a video for NI Tech Support showing them a different problem and I had to used the mouse so they wouldn't have to lose time watching me fiddle with the sample points.

 

Yes, exactly...thank you

 

i dunno why you'd think that? if you use 2 knobs at the same time and each have their own sensitivity, then you can dial in the exact setting much easier. it is like saying 'humans would be better if they just had one arm. then you could do everything with 1 arm instead of 2. way easier huh?'

it doesn't make sense to me

not trying to be argumentative here - so pls don't get me wrong.

my encoders aren't broken, but i do like the way it behaves a lot better now. ghost: i'm not suggesting you zoom all the way in to move the sample start/end points, i'm saying that if you use the zoom and the start/end knob together then you can move the marker very precisely. and its all in the fingers. instead of having to do like 10 turns of the knob, you can literally be at any level of zoom and dial in exactly on a point without needing to twist more than once.

---

and also, this is just how it is in sampling > edit mode - which is what i use to get the rough cuts of 16 bar loops or whatever for further slicing.

when you go to sampling > slice > edit - the encoders behave as they used to, or at least, it feels great for refining my slices. THIS is the time when you can use 1 hand on the encoder and one hand to hit the pad you are editing. so you will get the precision with 1 knob when you are actually slicing.


---

doh, this is what i get for stirring **** up on the forums! dropped my masch right on the cable, broke the usb connector off inside. the gods won today

 

That's the wrong screen and wrong function.
We are talking about the Sample Edit screen not the Slice.
It's when you are editing the points on a sample
Start and End Points
Loop Start and Loop End Points

This is the screen that acts insane.

 

yes, that is what i said in that exact quote!

 

no worries iiiii I know you're not being argumentative I'm glad you're chiming in on all of this.

in your example about 1 and 2 arms I think you're looking at it from the perspective of having two arms makes doing something easier, but when it comes to the sample editing, it's more like this example…. imagine if you were handicapped and only had 1 arm, then how would a manufacturer serve you better, how would they make the maschine you're using easier….
that's how it used to be in 1.72, now they've taken something that was easier and made it difficult for a 1 armed person to use.
before you could audition chops and do other things with the other hand, now you can't.. in addition to the fine tuning bug it's a workflow step backwards.

 

truth. i can see that. i have only done slicing on smaller samples but it appears that the slicing page is the same as it was before. i might end up doing more slicing and less duplicate pad/start/end type chops.

once i repair my masch ;(

 

repair , what happened?

 

This is what makes it so crazy the Slice page is pretty much business as usual, it's the Edit page that has this new issue of scrolling. :S

 

Wait, so you are saying you like the slice screen for refining your slices? So you agree that It's better lol. This is exactly what we have been saying. We are using edit for chopping. We want it just like the slice screen is now. Sure the edit screen is good for getting it into the ball park or as you put it "rough cuts" But that is long winded to start in the edit screen and then going into the slice screen. Why not just do the whole thing in the edit screen. All my chopping is done manual in the edit screen using trim and duplicate and I need a precise cut the first time.

Sorry to hear about your Maschine.

 

I like the old way much better, made the user feel like they had more control over fine tunimg the sample. Please look into this NI.

 

You know what is funny about the bug is that there has been no acknowledgement of it by N.I to my knowlege. No apology nadda. If you have a forum on your site you should be involved not just sometimes but the majority of the time especially when there is a release of new software and hardware. Seriously who could be that busy to not say "Hey guys sorry for the incovenience we are working on a hotfix for this problem just give us a second." It's like they sit with popcorn on these forums and watch us speculate on everything instead of addressing the topics at hand. This bug seriously sucks.

 

If you report a bug to NI they respond and let you know if they can duplicate the problem or if additional information is need to help them recreate the problem.

The perspective is that if you are experiencing a real problem that needs their attention you will use the Technical Support Form.

http://www.native-instruments.com/en/support/contact-support/tech-support/

I understand what you are saying but we have to remember to use the right method of communicating with NI.

 

there is NO way this is better, i dont have to zoom to edit my points right, i like the option to but i dont want to be forced to. this forces me to zoom. which hinders the work flow.

as for using the computer to help out, that would help but it just makes it a longer process to edit samples! smh at this! NI needs to fix this asap

 

The only thing that sucks about it, is that the fine tuning [SHIFT+POT1] is the same for a 0.5sec sample and a 6 minute sample. (works perfect in 0.5sec sample)
If it worked relative to overall sample length, it would be fine.
Besides that, I prefer the new way-for short samples it's perfect, maybe that's what NI had in mind

 

This is NOT a bug.