Rate of improvement

Basically I haven't been doing music for more than 2 years. I come back to the Maschine, do an update pretty excited, and just get pretty much the same experience as 3 years ago. Even the user interface graphics are still low res and pixelated, I have a feeling like using a piece of software from Windows XP days.

In 2 years since the introduction of realtime audio stretching, that is still not as useful as what you can do in Kontakt, nothing to get excited about. This makes me feel like I chose the wrong platform.

I hope this is not offending to you NI Team, it is just my experience.

 

This is not really a feature suggestion so I am moving this to the main Maschinen forum.

 

Pixelated? Weird. I keep hearing people complain about that, but I don't see it. Are you using a large format display on windows 10? Have you messed with scaling at all? Maybe look into that, as it's constantly changing on the windows platform, and Microsoft often messes it up, causing people everywhere to blame various vendors.

Are you expecting the GUIs on pro audio products to look like pro graphics products? I keep hearing people complain about "low res" GUI, but everything looks perfect on my windows 10 system @ 4k on a 32" BenQ. Maybe it's just my screen? Who knows. Good luck!

 

For where it is and where it's heading please see:
https://www.native-instruments.com/...-komplete-kontrol-development-updates.420727/

 

Huge update dropping this year, plus plenty of new features since 2 years ago...now is a great time to.

GUI looks fine on my 5k iMac.

 

Not having a fully scalable GUI which is particularly suitable for 4K screens is probably the number one complaint made against almost all NI plugins if you look outside these forums.

 

Presumably many of these companies typically focus on pure audio and work flow issues, as well as major GUI and control issues first, and then minor issues like dpi scaling later, especially when the external environment(win, Mac, Nvidia, AMD, desktop scaling and protected a/v paths, etc) is fluctuating so much.

I suppose I'm just so used to my "low DPI" 32" 4k at 180dpi that I don't notice, lol. Yeah lots of people complaining about dpi scaling on numerous vendors' forums. Most of the comments are basically apocalyptic. "THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE IN THE YEAR 2020", etc.

 

PMSL but they do have a point, a lot of companies are really dragging their heels on this and even on 1920 x 1080 some GUIs are almost unusable.

 

Im sure. We should pull the corporate charter of those companies for this offense. Or, more likely, we should have them reallocate the dev resources who are currently working on song mode, or the next controller, or whatever, to DPI scaling.

 

I have a feeling that even by the end of next year we will still have almost illegible GUIs ... meanwhile we are even beginning to get 4K on YouTube.......................

 

Depending on which vendor ecosystem you engage, you find different assertions made about 4k, in general.

On the ISP side, greedy providers want you to think OMG 4k IS SO MUCH WORK FOR US, so you have to pay for data packages that disconnect cost from service rendered or business cost.
On the streaming service side, OMG 4k IS BLEEDING EDGE TECH give us some time to update our content and secure licensing from studios!
On the GPU side, since the bitcoin fiasco, OMG 4k GPUs ARE SUPER DUPER PREMIUM and should cost a premium, too.

On the pro audio/DAW side? OMG 4k IS ANCIENT TECHNOLOGY AND YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED.

Weird, right? Everyone in each ecosystem has these disparate opinions about 4k rendering and high DPI(separate but linked factors), which is happening because the industry tried to handle the transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160(4096 × 2160) very differently than it handled the transitions from other older tech. Some companies tried to hang on to the "OMG BLEEDING EDGE, BRAND NEW" reputation of 4k for the potential profits. Others are rolling their eyes and recognizing 4k has been around for a LONG TIME NOW, lol, and should be far more standardized by 2020 across ALL ecosystems and vendors.

 

And a large barrier and ongoing problem in the 4k, especially 4k HDR world and 4k UHD BluRay side, is Intel SGX and their attempts to force enclave computing as a post-production change to many platforms. Intel Secure Guard has caused MASSIVE adoption and support issues for 4k, and there were many people who LOST THE ABILITY to decode 4k and 4k + HDR streams and UHD media on their desktops due to 1) SGX changes and 2) spectre and other vulnerabilities related to the rushed, stupid adoption of SGX and SGX philosophies.

Does anyone follow any of this? This process of securing and creating a protected A/V and general data processing path has caused *major* issues, and for 2+ years now. It affects games, desktop apps, physical media players, etc.

 

Different strokes for different folks.
Does the appearance of Maschine change the aspect of getting work done?

With all the things that could be improved to make Maschine better the GUI is pretty low on the list of actual user return.
What's the point of improving or changing the appearance if you don't get the much needed real improvements?

I'd take a more functional ugly Maschine over a pretty 4k version that's still missing major features.

 

If one has to pick between functionality and looks of course functionality is a priority, however, if it's bad to the point things are hard to read then it's a functionality issue in my book, I have this issue in both Windows and Mac. The more you scale the more pixelated/fuzzy the text gets, especially small text like the tags; if you dont scale at all than things are sharp but uber tiny and affect your whole OS, unless you use a 50" TV instead of a monitor you'll need a magnifying glass to use it... Some people seem fine with it tho.

The difference between the OS icons/text and Maschine is huge...


IMO As long as it's not a nonsensical request then whatever the majority wants should be the priority, those are the people who buy things and allow the company to exist in the first place and High DPI is one of the major requests.

How does the data required for 4k Video, decoding or high-end GPU prices affect simple software GUI's tho? In the sense of not wide-spreading 4k?
In Audio it's just different sized PNG's or it's vector-based, neither of those things has Video/3D issues... it's still light.

 

Why are those images so tight?? Are those for people who put their faces 1 inch from the screen??

Here is how my 32" 4k screen looks, from my space about 2 feet away where I sit.
EDIT: err, my image is blurry because of my phone cam : /

 

It isnt about the data, or even the tech. This is a game of economics and of technological dominance over the ecosystem.
Frankly, 4k was ready in 2007, but costly. Ive been onboard with it as a preferred display spec for a long time now, and Ive spent a loooong time dealing with these vendors, Intel, Microsoft, ASrock, etc, to try to manage the 4k stuff as it pertains to gaming and 4k (UHD) BluRays.

This all overflows downstream into pro audio GUIs because the changes being made to that tech cause microsoft and other OS vendors to also react. Then, all the vendors who publish on those OS'es also have the issue, as they wait for the higher level vendor to fix or adopt something new.

Steinberg is eating it right now, and they've finally admitted it -- they cannot recommend hyperthreading for all users of cubase 10 any longer, and I have that in writing. This is because of microsoft + intel making decisions unilaterally that affect all other devs. Microsoft has told Steinberg "tough", and will not provide support for expanding or re-prioritizing the multi-media multi-threading limits placed in win10. This hurts Steinberg because of their particular signal processing pipeline, and its high integrity and precision.

EDIT: I forgot to mention -- current data shows only 8% of computer users have 4k screens. This slower adoption, which is the result of all these bs games being played by other higher level vendors, has slowed down overall rates. Developers, and VPs of engineering, CIO/CTOs, look at these numbers for guidance on what to put their teams on.

 

Sure. In gaming 4k is a major issue, not even a 2080ti can deliver 60fps consistently in AAA games with max settings and it costs an arm and a leg, I understand that however, all the applications related to the GPU's, overclocking / management, intel crap etc... all have HiRes GUI's, you're saying the inability to have high FPS make those companies make low res applications? They dont tho... this is where I am confused, well perhaps motherboard software, those are always horrible. The tech challenges that affect 3D, HDR, 4K video, etc dont affect GUI's afaik, but I could be wrong.

Both Intel and NVIDIA were always infamously Anti-Competitive, Anti-Consumer, Anti-Technology companies, sure... Intel is now paying the price for it, finally...
TBH As a user and customer, I dont care what the devs have to deal with in the backend of things, "XYZ company screwed us and its a lot of work" is not an excuse.

Lol. IDK... Thats a fair point tho, it looks a bit worst than IRL.
I guess it was because on that pic i was trying to show there's a difference between Windows and Mac, being that Windows looks a bit better.

 

Hardcore gamer here. Love me some games. =P Sorry this is so long. I have a hard time summarizing this.
I get 60 FPS @ 4k with my 1080ti in about 80% of games. The games that go under 60fps, I just run at 2k which looks really good. I wont buy a 2080 for a bit. Maybe wait until 2-3 more generations.

Na -- what happened was Intel SGX was turned on a few years ago, after PAVP, in many cases POST PRODUCTION (surprise!). First, to try to keep people from pirating 4k HDR movies. Then other applications could also use enclave computing. Vulnerabilities were found. (Specter, etc)

Then this affected gaming, which suddenly lost the ability to do HDR on PC until windows10 updated a few things. Then you had to buy an iGPU or have an embedded Intel 6000 series GPU to play back 4k HDR movies on PC, or buy a standalone player. HDR came back for games after a windows patch in early 2019.

Desktop DPI scaling, as well as desktop HDR, was caught up in this at that time. Your taskbar icons were blurry all the time lol. (remember that? You would go to fullscreen and then back to desktop, and half the icons in your taskbar would be blurry messes because of how windows was doing DPI scaling.)

Also -- data caps from ISPs cause people to think twice about streaming 4k content to their homes, if they are on a budget. You need a powerful, multi-core router/switch at home, as well, if you plan to run a couple screens for a few people who live there, and you need a stable connection to keep it looking nice.

The chaos in this environment over the last 5ish years has caused the average non-tech user to have a really tough time playing back 4k HDR movies on a PC, which inevitably slowed down people adopting 4k screens, which slows down a range of vendors from making 4k stuff a high priority in general. The tech could have been standardized, pushed out to all devices and OSes many years ago, and it would have been more like the adoption of 1080p. But some vendors wanted more control, and more profits....

 

Rendering a gui and rendering a video game are not even remotely the same thing. It's not like people are asking for ray tracing, enhanced shadows and complex particle geometry here. DAWs are like 99% static dots and menus. It's not rocket science.

That said, I run two 32" 2560x1440 monitors and machine looks fine to me. I don't want some GUI that is so artistically enhanced that I can't tell what parts are interactive and which parts are static. I've seen plugins where I had to click around because I couldn't tell what was adjustable and what was just for looks. Annoying.

The toolbar area at the top of the screen could use some updating to match the rest of the UI though. Or at least follow windows 10/mac OS design style, but it's not like it's the part of the screen I'm working in anyways.

 

No, rendering 3d and rendering a basic GUI in desktop applications are certainly different things, but the point was that a whole ecosystem of vendors and a whole list of umbrella issues exist, often not even technical issues, which caused 4k adoption to be slower than rates seen during other transitions to new tech.