Easier way to trigger "Refresh Current Preset" in the editor

Discussion in 'Wishlist' started by Quadfire, May 16, 2020.

  1. Quadfire

    Quadfire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2019
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Would be nice to have an easier way to trigger "Refresh Current Preset" in the editor. A keyboard shortcut? A button next to "Save As"?

    It's bad enough that there is no automatic two-way sync in the editor, make the manual version of this easier.
     
  2. slateboy

    slateboy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    226
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    uk
    Home Page:
    Do you mean reload what is in the AA currently or undo back to the original “saved” state?
     
  3. Quadfire

    Quadfire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2019
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I mean "reload what is in the AA currently" which is what happens if you go to File and click Refresh Current Preset.

    I can also see the benefit of a button to "revert" the preset to saved.
     
  4. Jay Mitchell

    Jay Mitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The two tasks y'all are griping about are already simple to carry out.

    Refresh: As above, select the "File" pulldown at the top right of the editor screen and then choose "Refresh Current Preset."

    Revert: select another preset - any other preset - than the one you've edited and then answer the "Discard?" query with "yes." The preset you're on now is restored to its saved state but remains selected. If you really want to change presets, you've got to select the other one a second time after you discard your edits. This works the same with the device UI.

    It's a bit much IMO when having to click your mouse twice is seen as as an excessive amount of effort.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
  5. Quadfire

    Quadfire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2019
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    TLDR; What is obvious and easy for some might be hard and beyond annoying for others. A multi step process with waits is not as simple as a single press. The more you use it, the greater the pain. User's preferences, needs, and tolerance of complexity vary.

    This is probably a trivial fix that has little downside to those who don't need it. Automatic refresh would be even better, but it is not trivial.


    Yes, those are the steps to trigger refresh (and revert) actions today. There are multiple clicks, delays, waits for screen actions that display menus and dialogs, and the need to reposition the mouse multiple times to click on these items displayed.

    It also sounds like we agree that there might be simpler, more direct ways of performing these actions.

    The main issue is related to whether or not the current design is good enough and the problem is a large enough hassle, right? Perhaps this works better under Windows with a mouse than a MacBook with a trackpad?

    Great UI designs usually consider a range of personal preferences, working styles, tasks, use cases, and personas. Some users have two hands free; some have one hand holding a guitar. Some users have mice, others have trackpads. New
    users, power users, and casual users have varying needs, understanding, and proficiency. Tasks vary from one-off to repeating the same task repeatedly.

    There's an industry standard of adding alternate mechanisms in UI's for exactly this reason. This includes menus, buttons, and keyboard accelerators (command shortcuts). Many people find these distracting, overkill, and unnecessary, but they are invaluable to others.

    The current design might be simple and effective for you and others. That doesn't mean there are other preferences and needs; that some small changes would not have a big impact.

    It maybe more effort to debate the severity of the issue than to just fix it. Clearly a small button can be added to refresh (or to revert). Keyboard shortcuts night be harder (but are supported in JUCE). Very possible the bigger cost for Atomic would be to prepare and ship a new release of the editor; the code to fix this issue might be trivial.

    I get that this may not help you much. Can you accept that it might help others?

    A better, but technically challenging fix would be to have seamless two way refresh (sync) between the editor and hardware. This is what most users expect and are surprised to discover and accommodate. Let's not go there in this thread....​
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2020
  6. Jay Mitchell

    Jay Mitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    18
    That depends entirely on the specifics. "Personal preference" may have nothing whatever to do with a UI design. Think aircraft cockpits as one example.

    Do you presume that having a "great UI design" ever was or will be a high priority for Atomic's codewriting? If so, you might be mistaken.

    I'm defending nothing; I am pointing out that it is not broken, i.e., there is a straightforward way to accomplish the tasks in this thread. I'd add that there are functional considerations that I personally would prefer take priority over additional development of the editor. When I'm using the AF, most of the time it's not even connected to the editor.
     
  7. Quadfire

    Quadfire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2019
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Very likely there are higher priority items to fix/improve. The fact that a function operates as designed or is not a blocker doesn't mean it can't be improved. Perhaps it's a case of ain't broke, don't fix. These arguments could be applied to most wishlist items.

    Adding a button or shortcut seems simple and IMHO worth it.
     
  8. Matt

    Matt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2017
    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    28
    If you are connected to the editor why would you be twisting knobs on the unit itself?
     
  9. Quadfire

    Quadfire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2019
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Because:
    • Switches and knobs are easier and more direct than using a computer one handed (with a guitar around your neck).
    • Even though I know I need to stick to just the editor or the unit I find myself hitting that button or tweaking that knob on the unit.
    • I'm setting up footswitch settings in the editor and need to test/tweak them repeatedly on the unit ... and see their changes in the editor. (This was pretty tedious)
    I suspect most people are pretty surprised the AA editor doesn't automatically sync. Making it easy for them to manually sync is a cheap way of addressing this. Command shortcuts and buttons are a standard way of making UI's faster for repetitive use cases. JUCE supports both buttons and keyboard shortcuts.
     

Share This Page

Share