Talk to other MIDI Designer users about MIDI Designer, iOS MIDI and related topics. Or share layouts, pages, and ideas.

Check out our Facebook Group.

Of course, if you want to send us an email, feel free.

New! Consolidated performance observations

NEW! Summary of user requests

MIDI Designer
Design your perfect MIDI controller for iPad, iPhone, and now on M1 Macs
Possible to implement something like "panel groups"? - MIDI Designer Q&A

Possible to implement something like "panel groups"?

+2 votes
asked Jul 18, 2018 in Suggestions by fretnomore (640 points)
The easiest part of this is the conversation about how this could happen, leaving implementation aside. But... how would this look in design mode? Where would you put all the panels?
Yes, it could be a problem. Some kind of layer select menu I guess, or an icon in the corner of the panel that rotates between layers?
All of these could work. For right now your main weapon is a page jump button that changes pages on the other side. That way you can sub out 50% of your layout. With control copies, you can get a bit closer to something that looks like a panel swapping (though this isn't as flexible). Thanks!
This suggestion is awesome and has been logged. No idea on timeline yet as it’s looking like a complicated piece (mostly because of the question, “where will you put the hidden panels in design mode?”)
To answer "where will you put the hidden panels in design mode" --

Make an additional six (hidden) pages per bank, pages 7-12!!

Hidden page 7 holds hidden panels for page 1
Hidden page 8 holds hidden panels for page 2, etc

These hidden pages would only be accessible in Design mode, but otherwise function normally.

==============================

Basically by creating an additional bank of pages, you're effectively creating an additional "buffer" that can be used creatively.  If I'm not mistaken (took programming classes but don't program for a living), the concept of "buffers" or "instances" historically has solved a lot of issues:

-- MMORPGs where players are spawned into zone "instances" to resolve certain common conflicts
-- synth edit buffer allows designer to tweak patch in volatile memory buffer but not destructively alter original patch in permanent storage
-- DOS and the old x86 issues of memory limitations, of apps crashing other apps, were solved by isolating programs into their own separate working space, or buffers
-- DJ Softcore that you interviewed discovered he needed a buffer of an additional 8-tracks to prep in his headphones, so he could "drop the beat" smoothly and keep the crowd dancing

Stretching the analogy to MD, having a buffer of 7-12 pages per bank might could solve some issues, as well as open new opportunities...

-- context-sensitive hidden panels that display only on certain conditions
-- "pop-up" info, like text instructions
-- label, text, and image swaps, for pseudo-dynamic pizzazz

Food for thought.
Thanks, that's definitely one way to go. Still... I don't see an extremely easy-to-grok interface coming out of the use-hidden-pages approach. The trade-off with MD from the get-go has always been simplicity vs. flexibility. Since Lemur is a very mature and extremely flexible solution, we went a very different way. Rumor has it we killed Lemur (or it died of natural causes? Or it's still alive?) along the way somehow, which wasn't in the plan at all.

Anyway, thanks for the thinking. When we get into large-scale feature adds in the future, this might come in handy.

Thanks!

1 Answer

0 votes

Not sure if this is 100% related to this request. I just started with MD recently and searched a lot here but didn't find something similar. I'd love a bit more flexibility in relationships.


1) the option to DON'T change the behaviour of the element when it becomes a Supercontrol (still does in parallel to be the "super" what he is designed for)

2) the option to hide a Subcontrol when the controlling Supercontrol is inactive - i.e. I just need to set a reverb level when the reverb is turned on

3) the ability to group some buttons and have just one active at a time without the need to set a hidden Supercontrol
answered Nov 21, 2018 by hape (170 points)
...