While running a loop:
- long press next part to get mixer
- long press exit to change exit button to lock
- press lock
- press exit
The third step is redundant. I’ve already done enough with the long press on exit to indicate I want an action to happen, just lock the track at that point. There is no need for the additional press.
As a separate point (I should probably put this as a separate post, but I feel the above leads on to it), the buttons all seem incorrect for the mixer anyway.
- next part (which is just another way of saying “select part”) in loop display mode as analogous to select in mixer mode (although I accept it’s “select track”) They’re crying out to be the same button.
- long press on next part to enter mixer mode should be balanced with long press to exit mixer mode.
With the two changes above you free up a button on mixer mode and get a more consistent UI. Long press on left button toggles in and out of mixer mode. Short press on left is always select (of something).
Middle button is freed up in mixer mode. If it were me I’d have it cycle though the function of the right hand button. That function cycle would be:
- mute/volume. Right button then toggles mute, and wheel would be volume control (as it is now)
- lock. Right button then toggles lock
- pan (predicting the future). wheel then controls pan. Right button could cycle through pan modes (analogous to volume mode cycling though mute/unmute), left-middle-right.
- input source (predicting the future). Right button then cycles through inputs for track. Main L, main R, main stereo, aux L, aux R, aux stereo.
- output dest (predicting the future). Right button then cycles through routing for track (stereo main, stereo aux, left main, left aux, etc, as suits your plans).
Away you go Brennan… I’m sure there’s some reason why what I’m suggesting is wrong, it’s already perfect and it’s all part of some master plan. (Apologies for sarcasm in advance)
Edit to separate input and output routing.