My general impression about SC3

Scaler 3 General Discussion
1

Please forgive me devs if I speak blunty, but my general impression is that SC3 doubled (or quadruplicated, or even worse) the number of clicks/processes needed for everything, even the simplest things

That, added to the several GUI items difficult or impossible to spot/read, makes the upgrade not very inspiring to me :roll_eyes:

3 Likes
2

It feels like they released it a bit early and that they have been taken by surprise by the number of users who wanted features that are not yet there (Sync being one of the biggies). But if there is one thing we know from Scaler 2 it’s that the development of Scaler 3 will be ongoing and will bring many big improvements and additions over the next few months and years.

I just hope that Davide and the team can keep their sanity over then next couple of weeks because we can be a demanding lot…

I’m currently using the trial version and when it runs out I will probably hold off buying S3 for at least few months. I’m very much in the groove with S2 and S3 at present does not bring very much more to my particular party. I may end up upgrading to S3 on iPad, where the multi-track stuff is more useful to me and the UI layout makes more sense, and sticking with S2 on PC.

2 Likes
3

Hi - I’m seriously interested to understand why the sync model is considered better than the arranger model in Scaler 3. Can you unpack that for me?

1 Like
4

Sync was just one example and this is probably the wrong thread to discuss it but, since you ask:
It Spreads the CPU load
One click stem mixdown
Access to DAW built-in FX (this is a major one for me)
A more comprehensive mixer
Sidechaining
Instrument combining/stacking

S3 now effectively contains a “mini-DAW” but it can never be as comprehensive or flexible as the mixer in a full-blown DAW.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great addition to S3 but it’s not always the best solution.

The other reason Sync is important is for Ableton users due to the shortcomings in Ableton’s MIDI implementation.

3 Likes
5

Another reason is auditing: testing various combinations of patterns and plugins in the arranger is just impossible, because if you change the idea about the patterns/instruments in a track you must delete the track and remade it: a big waste of time and patience

2 Likes
6

I am also dissapointed that a sync option is not implemented as an alternative and was also hoping for a way to route midi like unify can, maybe it will come.

1 Like
7

Davide has already said that sync is coming. I’m certain other stuff will follow just like it did in Scaler 2.

8

Thanks for that, it’s helpful to understand the different workflows people use Scaler to support.

I have predominantly used Scaler in Logic in the past but, since picking up a Move, have been increasingly doing things in Ableton - and struggling a bit with the midi implementation.

I have been really enjoying the arranger in Scaler 3, but I tend to use it to pull together ideas, or build out an idea from the Move, and then drag the midi into Ableton tracks to progress…

9

Yes, indeed, always useful
I also tried a no-DAW workflow, and I was close to it thanks to Cantabile Solo, but it doesn’t swallow my UJAM guitars, so I was forced to come back to Bitwig, one of the few able to sand-boxing plugins, so virtually unsinkable

10

I’d agree with some of this… and for sure, take what I write with a grain of salt, as most folks seem to love the new release… and note that I haven’t read the manual yet (as the colouring is difficult to read and the ‘headings’ and other structural elements are often missing.. and the diagrams are sometimes unclear)… but anyway…

The interface design is sort-of confusing and almost unusable, specifically:

  • The ‘Chord Set’ is a ‘double-selector’ of sorts, in that if you don’t use the ‘1 octave keyboard’ selector, the ‘section’ selects both chords AND key, so for that functionality, it’s sort of in the wrong place; maybe you want to play something in a specific key.. but as soon as you go away from the keyboard selector, the keys are changing in the ‘Chord Sets’.

  • Many will see the ‘all black’ interface as ‘cool’ but it’s often unusable, as it’s not easy to discern the object ‘dividers’; this means exclusive radio button options are not clearly different from what should be checkboxes. Basic theming is something that needs to be incorporated fairly swiftly.

  • In a similar vein, some objects that select numbers are using left/right ‘buttons’ (as “<” and “>”) when selecting octaves.. .but the tempo selecting is a click’n’drag thing… AND is vertical instead of horizontal.

  • The ‘pages’ (tabs) (in particular) and the interface (in general) needs more ‘tool tips’ or actual labels so that people new to the application don’t have to ‘press a button without knowing what it will likely affect’. The labelling of ‘tools’ is again, pretty ordinary throughout the interface. The ‘add’ (‘+’) button in the ‘Arrange’ ‘tab’ is unlabelled and who knows what it does? …until you tap it…

  • More on the ‘add’ in ‘arrange’… The concept of a ‘motion’ is inconsistent and confusing. In ‘arrange’ it’s like another ‘voice’ or ‘track’ in the ‘arrangement’, the sound for which you can only change within the ‘mixer’… but when working with the ‘Main Track’ anywhere in the interface, a ‘motion’ is actually an articulation, how to play the notes and is not a separate track.

  • Basic interface design is wanting too.. in that in some cases you have to click’n’drag an object to a space.. but in another place, you need to double-click on something to make it ‘stick’.

In short, the ‘physical usability’ (not the ‘musical usability’) of the application is really pretty ordinary.

4 Likes
11

This was my takeaway as well. Tooltips are critical for this UI - there are so many buttons and gizmos that I really did not know what I was clicking on.

Took me about 15 minutes to figure out how to add a track in the arrangement area.

The main tabs are also a huge disappointment. Tiny unintelligible icons with no textual elements at all. I really have to study these to “get it”.

Lots of fine tuning to be done to the UI if this is to gain some long-term fans

S

1 Like
12

There are tooltips, but the option to turn them on is hidden in the Settings → Preferences panel.

13

Yes thats good news, Davide and the team are usually very receptive to the community.

14

Yes, but that option cannot be saved, so the next run it is OFF again

1 Like
16

And - why should I need to “turn them on”?

This should be ON by default and let the user turn them off if it becomes bothersome.

And as Claudio Notes - if this setting is not saved - it is essentially useless.

S

1 Like
17

I think the tooltip setting is included in the presets so if you turn it on, “save as default” then never recall a preset it should stay on. But it makes no sense for it to be stored with the presets. And, yes, it should probably be on by default.

1 Like
18

Another bizarre “save as default” (that seemingly occurs all by itself) is the use of a third-party plugin in Standalone mode if the user - god forbid - decides to save a Preset.

See here for my challenges on Wednesday:

Scaler 3 Standalone Crash Report - Keyscape VST3 - Scaler 3 Support - Scaler Music - Community Forum

Not only did I not know about “save as default” - this scenario REALLY expands on what gets saved “as default” - so much so - that I still cannot open Scalar 3 standalone without a hard crash.

S

1 Like
20

Not to sound stupid but how do you increase the size? I have looked everywhere but no luck. With the 3 screens or sections on top of each other the general size is difficult for me to see. I may get use to the workflow if I could see it.

21

If you mean increase the size of the window, you just drag the corner of it. Hover over the corner until your pointer turns to arrows and then drag.

22

I tried that but will try that again. Thanks a bunch.