1.When I drag and drop, the chords always turn into augmented chords instead of being placed inside the box. It’s very unpleasant. Scaler 2 handled this very well, but Scaler 3 doesn’t.
2.Scaler 3 cannot easily input chords. For example, when I input common chords like G/F or G/B, it doesn’t work, and I have to search for them. In this regard, it’s not as good as Ezkey2. With Ezkey2, whatever chord you input is exactly the chord you get, which is very convenient, and the chord voicings are very reasonable.
3.I don’t see any difference between open voicings and guitar voicings. When I enter G/B and choose Voicing, B is no longer the lowest note. This issue exists in Scaler 2 and hasn’t changed to this day.
Can you give an example of what you are dragging and dropping? Hard to understand what you are doing there?
Do you have ‘Show Bass Inversions’ turned on Preferences? Maybe that’s why you are not seeing a X/X (bass inversion).
Voicing Profiles are intended to re-voice the chord. We are replacing Open 1 and Open 2 with more traditional Open Voicing profiles which should help differentiate it further from the Guitar Vociings
1. I originally wanted to make a tutorial video. But I didn’t. Because the difference is very obvious. With Scaler 2, you can accurately place or overwrite chords when dragging them. But with Scaler 3, when placing or overwriting chords, a vertical line often appears, and when this line appears, it adds a chord in the wrong position. It’s very uncomfortable. I have to operate in the top-right area to be accurate. Scaler 3.0 has more features, but its tactile operation is not as good as Scaler 2. I won’t make a video; this issue is obvious.
2. I enabled ‘Show Bass Inversions’ in the preferences. However, after voicing the chords, my BASS no longer inverts. This issue exists in Scaler2 and still hasn’t been resolved.
3.But open voicing and guitar voicing are the same. No matter which one I choose, it’s the same. Since they’re the same, why are there two?
For a C chord, when I choose open voicing,
it is C G C E.
For a C chord, when I choose guitar voicing,
it’s still C G C E. Since they’re the same, why distinguish between open voicing and guitar voicing? Or am I misunderstanding something?
Hey @swingmix
Im not sure I understand your point on 1? It’s very nice to replace or add the chords. I really like the mechanism in Scaler 3. Not sure I have heard anyone else have any issue with it. See below.
As for 2, as I mentioned. The Voicing Profiles are set. Please don’t use them if you want to use your own voicing.
3. Yes as I mentioned in my previous posts we are changing the Open Voicing profiles in next update. Look out for them!
If you are using Cubase returning to start after hitting stop or after hitting play in the transport console is not the usual behavior. For that you would have to make a macro that does that when hitting stop/start. Cubase make things harder sometimes .
Yes. Replacing and adding chords is very convenient. But there’s still a tactile issue with the software operation. When I drag and drop chords in Scaler 2, it feels very solid and doesn’t make mistakes. However, when I drag and drop chords in Scaler 3, it often replaces them instead of adding, and vertical lines can appear.
I’m really happy to see that the Voicing section will be updated. Is it possible to keep our own chosen root note while selecting Voicing?
so many times I will have a progression in the main track in the arranger page. I will click to make a change and the whole progression will disappear!
I think this from the original post nails the issue. Intricate, powerful and relatively complex software requires the MOST delicate, creative and deliberately intuitive software to be successful and loved. The interaction between man/woman and machine is an art - I know because I have designed many systems (some more complicated than S3) and probably the greatest effort for success is to get that interaction as close to spot on as possible. (As usual cost and time are often key factors that work against this desire). For what it’s worth if I was in a room for 4/5 days with the Scaler team we could redesign the frontend and make it a winner!
One persons trash is another persons treasure. We must note that Scaler 3 is a huge success and is building on our decade of work. It has won every possible award since release. Every review we have had has praised the UI, from Sound on Sound to Music Tech to Attack Magazine. Every major YouTuber (Sanjay C ‘I give it 10/10 for the UI alone’) praises the UI.
I chose what I consider to be the world leaders in this specific field to design the UI for us.
I get that some people don’t think the UI is great and that’s cool - but assuming we didn’t use an UI team for this specific and complex project is naive.
Ok, I appreciate the response. I’m not happy with the word ‘trash’ - in fact I implied (more than implied actually) that the application is ‘Intricate, powerful and relatively complex software’. That said, over the years, I also noted that those that build the software - their ‘baby’, often come to a strong defense whenever criticism is discussed, Rather than statements like ‘One persons trash is another persons treasure’ and ‘I get that some people don’t think the UI is great and that’s cool’ which don’t really help - why collect the views since the release of 3 and maybe have a think about the possibility of improvements? That would be a win win wouldn’t it?
.