The Look

Looks and feels great.
I still find it a pity that the volume correction of the Room EQ is not included in the snapshot. It very much should be imho.

Georg

https://gifyu.com/image/bw8Xf

Great, thanks.

The legacy design fails in anti-aliasing for the knobs. The knobs now have a zig-zag look.:(

Would be cool, if:
1) One could "collapse"/restore FX&Snapshot panel on right side. Would be usable, if one needs to see only faders and needs to minimize screen space TM takes.
2) FX&Snapshot panel is also resizable together with the rest. (If I recollect right, Mac users also suggested that.)

Well my graphics card is to old, Radeon R7 200 series. Cascading errors, Funny thing is if I install the basic microsoft display driver, TMFX works, but I can only have one monitor (I have 3).

hi everyone. will this version work with the old hdspe aio card ?

We think this (100% scale) can be improved  (see 200% scale as example) in a future version.

The "Disable mouse wheel operation" option has no effect. Bug?
TM Icon in the taskbar looks low resolution.
TM is really nice and modern looking now.
Thanks!

Brilliant news!  Testing with Madiface XT (lots of channels).

Initially I thought the horizontal scroll bar active controls were tiny, until I realised you can just grab the bar anywhere and drag it.

If I am being picky:
- I do think the scroll bars and therefore the row labels are pretty tiny.  It doesn't matter to me but to a new user learning TMFX they might miss the significance of the row labels
- I think having a higher gamma for text generally, and especially in-channel text would be a good thing.

The general contrast of the bitmap TMFX is spot-on in my opinion.

Interesting, here both dont work. What graphics card do you use?

I encountered a small problem.
I loaded a workspace with quickselect and one of the outputs provided no sound and also the meters in totalmix of that output channel showed no signal.
I had to move the fader of the input channel that feeded the output channel a little bit back and forth than the signal got routed through.
The workspace was created in 1.9 but was already saved in 2.0 before.

Edit: I just noticed that I also had the old totalmix running in the background, maybe it was because of this....

yeah agreed...contrast needs work...better able to distinguish numbers on old TotalMix.

This needs to be reviewed please...
Also ive noticed some pics in this thread show channels of different colors...how do you do that..cant find an option for that..apart from that it is generally an improvement..Thanks

For such a high amount of channels, you have the scroll bars like before in TM FX 1.x.

Additionally you can make use of
- Options -> Channel Layout to hide not used channels and
- use up to 6 different Layout Presets per workspace to recall different views on different devices / channels

So you could use one view for all used channels, with or without using color.
And special views for example to see only the connected/used ports or all available ports used and unused.

This can reduce the amount of channels that is being displayed nicely and then it is much likely, that you get an overview about all channels.

Otherwise you need a bigger screen or need to use the the native resolution of the screen to get more space / pixels.

@RAMSES;

Whats the setting for getting those colors on your channel strips, like post nr. 3?

gr. Marcel

The same, like in older version to get coloured fader labels. Select Change Channel Layout and set colour desired. In new version not only label, but the whole faderpart gets set colour.

I agree, it is very hard to see, which output is selected.

Maybe, make an orange borders of that fader section could be solution. Or any other color of the rectangle.

I think you shouldn’t use too many colors; otherwise, it ends up looking like a parrot and visually overwhelms the eye.

You already know which submix you’ve selected, and you can always read it if needed.

Have you already tried setting the Brightness Correction in the Preferences (F2) to “High Contr.”?
It improves text readability.

Instead of adding more colors, I’d suggest trying that first—and maybe asking RME
if they could use pure white instead of light grey for the labels.

Even before TM FX 2.0 people had issues understanding the basic concept of TotalMix
and I am pretty certain, that the color won't change it.

Additionally, a beginner starts with a fresh factory setting without any color.
So, the color is of no help in such a case.

And later, if you are more experienced and discover colors in channel layout, then you know where to look at.

For those reasons, I think it is a bad idea. Too much color is counterproductive.

> I use Hi contrast and it is not very clear which submix is selected.

What kind of monitor do you have? I thought I had a problematic Full-HD setup here, but I was able to fix it by making the TM FX window a little larger than usual to have more pixels available for vector scaling.

Otherwise, I don't understand the problem. You should know where to look at, to see which submix is currently active, or you can restore it via snapshot or workspace. A selected submix is for me clearly visible.

Now I understand. Yes, the color seems to be making the highlighting of the output channel unclear.

@tzzsmk: use the Names option.

Then it seems to be monitor dependend or how lit the room is. This issue I do not have.

Well, sure, it my deped on many things. Monitor, room lighting, way of use of coloring in TM by user and user´s sight. But simply, if one uses colors and there are is at least one fader, that has neihbouring faders of different color, it is way more hard to see the selection of that fader. That should be valid for most cases.

The change in brightness is not so high, that one would recognize it easily. One cannot compare it with neighbourinf faders of the same color (there are none) and comparing brightness to other colors is not easy and straitforward.

Maybe, after some time, one could get acustomed/trained and be able to see the difference more easily.

IMHO, it should be adressed in some way, or it will create confusion mainly between new users. More stress on user support, more questions on forum how to do routing...

Sure, but if one likes it colorized (I do like new feature) and has individual faders of distinct color, the selection is very poorly visible. That is case.

Sure, one may solve it by not coloring faders, or using the same color for at least two faders side by side. But it is user limitation, not overall solution.

But sure, I can live with as it is now. I just wanted to focus developers on thing that they have not tested. Or they have very bright sight. My guess is that they have tested it mostly/only with multiple adjacent faders of the same color. In that case, things work fine. One may directly compare the brightnes against faders of the same color.

OK. That is another example, where the visual problem arises.

I guess, from MC reaction, that RME has not been aware of that undesired sideeffect of adding coloring. Hopefully RME will try to address it somehow.

But as I said, I may live with the state as it is. Improvement would be appreciated. That is what betatesting is for. Programmers usually do not test all usecases. Firstly it would take hell of time/resources, secondly (from my own experience) users often use things way developer do not anticipate. So, they do not test such cases because simply only certain usecases come to their mind.

I do not complain, I just point out, this was probably overseen. It is clear to me, it easily happens when new thing is added.