Labels in Patch

We should chat about this in person, but for the sake of anyone else reading this. I think the logic makes sense. I'm sure all this is arguable, but...

If I'm in Channel Format and I remove an address I'm saying what is attached to this address is no longer the output for this channel, so the channel label is preserved as this is the item I'm concerned with.

If I'm in Address Format and I remove a channel I'm saying this channel is no longer the control point for this address, i.e. the label still applies to the address but not the channel.

Dan

I'm with Jane on this one.

At each new move of a tour the quickest way to remove the patch for the last venues dimmers is to be in address format. The fact that this removes the labels for the channels is really annoying because labeling the channels is really useful.

You could set up a group in channel format to remove any address but there's a good chance you've added extra channels in some venues for workers etc etc. Clearing out the house universe is the safest way to go.

One of my tours was complaining about this last week.

Nick

I understand what you're saying Dan but I guess it depends on context.

How many users permanently have Patch set to address format rather than channel format, are more interested in referencing the address label than the channel label, and would therefore prefer to keep their labels with the addresses if unpatching? (That's a question, not a supposition). 

Who, other than touring shows, needs to unpatch whole universes at a time - people in receiving houses doing a different show every day/week? I'd be interested to know if there are the same amount of people out there who would be annoyed if it changed to always keep the label with the channel as there are with the way it works now.

Or it could of course be only me and Nick who are bothered! 

Thanks,

Jane

A very good point!

As we discussed yesterday, I think this may be one of those cases where what is actually very logical and consistent is not actually helpful with the way a certain feature is being used.

I guess if 90% of the time it would be desirable to keep the label with the address then this is probably a change worth pursuing.

Cheers

D

A very good point!

As we discussed yesterday, I think this may be one of those cases where what is actually very logical and consistent is not actually helpful with the way a certain feature is being used.

I guess if 90% of the time it would be desirable to keep the label with the address then this is probably a change worth pursuing.

Cheers

D

I agree, although surely you mean "keep the label with the channel"? Or have I misunderstood you? :-)

Indeed I do!!

I'm with Jane and Nic on this one, and would love to not lose any Label information.

I think that taking this to the next level would have a data import from Lightwright allow a map of something like a truncated Purpose (or any chosen text field from LW) go into the Label field on the console.  This way you could readily change the label and/or have a backup if needed.

SB