Komplete Kontrol has conceptual "flaw"?

nightjar

I wonder if others feel there is a conceptual "flaw" in KK?

KK started as a companion app for hardware KK keyboards... and limitations of the display found on these Keyboards dictated how the GUI of the computer app looked and function...

But the reality of most users workflow is that the GUI of the computer app is PRIMARY, and the display on the KK keyboard tends to be secondary.

This misstep between the products original concept and the reality of the products true usage has hampered the development of the KK computer app. It should have a far better GUI for searching and displaying results at this point in its existence.

Does this seem logical to others as to why things have been so slow to get better?

The display in the hardware has had a choke hold on KK?

JesterMgee

There are many flaws/limitations in KK (and many things). We all hope that some day at least some of these things we have all been raising for the last 7 years will be addressed, but hey, this is NI and they move at a different pace than everyone else.

I can agree as I use the GUI App 98% of the time and actually rarely use the keyboard screens to browse as it is just faster with a mouse. We know it needs to display more presets (especially when a small GUI plugin is loaded and you see only 3 presets in the list), there needs to be better search/filter capabilities, there should be a "random" feature, there should be a more detailed favourite/rating system and there should be the ability to search/group BOTH factory + User library

But it is what it is and all this aside, compared to how I would approach finding a preset sound and mapping out my workflow 10 years ago, it is a Huge improvement. Would never not welcome more functionality but have certainly been pleased with what it has been able to do. I don't believe it fully lives up to the "Komplete Kontrol" name it has other than the Komplete bundles instruments, but I am still digging it for sure.

nightjar

Thanks for the added thoughts...

It seems NI acknowledged this problem by introducing the A series keyboard.. omitting the display was not just a cost-cutting measure, but a step away from how they had chained themselves to an awkward issue.

With the S-series keyboards, has NI been trying too hard to keep some sort of unified "code and graphics asset" for misguided developmental efficiency? Should they instead invest in a bigger effort to have each environment (hardware display and computer GUI) have less dependencies on each other?

I don't know if this is actually the case.. but I can't think of any other reason that NI even designed the terrible GUI of KK other than it being too developmentally connected to the hardware display.

If so, can this conceptual flaw be fixed by investing in a new "code and graphics asset" approach to KK development?

And is this perhaps already happening?

JesterMgee

Sounds like you are a programmer?

Not really sure what you mean, the way it all works (IMO) is pretty good, the browsing from the keyboard is fine especially when scrolling through sounds in a library and the image assets as you refer, are fit for the purpose and I have zero issues with that, just as usually is the case not as fast as using a mouse and keyboard with a full screen of info to take in. like comparing playing a FPS using a joystick vs keyboard/mouse.

In reality I think in terms of GUI/Browsing, from the hardware there hasn't been much complaint at all as it works just as intended and is pretty slick really. The main points of complaint are simply in the KK window not being sizable and thus having limited browsing available in it and of course the limited filtering/search options.

omitting the display was not just a cost-cutting measure, but a step away from how they had chained themselves to an awkward issue.

Nah, I pretty much feel it was purely cost cutting in an effort to make a cheaper model to reach a wider audience. Komplete Kontrol (software and keyboards) are really designed to make the aspect of using NI instruments and expansions more appealing, the fact it also works with some 3rd parties is a bonus too.

The biggest thing you miss with the A/M series (bigger than the graphical browsing) is efficiency in workflow since you cannot see what any of the controls are until you touch one. The screens make this way better on the S series and as someone who owns an S series MK1/MK2 and an A series I can say the S Series MK2 is the best for workflow out of all of them followed next by the MK1 and finally the A series.

nightjar

I just think some lead designer had a vision of what KK should conceptually be (most users using the hardware display as primary), but reality proved different... most user lean much more heavily on the GUI of the app to access their NI libraries.

This miscalculation (if it is truly so) may need to be addressed on the deepest level of product development.

JesterMgee

Well KK was kind of built on how Maschine already worked, just focus on the library browsing. When it initially launched it didn't even have screens, just an LCD strip and the browser was an OSD browsing window which didn't offer any extra benefit over just using the keyboard/mouse since you had to be in front of the monitor.

The screens do offer extra usefulness in browsing when you are not in front of a mouse and keyboard tho so not sure the focus was some kind of misdirected vision, it is really no different than loading sounds using a hardware synth with a browser and simple OS on it. Compared wo "working in the box" it will always be a little less efficient. I only use the GUI side more because I have a mouse/keyboard in front of me but if I pull my S61 slide draw out all the way to do some proper work then I am often a little far from the screen and mouse, so then the screens come in useful and for the most part I have no issue using the keyboard browser.

What is the actual issue you experience?

nightjar

No particular issue.

Just curious to knowing more about a factor that might be slowing down KK development.

The User Experience of the KK app is so fundamentally far from optimal that I am convinced some factor had to take priority over the UX.

Best guess is accommodation for the hardware display.

RedwardMc

Disagree, the hardware screens are great. I have different issues with KK/Maschine.

nightjar

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/7591#Comment_7591

I'm not saying hardware screens aren't great.. I'm glad they are there.. That's not the point I'm making at all.

Instead.. has NI linked the graphics element development of software for the hardware screen & app GUI too closely together?

Kubrak

@nightjar wrote:

 has NI linked the graphics element development of software for the hardware screen & app GUI too closely together?

Is that important? To user....

KK works quite OK. Sometimes I use KK, sometimes HW displays. There are things, that could be improved on KK (like Jester has mentioned), but generally it works OK. It could be bettter, as well as almost everything could be better. In ideal world.

nightjar

KK app has terrible User Experience in its most fundament purpose:

To search and display preset options.

Why did it start out on such a wrong foot?

It needs more than an incremental change to correct the core problem of usage.

Thank goodness that NI took a bold approach with the upcoming Native Access... KK app needs this same re-examination of its purpose.

JesterMgee

Just curious to knowing more about a factor that might be slowing down KK development.

macOS

Seriously, every 6 months they have to patch things for that, or Logic. It would be a huge reason for part of the lack of development. Also, VST3. I am sure much of their spare time is testing things out for that. Probably also a thin team of developers, changes in direction and management and simple red tape. All gets in the way.

I am still not clear on exactly what you have issues with that make it such a failed product in your eyes. "To search and display presets"? How so, I can search or filter. Sure it has been noted that functions like "exclude" a tag from a search would be great but I tend to have few issues when I want to find a sound or change to a new one. Comparing to all other ways I have done this in 20+ years, including Akai Advance, it is the best system I have used in all that time and can only hope it gets better is all.

It needs more than an incremental change to correct the core problem of usage.

Which is what exactly? Explain it in a simple "when you try do this, that happens instead" way. What is something you do where the observed outcome differs from expected?

nightjar

Something glaringly obvious is to have the search filters arranged in adjacent columns rather than vertically stacked....

See IKmultimedia's SampleTank as an example.

JesterMgee

But apart from satisfying ones personal feeling about a layout, what does that serve to really improve anything other than making things orient a different way? It's hardly anything major. Had you mentioned something logical such as being able to exclude tags from a search or filter searching based only on specific types then that is more sensible. The way the Type/Character tags are oriented is something you just adapt to. There are far more important things than how tags are laid out, I personally have no problems with this as it is.

nightjar

UX analysis starting with the most fundamental first step.... layout..... is EXACTLY how deep the rethink needs to be.

That's indicative of the critical point I'm suggesting.

Nothing else means much until the basics get fixed.

JesterMgee

Fair enough man…