Actually Nick, I have to disagree.

The user experience is what should drive the design of the interface and such.

Thomas, Manuel and I all agree on the awkwardness of the visual representation of the waveform. By being "different" than other DAWs does not make it better. In fact, it causes an unnecessary need for the user to reconceptualize what they are looking at.

Survey users and potential users ...

Thanks,
Darryl

The lack of a standard waveform display is the only thing holding me back from buying Hindenburg. Honestly, I know exactly what a breath looks like in a standard wave, and I've been editing in that graphical environment for decades. I'm sorry, but I would have to edit my files in a separate editor to see what I'm doing, then mix in the Hindenburg UI, which I otherwise like very much. Would much rather do everything in one application.

Hi,

The waveforms are rectified by design. There are a number of reasons why - but the main reason is that you get more information about the audio than you do with traditional waveforms.
If you make a side by side comparison, then you will see the difference.
This makes it easier to see, for instance, breaths.
It might take some getting used to - but there is a thought behind it.

Best regards,
Nick

Agree! It should have an option to change waveform view to something similar as Audition, Audacity, Dira or Netia (as this áudio editors are using the same waveform). This would make áudio easier to edit, cut and paste.