Three "Features" RM Simply Must Have

Quote from skoczy

I don't use similar names for folder here anywhere

what are you missing in these 4 points? how it is different from this iTunes?

1) user can create folders and nested folders
2) user can put rigs inside folders and any of nested folders
3) total number of rigs displayed after folder name should count all the rigs inside current folder as well as inside of all nested folders
4) the search scope is current folder and all nested folders (if any)

Yes you did. "Folder" and "nested folder." What you're describing is exactly how RM works now with the exception of the count and the search scope. You can create a folder. You can create a folder under any other folder (a "nested" folder). Right now, I believe there is a 2-level limit, which describes, to the T, exactly what you're discussing.

iTunes, Spotify, and, most importantly, every single computer's file structure does not work exactly like this, and this is why it's confusing. There are three essential parts to this, going from most specific to least specific:

1. Your rig. We all know what the rigs are - a file describing the rig and its settings.

2. A container for a set of rigs, a.k.a. a playlist (and that's what I'll be calling it from here out). In iTunes or Spotify, this works like the following video (a bit outdated but the idea still works):

Music playlist files, by the .m3u or .pls spec, are files that contain a list of songs that exist on your computer. For the .m3u spec and for more information, you can find out more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M3U We wouldn't need to use a .m3u file (or multiple) for playlists, because I'm guessing that Rig Manager stores everything in a SQLite database somewhere on your machine, but the concept is the same, regardless of storage medium. For the Kemper, the playlist would be a list of all rigs (instead of, using the iTunes example, songs) that exist in a certain location on your computer.

3. Folders. A folder should contain only playlists or other folders. Think of RM as a closed file system, where these are the only file types allowed. A folder, when clicked, should show the contents of all playlists within the current folder or in subfolders underneath.

But why should we never place rigs directly into folders?

With a playlist, you know the only thing it references are rigs. If you have folders containing rigs, and that folder contains another folder, clicking that parent folder gives you no indication that there is a rig on that main folder (which contains other folders). There is a clear distinction between what does what, what contains what, and how everything is handled.

For instance, in the current method, say you have Local Library/My Saved Rigs containing 3 rigs, and Local Library/My Saved Rigs/MBritt Profile Pack 1 containing 62 rigs. The top level folder (Local Library/My Saved Rigs) would display 65 total rigs. This is fine for simple browsing, but, if I delete the MBritt folder, how do I know what's left before I delete, without going through one-by-one? If I want to move those 3 out to a separate playlist, then I have to compare two lists to find the differences. Now, imagine you have 25 folders, each with a different count of rigs. Good luck finding which 3 rigs are on the top level.

The numbers add up properly when using playlists. For example, if you have 3 playlists with 50 rigs each, each playlist will display 50 next to it and the parent folder will display 150. You can find every rig very simply. Searching becomes much easier, as you click on the folder and search for everything within. Counting becomes simple as well from a coding point of view - find all playlists with this folder as a parent (or ancestor of some sort) and sum the count. You don't have to iterate through folders finding files with specific extensions any longer.

Finally, and, arguably the most important reason for this - by changing this structure, it makes it possible for your "Local Library" to reference rigs that may not exist in a playlist, and your "Local Library" actually becomes more of a complete library view, where everything you have lives there, even when removed from all playlists. Users can then choose how they want to approach their rigs - make tons of folders and be hyper-organized, to just use their "Local Library" and search, or use a hybrid approach - use "Local Library" for most things, and the most common things can be broken out into folders. "Local Library" basically becomes your complete local rig library, where, similarly in iTunes, the "Music" top level item is your complete local music library.

TL;DR:

• [ Local Library ] (1545) - clicking here displays all rigs, including the 10 missing from the playlists below)
  
  • > Folder (100) (the only thing that exists in this folder are two playlists:)
    
    • Rig Pack 1 (60)
    • Rig Pack 2 (40)
  • > Folder (94) (the only thing that exists in this folder are two playlists:)
    
    • Rig Pack 3 (14)
    • Rig Pack 4 (80)
  • To Sort - Rig Pack 5 (1241)

Doug, that was an excellent and thought provoking thread. I really hope that the developers give ideas like this some consideration.

Quote from dougc84

Yes you did. "Folder" and "nested folder." What you're describing is exactly how RM works now with the exception of the count and the search scope. You can create a folder. You can create a folder under any other folder (a "nested" folder). Right now, I believe there is a 2-level limit, which describes, to the T, exactly what you're discussing.

iTunes, Spotify, and, most importantly, every single computer's file structure does not work exactly like this, and this is why it's confusing. There are three essential parts to this, going from most specific to least specific:

1. Your rig. We all know what the rigs are - a file describing the rig and its settings.

2. A container for a set of rigs, a.k.a. a playlist (and that's what I'll be calling it from here out). In iTunes or Spotify, this works like the following video (a bit outdated but the idea still works):

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Music playlist files, by the .m3u or .pls spec, are files that contain a list of songs that exist on your computer. For the .m3u spec and for more information, you can find out more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M3U We wouldn't need to use a .m3u file (or multiple) for playlists, because I'm guessing that Rig Manager stores everything in a SQLite database somewhere on your machine, but the concept is the same, regardless of storage medium. For the Kemper, the playlist would be a list of all rigs (instead of, using the iTunes example, songs) that exist in a certain location on your computer.

3. Folders. A folder should contain only playlists or other folders. Think of RM as a closed file system, where these are the only file types allowed. A folder, when clicked, should show the contents of all playlists within the current folder or in subfolders underneath.

But why should we never place rigs directly into folders?

With a playlist, you know the only thing it references are rigs. If you have folders containing rigs, and that folder contains another folder, clicking that parent folder gives you no indication that there is a rig on that main folder (which contains other folders). There is a clear distinction between what does what, what contains what, and how everything is handled.

For instance, in the current method, say you have Local Library/My Saved Rigs containing 3 rigs, and Local Library/My Saved Rigs/MBritt Profile Pack 1 containing 62 rigs. The top level folder (Local Library/My Saved Rigs) would display 65 total rigs. This is fine for simple browsing, but, if I delete the MBritt folder, how do I know what's left before I delete, without going through one-by-one? If I want to move those 3 out to a separate playlist, then I have to compare two lists to find the differences. Now, imagine you have 25 folders, each with a different count of rigs. Good luck finding which 3 rigs are on the top level.

The numbers add up properly when using playlists. For example, if you have 3 playlists with 50 rigs each, each playlist will display 50 next to it and the parent folder will display 150. You can find every rig very simply. Searching becomes much easier, as you click on the folder and search for everything within. Counting becomes simple as well from a coding point of view - find all playlists with this folder as a parent (or ancestor of some sort) and sum the count. You don't have to iterate through folders finding files with specific extensions any longer.

Finally, and, arguably the most important reason for this - by changing this structure, it makes it possible for your "Local Library" to reference rigs that may not exist in a playlist, and your "Local Library" actually becomes more of a complete library view, where everything you have lives there, even when removed from all playlists. Users can then choose how they want to approach their rigs - make tons of folders and be hyper-organized, to just use their "Local Library" and search, or use a hybrid approach - use "Local Library" for most things, and the most common things can be broken out into folders. "Local Library" basically becomes your complete local rig library, where, similarly in iTunes, the "Music" top level item is your complete local music library.

TL;DR:

• [ Local Library ] (1545) - clicking here displays all rigs, including the 10 missing from the playlists below)
  
  • > Folder (100) (the only thing that exists in this folder are two playlists:)
    
    • Rig Pack 1 (60)
    • Rig Pack 2 (40)
  • > Folder (94) (the only thing that exists in this folder are two playlists:)
    
    • Rig Pack 3 (14)
    • Rig Pack 4 (80)
  • To Sort - Rig Pack 5 (1241)

Display More

In the above example what is playlist? because the guy says: a playlist is just a playlist at 0:13

Got your point, but have more question, because this youtube example is not answering to all. Playlist is a list of elements which are not rigs, but references to rigs.

This below I don't get (not sure)

3. Folders. A folder should contain only playlists or other folders.

So you want to nest folders and allow placing playlists on any folder level??

A folder, when clicked, should show the contents of all playlists within the current folder or in subfolders underneath.

This is not how Windows Explorer works. You see only files (imagine they are elements of playlist) in current folder and you see nested folders, but you dont see playlist elements in nested folders. I prefer Windows style hierarchy.

I'm honestly not sure how I can explain this any further. I will try, but I'm done at this point. This is common UI implementation in any media application that allows storage of media.

Quote from skoczy

In the above example what is playlist? because the guy says: a playlist is just a playlist at 0:13

I still don't understand how it's 2015 and you don't know what a playlist is. Either way, in iTunes, using the video example, a playlist is a reference to any set of songs stored in the music library. A song can be in multiple playlists, one playlist, or no playlists. With the RM software, every playlist should be a reference to rigs in your master local library. A "reference" is basically saying "this file is over here, but use it in this context." And a rig should be able to be placed in as many or as few playlists as needed.

Quote from skoczy

3. Folders. A folder should contain only playlists or other folders.

So you want to nest folders and allow placing playlists on any folder level??

Yes. Why not? Why shouldn't you be able have a structure with playlists on multiple levels of folders?

Quote from skoczy

A folder, when clicked, should show the contents of all playlists within the current folder or in subfolders underneath.

This is not how Windows Explorer works. You see only files (imagine they are elements of playlist) in current folder and you see nested folders, but you dont see playlist elements in nested folders. I prefer Windows style hierarchy.

Right, that's why I said this:

Quote from skoczy

every single computer's file structure does not work exactly like this, and this is why it's confusing.

But it's how every piece of media player software with a media library works. Rigs are media. Just like photos, music, movies, etc. I'd encourage you to investigate for yourself, because you're obviously missing the points here.

I still don't understand how it's 2015 and you don't know what a playlist is.
I do know what playlist is, I just never used media library kind of bloating software. For playing my music I am using foobar mp3 player, for viewing pictures I use lightweight viewer - cannot image organizing pictures into playlists - it is just facebookish or applish But that's me - I like this simple and fast. This kinda reminds me AXE, where user's can organize all parameters of to craft cool sound instead of playing the guitar.

But yes - now I know how iTunes work - and will never install it

Anyway if there is desire in Kempers community for such way of organizing rigs into playlist then go and vote for that. Have in mind that Kemper's developers may be in the middle of VST editor/plugin call it whatever you like - will/should rig management be combined in one place with rig parameters editing? How it is done in AXE software?

With the RM software, every playlist should be a reference to rigs in your master local library. A "reference" is basically saying "this file is over here, but use it in this context." And a rig should be able to be placed in as many or as few playlists as needed.

I know hat you mean Just in case you want something done by developers' it is good to a list of requirements, because otherwise it's a mess and you get what Kemper's team has read in 3 different threads with different not precise opinions put in non readable form In a world of software development process you don't say "I want RigManager to work like iTunes". You assume that Kempers' devs use/know iTunes

Yes. Why not? Why shouldn't you be able have a structure with playlists on multiple levels of folders?

I never said multiple levels of folders in playlist are bad - just asking.

I am here to help

I don't see many advantages in these concepts. In itunes you almost never change a file - that makes links to it in form of playlists usable. But even there you run into trouble if the file is missing or has been moved/renamed.

Performances already implement the "playlist" idea to a certain extent - only that you work with actual files and not links - which is very reasonable, because you wouldn't wanna miss the possibility of editing a rig in a particular performance slot.

The current concept works stable and is fairly easy to understand and use. Nobody likes to deal with "broken" links. That would be my technical reservation.

I believe the idea of saving performance sets has been discussed somewhere. I can see some practical use for that.

Quote from bigHF

I don't see many advantages in these concepts. In itunes you almost never change a file - that makes links to it in form of playlists usable. But even there you run into trouble if the file is missing or has been moved/renamed.

Performances already implement the "playlist" idea to a certain extent - only that you work with actual files and not links - which is very reasonable, because you wouldn't wanna miss the possibility of editing a rig in a particular performance slot.

The current concept works stable and is fairly easy to understand and use. Nobody likes to deal with "broken" links. That would be my technical reservation.

I believe the idea of saving performance sets has been discussed somewhere. I can see some practical use for that.

Display More

I am not using performances at all - is this like a feature for users that have Remote? I believe many folks just use BROWSE knob position.

Dealing with broken links to files (rigs) is the part of programming. But I believe Kemper is not software development company primarily

BUT the rigs are you seeing inside RigManager are not physical rigs that you imported from hard disk, they are not even reference to physical files on hard disk - you can delete source Rig from hard disk and it will not affect RigManager. Once you drag rig from folder on hard disk into RigManager it is put in applications SQLite database.

What is not easy to use and not intuitive is for example searching the rigs which doesn't work for folders underneath current folder

And current folder shows only number of rigs within this folder, not counting the rigs inside any nested folders

Hey - I don't wanna come across arrogantly, but I seriously recommend that you spend some time to get a better understanding of RM, before you make such assumptions.

Every Software has a philosophy and is best used when you understand it, instead of guessing and trying to force it work your way. That may sometimes need changing a habit or too - yeah uncomfortable, I've been there more than once - but that is how you actually learn and grow your knowledge of a tool.

1. You should look into performance mode, because that is what you suggested - only with the limitation of 5 rigs per "playlist" (performance). PM is not FOR the remote, but you need a footcontroller (midi or the remote) to run it comfortably.

2. You are wrong about the rigs, they are "physically" stored in the database as files (whatever physically really means in the IT context) from the actual "physical" file. You can export them from the database, drop copies into performance slots or onto your toaster.

3. You can search "all rigs" by navigating to the All Rigs folder, which works like a view on all rigs on your machine.

4. Your statement that the search function should work recursively through all sub-folders and that it is counter intuitive the way it works now is merely a judgement call. I disagree!
I wouldn't wanna see rigs, that aren't actually contained in a particular folder. If you compare RM to finder, the search function is also limited to the current folder. That has been standard procedure for as long as I can remember.
You can type a few letters in the inspector search field "mars" and then navigate through different folders. Whenever you find some, you can edit them or move them to other places within your folder structure... You can leave the "filter" in the search field for as long as you want.
If you want all of them at once - click on 'All Rigs'.

Here is another thought. RM is not meant to become a deeply nested hierarchical folder system - like the windows registry. Start using tags more often.

I also disagree that Kemper is not a software company first, because almost everything you enjoy is based on software programming - it is called KAOS - Kemper Amplifier Operating System and it runs your toaster from start to finish. They are actually replacing physical tube amps by a software algorithm!

Quote from bigHF

Hey - I don't wanna come across arrogantly, but I seriously recommend that you spend some time to get a better understanding of RM, before you make such assumptions.

Every Software has a philosophy and is best used when you understand it, instead of guessing and trying to force it work your way. That may sometimes need changing a habit or too - yeah uncomfortable, I've been there more than once - but that is how you actually learn and grow your knowledge of a tool.

1. You should look into performance mode, because that is what you suggested - only with the limitation of 5 rigs per "playlist" (performance). PM is not FOR the remote, but you need a footcontroller (midi or the remote) to run it comfortably.

2. You are wrong about the rigs, they are "physically" stored in the database as files (whatever physically really means in the IT context) from the actual "physical" file. You can export them from the database, drop copies into performance slots or onto your toaster.

3. You can search "all rigs" by navigating to the All Rigs folder, which works like a view on all rigs on your machine.

4. Your statement that the search function should work recursively through all sub-folders and that it is counter intuitive the way it works now is merely a judgement call. I disagree!
I wouldn't wanna see rigs, that aren't actually contained in a particular folder. If you compare RM to finder, the search function is also limited to the current folder. That has been standard procedure for as long as I can remember.
You can type a few letters in the inspector search field "mars" and then navigate through different folders. Whenever you find some, you can edit them or move them to other places within your folder structure... You can leave the "filter" in the search field for as long as you want.
If you want all of them at once - click on 'All Rigs'.

Here is another thought. RM is not meant to become a deeply nested hierarchical folder system - like the windows registry. Start using tags more often.

I also disagree that Kemper is not a software company first, because almost everything you enjoy is based on software programming - it is called KAOS - Kemper Amplifier Operating System and it runs your toaster from start to finish. They are actually replacing physical tube amps by a software algorithm!

Display More

1) Performance mode is with it's limitation ONLY to 5 rigs is useless for me and I don't like use things uncomfortably (Performance mode without Remote)

Performance Mode (from MANUAL)
Performance Mode is a powerful tool that allows to organize Rigs in “Performances” detached from your Browse Pool. A total of 125 Performances are available, each of which can hold up to five Rigs in logical locations called "Slots". You could, for example, use a Performance to store the sounds dedicated to the intro, verse, refrain, bridge, and solo of a song, and switch between them using a foot controller.

Performance Mode (from MANUAL)
Soft button “Arrange” opens a screen where you can easily reshuffle Performances according to the set list of your next concert.

I still feel Performance Mode is made to work for live players with Remote, unless you want to switch in the middle of the song by pressing button on Kemper's greenface

2) Yes rigs are stored physically in database once imported into RigManager, that's what I said. You can delete rig file from hard drive once imported into RigManager. Yes you can export the database of RigManager - never said you cannot "drop copies into performance slots or onto your toaster" - not sure what you say, because I am not using Performacne Mode.

I said, after you import rig files into RigManager you can delete rig files from hard disk and you won't have broken links situation. The "rigs" are there inside RigManager although you deleted the files from hard drive.

And yes you can export rigs from within RigManager to local hard drive - never said you can't.

3) But it searches also RigExchange - you cannot apply that kind of search to Local Library.

4) If you compare RM to finder - So you're on Mac I'm on Windows Different habits.

I believe Kemper is hardware and "sound" company first

They are actually replacing physical tube amps by a software algorithm!

I believe competition does it,

[Blocked Image: http://s22.postimg.org/q79ri7fm9/axe1.jpg]

Kemper catches to soul of hooked amp being profiled. It's magic.

Quote from skoczy

I still feel Performance Mode is made to work for live players with Remote, unless you want to switch in the middle of the song by pressing button on Kemper's greenface

The "5 rig limit" is per performance, and, more accurately, it should be said that each performance has 5 presets available to it. You can have hundreds of performance set up, giving you hundreds of rig options. You really should read up in the manual instead of searching and copy/pasting results from the reference PDF, because it really is a powerful option.

You also do not need to use it where 1 performance = 1 song. As a matter of fact, I find this the least intuitive, because you end up with lots of duplication. I have an external MIDI controller (RJM MMGT 22) that I use to control the Kemper (as well as several other devices). I use the performance slots to group together rigs - clean rigs on one performance, edge of breakup on one performance, "artist" rigs on another, etc. However, you do not need to stick within guidelines for it - it's basically a way of loading rigs faster (yes, it switches faster than browse mode) and assigning it to a sequential PC.

It gives a nice way to also keep the stock rigs on the device, unmodified in the browse bank, and, per performance mode slot, you can make whatever changes you want (the same rig can exist, with individual changes, in any slot).

I'd actually disagree with you in saying that most people use browse mode. People that don't use it are often those that haven't tried it and haven't seen the benefits of it. Even without a controller, browse mode feels clunky to me. Performance mode is visually laid out and displayed - you're not trying to guess or blow through menus, at least after you get it set up in a way that works for you. And, using RM now with performance mode makes setting it up a breeze.

Quote from dougc84

The "5 rig limit" is per performance, and, more accurately, it should be said that each performance has 5 presets available to it. You can have hundreds of performance set up, giving you hundreds of rig options. You really should read up in the manual instead of searching and copy/pasting results from the reference PDF, because it really is a powerful option.

You also do not need to use it where 1 performance = 1 song. As a matter of fact, I find this the least intuitive, because you end up with lots of duplication. I have an external MIDI controller (RJM MMGT 22) that I use to control the Kemper (as well as several other devices). I use the performance slots to group together rigs - clean rigs on one performance, edge of breakup on one performance, "artist" rigs on another, etc. However, you do not need to stick within guidelines for it - it's basically a way of loading rigs faster (yes, it switches faster than browse mode) and assigning it to a sequential PC.

It gives a nice way to also keep the stock rigs on the device, unmodified in the browse bank, and, per performance mode slot, you can make whatever changes you want (the same rig can exist, with individual changes, in any slot).

I'd actually disagree with you in saying that most people use browse mode. People that don't use it are often those that haven't tried it and haven't seen the benefits of it. Even without a controller, browse mode feels clunky to me. Performance mode is visually laid out and displayed - you're not trying to guess or blow through menus, at least after you get it set up in a way that works for you. And, using RM now with performance mode makes setting it up a breeze.

Display More

I would love to make o Poll "who uses Perfomance Mode without Remote", but I just can't

When you look on Youtube folks playing their Kempers, they are in Browse mode First thing Kemper manual say to you - turn the knob to BROWSE mode

You said The "5 rig limit" is per performance - well performance is when you play live isn't it? You play one song live and have 5 different "rigs" for intro, chorus, verse etc. On next song you use next performance with 5 "rigs", "slots" or so

Just wondering - do you have Remote?

Quote from skoczy

When you look on Youtube folks playing their Kempers, they are in Browse mode First thing Kemper manual say to you - turn the knob to BROWSE mode

Right. The Kemper's been out for 5 or 6 years. Performance mode came out 2 years ago. Of course the majority of videos are using Browse. And it's easier to display and demonstrate one singular rig in browse mode.

Quote from skoczy

You said The "5 rig limit" is per performance - well performance is when you play live isn't it?

I'm not going to justify this smartass question with a smartass response.

Quote from skoczy

You play one song live and have 5 different "rigs" for intro, chorus, verse etc. On next song you use next performance with 5 "rigs", "slots" or so

If you want to do it that way. Or use one performance for an entire set. Or use the idea of performances however the hell you want to use it.

Quote from skoczy

Just wondering - do you have Remote?

No. See:

Quote from skoczy

I have an external MIDI controller (RJM MMGT 22) that I use to control the Kemper (as well as several other devices).

I use performances to manage my rigs into a logical order. I sit on PC #2 for 75% of a set (Vox AC-30 rig), but I'll probably jump between 20 different presets and a half-dozen or more different songs.

I posted this on my own thread , but this one has legs I see , so......

i see that someone posted the ability to drag and drop in rig manager, but can you drag a rig from the pool, and drop it into performance ? I have not been able to do that. am I missing a step ?

i would love not only to be able to do that, but also from rig manager, be able to double clic a performance, and have the option to move a rig around in different orders as I see fit. But I don't seem to be able to do this. Is this possible ?

Otherwise to me, this is very limited , but I guess that would more be an EDITOR , and it seems there are no immediate plans to do this ?

again, I have been away awhile, so not sure if what I am asking is being addressed or not .

I agree with the OP - "summed" sub-folders would be far more useful to me than how it currently works. There's no need to break how anyone currently uses RM - just provide an option in the menu or preferences page. Selecting multiple folders would also be helpful.

Quote from meambobbo

I agree with the OP - "summed" sub-folders would be far more useful to me than how it currently works. There's no need to break how anyone currently uses RM - just provide an option in the menu or preferences page. Selecting multiple folders would also be helpful.

One matter is not clear for me.
If I have a subfolder called it "Sub1" and several subfolders "Sub1.x" and in "Sub1" are also some Rigs. What Number should the "Sub1" show?

If sub-folder "summing" or "roll-up" or whatever you want to call it is is enabled, youd see all the rigs in the folder plus all the rigs in all its subfolders, and in any of those folders' subfolders. So if folder "top" has 3 rigs, and it has a subfolder "sub1" with 10 rigs, top would show 13 rigs. If sub1 had 2 additional subfolders with 4 rigs each, sub1 would show 18, and top would show 21.

One thing that we need to address is if top and sub1 each have some exact same rigs - then top shouldnt show or count the duplicate rigs.

Quote from meambobbo

If sub-folder "summing" or "roll-up" or whatever you want to call it is is enabled, youd see all the rigs in the folder plus all the rigs in all its subfolders, and in any of those folders' subfolders. So if folder "top" has 3 rigs, and it has a subfolder "sub1" with 10 rigs, top would show 13 rigs. If sub1 had 2 additional subfolders with 4 rigs each, sub1 would show 18, and top would show 21.

One thing that we need to address is if top and sub1 each have some exact same rigs - then top shouldnt show or count the duplicate rigs.

I have problem with your exampel, because only 2 Levels are possible under "local library" . For example your "Top" and "sub 1". In this case "sub1" can not have subfolders.

A picture is easier to understand.
I have a Dir. "M.Britt" with several Subdir. with the Packs. I hope Guido and Mike forgive me - for test I copied 5 Rigs of Guido in the Dir. "M.Britt" which is my Root for that example.
How much the root should show 166 ore 161 (161 +5)

Edit: Some time I copy sometime my favorites of the sub-Packages after testing all. This would not be possible if its not allowed to have a Rig twice.

Well "top" in my example would be local library.

I think you should still be able to have the same rig copied in a folder and its subfolder; however, the parent folder would only count it once and display it as one row, not two. If you deleted the entire subfolder or deleted the rig from the subfolder or turned off subfolder "summing" it would still be there