On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:14:54PM +0100, Remon Sijrier wrote:
> On Sunday, November 14, 2010 01:01:17 am firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > Let me guess: a combination of a badly designed widget that has no
I have a look at it every now and then to see how it's evolving. Last time
it still was limited to stereo, and it crashed within minutes. Which does
indeed mean I don't use it.
> But you are correct that the pan/gain 'indicators' have less precision then
There's a simple rule: if the indicator says '-3.0' then the actual value
should be -3.0. Not -2.96 or -3.04. In other words the indicator should have
the required precision to be able to show *all* possible values exactly.
Steps of 0.1 dB for gain are perfectly OK, even bigger ones. You have
to 'smooth' the transition anyway if the gain changes.
> Right now gain increment steps are 0.05 dB for gain, and there are 200 steps
I hope '200 steps' means 201 positions. You need an odd number in order to
have a central position.
> Just some thoughts: rotary knob controls are better to control by the human
Real ones provide support so the user can hold the knob without moving it even
in shaky conditions.
> The use of sliders vs knobs in software imho still is a different issue since
You can, and in fact the sliders I'm using in some new projects do have
sub-pixel accuracy, also visually.
> Traverso does away with that by using the relative mouse moving distance,
Relative motion is the only one that makes sense for a slider. There's nothing
more useless than a control that jumps to the value you click on.
> Side effect is that the mouse can be moved physically
Which in general is a good idea. OTOH, fader attenuation should 'go faster' for
low gain values (e.g. below -40 dB w.r.t. the maximum), so a fixed step is not
There are three of them, and Alleline.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list