On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 07:43:52PM +0000, Aurélien Leblond wrote:
> I'm contacting you because I have been working on porting the internal
I certainly do have some ideas and opinions about this...
And in fact I'm designing a new modular synth app that
will be competition for both AMS and Ingen, so I have
been thinking about this (and that's not finished).
The module GUIs are IMHO one of the major flaws of AMS.
Presenting an array of sliders that all look the same
and that have a resolution that depends on their size
is probably the worst way to do it. Resolution and the
control law (e.g. lin or log, but there are others as
well) should depend on what the GUI element is controlling
and on nothing else. Rotary controls have an advantage in
that sense. Layout, size, colors, etc. should reflect the
function and structure of any module and not be dictated
by some toolkit or other GUI rules.
The people who designed the best HW synths (and the same
can be said of mixers and other audio gear) were well aware
of the impact of layout and ergonomics. So imitating them
is not a bad idea. But the one you linked to is not really
the best example - it's just a regular grid of controls and
connectors without any visual hints as to their function.
It's often said that the potential for 'discovery' is the
key to good UI design. I disagree. The most important thing
IMHO is to provide subliminal cues - and these must be based
in function (which is what is discovered by the user).
Vor uns liegt ein weites Tal, die Sonne scheint - ein Glitzerstrahl.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list