Few things less useful than someone who complains about something in which they have nothing invested.
4 Likes
Here is a short video of one of my modules currently in develpment:
Itās just a sampler.
It resembles a cassette-deck by wasting a lot of space just for displaying the cassette. This space could be used much better, e.g. for displaying a graphical representation of the samples and some edit options for the loaded/recorded sample.
It provides a fixed tape length, so if you choose the wrong tape length, you will run out of tape while recording. This is just because it resembles a cassette-deck.
You can grab the reel to slow down the tape speed. This could have been better achieved by an XY-pad, because the reel is nothing more than a fancy looking XY-pad (unfortunately it is rather small because my module resembles a cassette-deck).
But Iām frequently asked to finish this module as soon as possible. I think because itās a skeuomorphistic eye-catcher and not because of itās outstanding features as a sampler (there are a handful of sampler-modules already in the rack that do a much better job).
4 Likes
I agree with that. To many options is the same as to many knobs combinations. You have to brain map a progression of button clicks to change functions. This is probalby less an issue when you are a musician playing an instrument.
I think Andrew is doing an outstanding job to manage all of this. His work on Rack is superb and the success he has draw from Rack is speaking for itself.
1 Like
EMACS is great. The lisp dialect itās using, the way it works. The only problem with emacs are its key chords you have to input for simple things --> Bad UX. Thatās why Iām using VIM 
3 Likes
I never called anyone stupid. You read between the lines and draw conclusions from your experience. Language is as sharp as a Katana. Use it wisely, otherwise you chop of your hand, or worse: Your head.
To clear things up again, letās cite the section which led to this heated up discussion:
- I never called anyone stupid. Being stupid or being smart are things at opposite ends of each side. I started to list an example of software doing Skeumorphism before (for 20 years now - Reason) and drawing an analogy to rack (same domain with similar approaches, not the same - I like and dislike both software for the same reasons)
- I have been generalizing the problem for anyone to understand it āItās just promoting this nonsense complex design, hardware is doing bound to for generations. For me personally this is the biggest fail of all software, trying to replicate the real world. Virtual can be so much better.ā
- I have been making it specific and pointing to the problem for everyone to draw attention to the hotspot āReal hardware suffers from complex knob combinations and matrix navigations.ā
- Iāve been expressing my personal dislike about sticking to hardware limitations and insulting āthe designerā for this, which I apologized for. āBut putting this in software just does not make sense and from my point of view is a complete Designerās fail!!!ā
- āNo one on this earth should do skeumorphism in 2020 if he claims to be smartā be smarter and start removing hardware limitations.
Some of the rack devs stated their deliberate choice of why they chose to do what they do. Everyone is still free to do whatever he wants.
I expressed many times the issue and here a citation again which makes very clear what this dicussion is about:
Why do we (users) like to have this limitations? Iām a dev myself for 20 years and know the arguments for not having āTHISā or having āTHATā limitation. Easier to maintain, technically difficult to implement. So yes, focus is necessary and decisions to be made.
Iām not blaming anyone for their decissions. Iām pushing for thinking about a different angle. Like it ā¦ yes keep on discussing here. Donāt like it? Feel free to ignore.
1 Like
Great UI Design! Great module. Why can you run out of tape? Is this hardware bound limitation usefull in software?
Limitations force creativity.
Imagine a chess game with an unlimited playing field and an unlimited number of game pieces (the VCV rack looks a bit like that, only CPU power is the limit).
The ābestā music I ever composed was made on a Commodore 64 SID (3 VCO, 1 VCF, zero FX).
2 Likes
I get your point. I would rephrase a bit here:
Focus forces creativity. Limitations force frustration.
Iāve been doing great sketches in Figure on my iPhone, but never a good full track because of itās limitations. Yes, I could have been exporting the waves ā¦ mangling themā¦ Donāt like this UX. This stops creativity for me. I need a device where I can change sounds. Maybe I should just focus on sound design sessions and later just use samples for creating a track.
My module is inspired by the Teenage Engineering OP1.
https://teenage.engineering/products/op-1/overview
I thought a lot about why Teenage Engineering limited the recording time on the OP1 to just 6 minutes without the option to enlarge the memory.
When using a real cassette-tape for recording, I have to deal with a given length. I have to think ahead what I am going to record. I want to resemble that in VCV-Rack. For endless recording, there are already existing modules, so thereās no need to code another one that offers endless recording time.
Maybe check out other apps for music making on the go. For me, no app does the job because I need a device with real buttons and knobs, not a touchscreen.
who said you did? seems you are now the one citing text incorrectly yet you accuse us of reading between the lines and drawing conclusions. your opinion on UI/UX in regards to Rack does not seem to be shared so maybe just let this discussion end already. what you describe is Puredata, Max, Supercollider, Bidule.
and if limitations force frustrations you should try to tell that to the amiga/octamed users making tracks on 4 channels.
1 Like
I never called something āstupidā should have been the right phrasing instead of someone. Got lost in translation. Thanks for the hint.
Iām not trying to put my limitations onto others. I clearly stated I have an issue with a workflow like this. There are many likes and dislikes. I try to be as objective as I can and as subjective as I can. So when using the word āIā, āmeā or āmyā āopinionā this should tell you a subjective view.
Woud be nice if Rack provided something like this on top of the existing modules. I donāt need another visual programming language like bidule, neither do I wanāt to create synths or patches from code.
A scripting language on top would be very nice to interact with the Modules as configuration interface
On the go? Iām doing this at home. I prefer touch devices as input for the same reasons a tactile hardware device is nice to use. Iām not a performer. I donāt play an instrument. Mouse for me is a necessary evil. I donāt even use one. Just the trackpad of my mac. the nice thing about an app is you can have plenty of them and easily accessible. Having the gear from my iPad/iPhone as real hardware ā¦ OMG
clearly you are convinced of your point, and watching how you answer to all I think perhaps you are right.
but I still not catching your point, could you give us a example of the worst UX with a module and how the developer could improve it discarding the skeuomorphims?
Can you morph hardware into something else? Hardly
Thatās what the limitation implies. Things you do in the real world, which just stop being possible or extremely expensive to apply because of matter.
I did give some examples already so here a general extract/recipe:
- Why am I limited to 1 rack height?
- How can I expand/unfold a panel into fullscreen?
- How can I implement sliding panels, that reveal/hide parts of the module for better details/overview?
For example (just an idea, woud actually have to play arround with a prototype): Have ports at the sides in panels. On key combination aka shortcut or toolbar button reveal/hide them. when patching you need them, when tweaking and playing you donāt!
I prefer sequencers where I can see the complete sequence, also the patterns (a good example for this is the KORG Gadget sequencer with itās LIVE cloned interface). A couple more features on the sequencer would be nice. But it;s doing a great job. Event a step sequencer would benefit from having all notes in the sequence displayed. Overview vs. details.
Andrew has some good pointers in the module design section regarding spacing and how to design, which some developers disregard (for whatever reason). Has nothing to do with skeumorphism but good design practices.
Grouping modules and showing//hiding or folding/unfolding them or just for subsections of one module.
As for a feature request if would be nice to create a custom interface for a group of modules. AKA a in Rack module designer where I can map knobs, buttons, sliders, ports to the underlying and hidden subpatch. This is out of scope, but would be a nice feature.
This have been the topics about screen real estate and how to navigate it. Ben has some good modules dealing with some things mentioned here in packone and packtau.
Have a module be extendable wihtout patching. There are already the expanders. But you canāt fold them.
1 Like
what module would you like in a full screen, all of them?
group , collapse hide (also import- export ) is one of the most desired features of all of us, we can agree this , reason do this very well
in other hand , the vcv rack is not only a SDK like steimberg vst, in the vcv page we can read āeurorack simulatorā it mean skeuomorphism , and it perhaps one of the most liked features for us
if you make a racing car game you shoul copy all the cars limitations, if not , it is a racing game only, but that not mean you cant add extra features that characterize the games (respawn for instance)
[
1 Like
Precisely because stupid and smart are opposites, the first sentence of yours that I cited can be rewritten as follows:
āAnyone on this earth who does skeuomorphism in 2020 must be stupidā
This sentence, and the sentence you wrote, have the same meaning. Itās probably a language issue. But your original post was likely to offend some, and then when you follow up saying people need to read your posts more carefully, it adds insult to injury.
The problem is not how people read your posts, it is how you write them.
3 Likes
I donāt think in black or white, yes or no. My brain doesnāt work binary. Its more fuzzy and thinks in options, when I talk options itās like having a choice whith more than 3 choices. A good set of choices would be 10. If there are stupid people on one side of the scale (black) and smart on the other side (white) there is a lot of grayscale (pun not intended) in between. My intention is to move the slider more towards white.
I count several limitations as not very smart (subjective view). You might like them and finde them usefull. I never ment to personally attack someone. Yes I used a very provocative language (by choice), which I apologized in review.
I have to disagree. āI write what I meanā is not the same as āI donāt write what i donāt meanā. I do both: I say what I mean, and what I donāt say is still not sayd. So if you equal this sentences:
āNo one on this earth should do skeumorphism in 2020 if he claims to be smartā "āAnyone on this earth who does skeuomorphism in 2020 must be stupidā
I did not use stupid in this context and never did. I just picked up the word stupid from the discussion, and been citing what I said putting this into the context of the citation with persey. He used the word stupid. I opposed it with giving him an explanation where bith of this words sit. I never implied if you are not at this end of the scale you must sit at the other.
From my personal experience, this is a cultural/language/educational issue in thinking binary. If you feel personally offended by this, my appology. I actually count you and marc with your modules to the smarter section end of the scale. And we already had a healthy discussion about your modules. I see your valid choices and thatās it. Do I see space for improvement despite being awesome modules? Yes I do. So you either like this user input or not, anyway itās your choice and I highly respec your craft.
So your choice has been to vote for āif he claims to be smartā should read as āmust be stupidā. Iām convinced I never buidl up this chain of conclusion. It may got lost in citation by quoting different sources out of context.
Mostly modules with different functions , sequencers. Modules where you can switch context or use button combinations, right menu clicks. Things like this. Direct access vs. 1,2,3 click combinations. The less indirection, the better.
valid point. If you want a Formula 1 Racing sim and not Wipeout or Mario Kart ā¦ I keep on telling myself itās all about modular music making. So if you want to restrict rack to the Eurorack domain and only this and never what to look left or right, thatās valid. And then we can conclude and end the discussion. Iām going to keep using LIVE for the other reasons I mentioned and just get the V2 VST when released.
Or I just find another VST Host where the things I mentioned seem to work in a fashion I prefer over the way it currently works in Rack.
it is like vcv rack, but vst (even you can load the vcv rack and others daws inside)
FamiStudio is a redesign of the legendary FamiTracker without the use of any hexadecimal numbers.
1 Like