EmRR

the look of audio software
« on: August 26, 2017, 09:28:53 AM »
food for thought.   I know my previous computer had trouble keeping up with the graphics side of overly intricate plugs, faux VU meters that wouldn't track in any useful manner, etc. 

https://theoutline.com/post/2157/why-are-there-so-many-knobs-in-garage-band
Best,

Doug Williams
Electromagnetic Radiation Recorders

"I think this can be better. Some kind of control that's intuitive, not complicated like a single knob" - Crusty

"Back when everything sounde


Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2017, 01:54:35 PM »
totally agree with the rant.
i still haven't mastered the first version of AutoTune to this day, let alone a newer one.

back then complicated UI just slow you down, but now it's ok i guess; cause the professional audio engineering industry is as good as dead, everyone can produce-mix-master at home and they have time to dial every knobs, push every buttons, etc.

EmRR

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2017, 02:11:12 PM »
Since I don't play video games, I don't think about that angle, but there's gotta be an 'entertainment' aspect to the way it is.  It's not about getting work done, so much.
Best,

Doug Williams
Electromagnetic Radiation Recorders

"I think this can be better. Some kind of control that's intuitive, not complicated like a single knob" - Crusty

"Back when everything sounde

gyraf

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2017, 05:20:10 AM »
Speaking to quite a few of the plugin vendors, it's increasingly clear to me that they all realize (and knowingly benefit from) just how  big a part of perceived audio quality is rooted in the visuals. Yes, still.

And no, not as  deception, but by suggestion.

On a tangential note, since aes last year I've been trying to shop a plugin "standard rack interface" to some of the big players - imagine having a formalized cross-industry way for all these visuals to dock without messing up screen space. This far no movement, but some understanding.

Jakob E.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2017, 03:08:34 PM by gyraf »
..note to self: don't let Harman run your company..

EmRR

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2017, 09:59:28 AM »
Thanks Jakob.  Good insight. 
Best,

Doug Williams
Electromagnetic Radiation Recorders

"I think this can be better. Some kind of control that's intuitive, not complicated like a single knob" - Crusty

"Back when everything sounde

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2017, 05:15:49 PM »
I have to say the modern approach to recording with computers makes the studio a very boring place ,
its basically one guy with a mouse and a screen everybody else sits twiddling their thumbs .
theres very little chance to get hands on like in the old days where you had a big mixer ,and could get a few people around during mixing and stuff .
I find the whole visual thing now is distracting ,it takes away from the listening experience , a section of the brain is tied up with visual stimuli.
I remember while I was training in sound the teacher covered up the console metering ,and said use your ears not your eyes.
Ive still stuck with my Akai Dps24 which Ive had since 2001 ,maybe the finest example of a machine of its kinds ever made ,no nag screens ,
or software update issues to distract from the job at hand .

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2017, 09:46:34 AM »
I find the whole visual thing now is distracting ,it takes away from the listening experience , a section of the brain is tied up with visual stimuli.

Hello

I can't agree more with that, today most of "sound" engineer are in fact mixing with eyes  :(
Years ago, when I buy my first "large" console I drop the screen at the side, not on top of the desk between monitors "as usual" and it was a deliverance !!!
I have a trick with client, because you quick notice who is literally hooked to a screen when one is available... and not close eyes and listen to THE sound,
I just shut it off, or hide DAW application or timeline/waveform window every single time I don't manipulate sound at software side...
Last session I made a surgical eq at DAW side, I barely moved the cursor and client say "HOOOO!!! IT'S TO MUCH !!!"
I had the eq curve zoomed to +/- 3dB range, client thinking +/- 24... when I told him he was confused...
In audio world visual feedback is a tricky thing.... avoid it...don't use a screen  8)

Best
Zam

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2017, 04:55:48 PM »
Interesting stuff Zam,
On some occassions a musician might ask for a change of eq in the headphones on a certain instrument, sometimes its not convienient to do this , but gesture towards the control ,and say 'how does that sound ?' 9/10 times the performer will say 'perfect',
even though you havent touched a control .
There is feedback between what the eyes see and what our ears tell us .
Sometimes while listening to music online ,you can find yourself staring into a youtube screen with a still image on it , I realised a long time ago this was doing nothing apart from reducing my actual concentration.
Its nice sometimes, as you said, just to listen with the eyes closed ,you get transported away by the music ,the moment you have visuals, that ability to trip away to a distant galaxy disappears.

scott2000

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2017, 09:42:16 PM »
I bypassed a vu meter on a tube limiter I have. I think it sounds better now...... ;D

sorry....ot I know....

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2017, 02:41:12 PM »
I think in the case of something like a Fed 864/u removing the meter does effect the loading of the output stage ,when set to read output at least , I saw a comment about it before here somewhere, so you could well be right.
Other times  audio psychosomatics and a kind of placebo effect could play a part ,I mean suppose I replace my foil caps with ultra high end items that cost a bomb , in order to justify it to myself, my brain might be tricking me into believing I am hearing a difference , even though the test rig says same difference  .I guess no matter if your a vst guy or you like big old tube compressors visual appeal certainly can have an effect on the vibe in a recording session ,
interesting subject ,hopefully a few more will chime in .....


scott2000

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2017, 05:07:31 PM »
Yes. I was being serious about it sounding better to me....Well, at least a different sound I think I like better. Not just because I'm pushing it harder than I would with a vu or anything like that.  I put a 1k resistor I used in place of it ..... the meter was just gain reduction and I can't remember where it was that I bypassed it..... I'd have to check again. It's an M-34B meter....if that matters....But yes, I'm sure it has something to do along the lines with what you're talking about....

I happened across it when I had a broken solder joint at the meter and decided to check it out without the meter....Can't say I did a real AB so, who knows.....

As far as hearing things, I'm not convinced that our hearing and/or associated senses isn't/aren't more advanced than some might expect us to believe..... I've never been a firm believer in null testing as the end all answer to things being the same................


 would be one example.....
« Last Edit: August 29, 2017, 05:16:12 PM by scott2000 »

EmRR

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2017, 05:12:34 PM »
A VU meter imparts a predictable percentage of distortion on the audio it is measuring in any classic resistively connected circuit.  This is all part of the spec from 1939....old news that disconnecting it makes better audio.   This is why old pro gear has a bypass  for any VU meters installed. 
Best,

Doug Williams
Electromagnetic Radiation Recorders

"I think this can be better. Some kind of control that's intuitive, not complicated like a single knob" - Crusty

"Back when everything sounde

scott2000

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2017, 05:18:03 PM »


Nice to see some pudding.....

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2017, 06:39:24 PM »
Hmm 1939,
Was that A.D. Blumlien,
Some serious audio discoveries under his belt for sure .

Whoops

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2017, 09:35:26 PM »
I like the visuals of Protools, simple and clean and also the visuals of most hardware emulation plugins
Fine with all of that

cyrano

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #15 on: October 06, 2017, 07:15:08 PM »
I have to say the modern approach to recording with computers makes the studio a very boring place ,
its basically one guy with a mouse and a screen everybody else sits twiddling their thumbs .

Install Reaper. Activate the built-in webserver.

Get a couple of ipads. Connect to the network Reaper is on and let one person handle monitoring from an ipad. Or his phone, even. On another ipad, someone could be arranging MIDI, or...

Endless possibilities. Make your own pages (HTML). Add scripting...

Make a distributed visual metronome, a very personal monitoring system, metering, RTA...
Why is it people love to believe and hate to know?

scott2000

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2017, 07:49:58 PM »
I have to say the modern approach to recording with computers makes the studio a very boring place ,
its basically one guy with a mouse and a screen everybody else sits twiddling their thumbs .
theres very little chance to get hands on like in the old days where you had a big mixer ,and could get a few people around during mixing and stuff .


Install Reaper. Activate the built-in webserver.

Get a couple of ipads. Connect to the network Reaper is on and let one person handle monitoring from an ipad. Or his phone, even. On another ipad, someone could be arranging MIDI, or...

Endless possibilities. Make your own pages (HTML). Add scripting...

Make a distributed visual metronome, a very personal monitoring system, metering, RTA...


Sounds the same to me....lol....neither is boring though I'd argue
« Last Edit: October 06, 2017, 09:11:24 PM by scott2000 »

cyrano

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #17 on: October 07, 2017, 07:14:34 AM »
There's an essential difference.

A classic DAW setup is single user.

The Reaper webserver setup is multi-user.
Why is it people love to believe and hate to know?

scott2000

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #18 on: October 07, 2017, 08:25:15 AM »
There's an essential difference.

A classic DAW setup is single user.

The Reaper webserver setup is multi-user.

I was kinda talking about the  twiddling.....

Instead of sitting, you could stand though......lol

I like both. I do find hardware easier for me to lock into the space between the spaces but love some of the vst stuff..... The Sonimus stuff I've heard is just crazy.....  Don't know how they do it.......

« Last Edit: October 07, 2017, 11:47:43 AM by scott2000 »

Kingston

Re: the look of audio software
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2017, 06:41:31 PM »
There's an essential difference.

A classic DAW setup is single user.

The Reaper webserver setup is multi-user.

Nothing was changed, you are still employing that one extra guy to set up [insert new configuration requiring full assistance for entire studio] mixer environment.