Frank Barknecht <fbar@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Mario Lang hat gesagt: // Mario Lang wrote: > >> Frank Barknecht <fbar@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > I *heard* that the Behringer is "broken" in this regard in that it >> > just stops to send data when one end is reached (that is, it stays at >> > 0 or 127 without wrapping around at all). I'd be glad to hear if this >> > is true or not, >> >> Yes, it is, and I consider this behaviour the only sensible. >> For me, the other dials (those that wrap) are broken, and >> they are a serious accessibility hassle. > > Of course I do not agree with you here. <grin> > > Why have an endless knob at all if it has ends and thus is not an > endless knob? I've demonstrated already that it is quite simple to emulate endless rotaries in software. However, the wrapping problem is not that easy to overcome. Since I do not have visual feedback, I can not look at the rotaries current value and predict when I need to stop to turn the knob to prevent wrapping. The day that infinite wrapping dials were introduced in modern synths was the day accessibility died finally. Before that, we were able to remember certain settings by counting up from 0, or down from max value. That way, I was at least able to select a certain preset or something. But when they introduced those dials which when wrap at each end, this was finally impossible since you were forced to look at the LCD to determine the current value of something. Its sometimes the small suttle things that make a big difference. -- CYa, Mario
