Frank Barknecht <fbar@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hallo, > Mario Lang hat gesagt: // Mario Lang wrote: > >> I've demonstrated already that it is quite simple to emulate >> endless rotaries in software. > > Yes, I've seen this and it indeed is a possibility for SuperCollider > or Pd (which I use) to make the Behringer work for ranges bigger than > 0-127. > > However thinking about your solution a bit more, it occured to me, > that it basically transforms the knobs to wrap-around knobs, carrying > the same accessibility problem you pointed out before. Aren't you > admitting by this, that wrap-around would be good to have? No, not really. In fact, most controls in audio are actually bounded. If you choose a frequency for instance, it doesnt make sense to go -1000000 or whatever. Same for filter Q or other typical parameters. You mentioned transport control, which is a good candidate for endless data, but I dont need that actually. My point is, bounded data is much more common than infinite data, so IMHO, the default behavour of a knob should be to NOT wrap. I can always add simulated endless data later on. But by default, I personally prefer non-wrapping behaviour. Anyway, I guess it comes down to personal preference (and therefore customisability :-), and I am probably a bit biased since "wrapping knobs" is deeply hardwired in my brain to "unusable piece of hardware". > That's actually all I would have expected Behringer to do in hardware > (similar to the Doepfer devices): provide a wrapping mode as an option > to customers. (Maybe they have this in their Windows software, who > knows.) Thats actually quite possible, I didn't really check. There is a wide variety of settings you can apply to the individual knobs and faders (making them send note on/off, MMC and so on), so it might as well be that you can enable wrapping for individual knobs. But since I cant see that LCD, I cant edit presets. And since their preset editor is Java, I cant use that either. Oh, isn't is a really charming world? >> 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. > > I remember, that one or two years ago Julian Claasen brought up a > similar question either here or when I met him in a person asking > about some hardware synth - I forgot which - if it has wrap-around > dials, which would make it practically useless to him. This indeed is > a problem, which turned up when hardware synths were facing the > problem of having enough memory to store more than like 127 presets or > to make finer adjustments than this range allows. Just limiting the > possible settings to small numbers isn't really an option nowadays, > but doing something like a click when the wrap-around point is reached > or similar accessibility methods would not only help visually impaired > users. Good point. Unfortunately, small markets are even less likely to care about these problems. As someone once said, 10 we are a 20 minority in a 30 GOTO 20 -- CYa, Mario
