2 Mar
2011
2 Mar
'11
11:49 p.m.
2011/3/2 Paul Giblock <pgiblox(a)gmail.com>om>:
Personally, I like the idea of plugin interfaces
having some form of
visualization. The compressor example is obvious. So is the graphical
equalizer. I can imagine other cases as well: waveform of a sampler.
Perhaps a synth that let's the user scribble their own waveform. There are
all sorts of things that would provide better user interfaces if the control
is richer.
My question was actually whether the UI represents the plugin only, or
may also represent the input/output/intermediate-stages... i mean,
whether the visualization part is separated from the UI or not.
This web UI stuff might be the best new interface
we've never used. But, I
want a studio configuration, not some "I can change plugin parameters using
an html text input while I'm at the office." David seems to think anything
with a pretty interface is stupid and just eye candy. But try convincing
Apple's human interface team of that argument.
Look is totally orthogonal to functionality. I'm personally concerned
about functionality in this case.
If the solution to visualization in lv2 is "ur
doing it wrong", then perhaps
we are using the wrong plugin tech.
LV2 is decentralized and extensible, never forget that. So is the
mindset of the people behind it. We don't always agree, and sometimes
take different paths, but still remain compatible... which other
plugin format allows you to do that?