29 Sep
2010
29 Sep
'10
10:46 p.m.
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 21:19:53 +0100
pete shorthose <pshorthose(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 28/09/10 21:17, Arnold Krille wrote:
While generally not liking rotary control emulations, when I do come
across these I will only use ones with a linear action, the others I
find impossible to use effectively.
I would also suggest the enhancements that Rosegarden uses. The first is
the the action is in fact x+y / -x-y, so that either vertical or
horizontal movement works.
The second is that if you double click on the knob it pops up a spin
box that shows the numerical range, has up/down spinners and allows
direct numerical entry.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
When such an audio-gui standard and configuration is developed, I would love to
participate. And use it in my apps. I think its a good idea, especially the
idea of allowing the user to switch between circular and linear behaviour for
round controls. And have that changes affect all apps supporting this
"standard".
i prefer to have both available at once. i think galan does this.
my need for the linear method stems from using the mouse for
recorded modulation, which radial is useless for. (you need to describe
a perfect circle in order to replicate the effects of a linear motion)
some might argue that no one should use a mouse for this stuff,
and they might be right, but i doubt they are offering to buy me
a nice control surface either :)
(even with such an alternative, linear mouse control is still
highly convenient for experimentation and rough sketches.)
Please go on with this, don't bother with
toolkits and how they implement
graphics, make it a configuration definition, a global / per-user config file and
think about some simple libs to give easy access to these configs in all major
languages like C, C++, python and maybe some more. (The less dependencies
these libs have, the higher the chance of adoption...)
some kind of reference lib could help, preferably a static lib.
i hadn't thought of that. but bear in mind that most applications
make use of a specific configuration back end. i would expect
many developers to be loath to support more than one at once,
splitting configuration options across different systems may be a deal
breaker. but perhaps only so for the reference lib(s), not the underlying
standard so there's no harm in it that i can see.
we need input from the community to make it work though.
would people consider using it?
what control methods do people want/need? (a list of candidates
basically)
if people are sufficiently disinterested that they don't even comment
then the opening question of whether it's a viable or not answers itself.
cheers,
pete.