On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:50:40 +0100, Robert Jonsson wrote I think it's really a matter of taste, I'm personally not that fond of interfaces that try to replicate hardware - I think it's a bit pointless. PD is pure functionality, and has it's own aesthetic (an aquired taste maybe :)) But user interfaces are _very hard_ to get right - a lot of programmers don't realise that I think. There was an amazing looking modular for linux (I think) that I saw a screenshot of ages ago, where the modules were made out of the maths operators they represented - lots of neon colours. I can't find it now, does anyone know what I'm talking about, or did I dream it?? :) Dave

Dave Griffiths wrote: Maybe not pointless, but less usable. And aesthetics can be applied to common controls, too. -a

--- Steve Harris <S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 03:37:36 +0200, Antti Boman wrote: I remember when I first saw Reason working, and I was shown the 'back' with all the beautifully rendered bouncy cables. It took me a few minutes to stop laughing.... although the horror was compensated by a right-click menu that let you connect to any other available port without having to tediously drag the wire across the screen to a small target (hello carpal tunnel). Which is nice. Come to think of it, wires are possibly the number one hardware thing I'd rather not have to deal with in software, save for some sort of 'print layout' function. Mike __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com

actually i've worked with those sorts of apps, like Reason, in windows *cough splutter*... and i find them really annoying to work with... knobs dont actually translate very well into mouse usage!!! you end up struggling to control the thing... although generally it runs on the y axis up and down.... which is kinda counter-intuitive to using a knob in 3 dimensions! there seems to be a fashion for this sort of stuff now... i dont find it very helpful as i'm from the bizarre generation that has done all their work inside of a computer... earlier on in my studies i did do the basics of analog synthesis with oscillators etc, but i find myself lost when i go into a studio full of hardware - this is also mainly because im dyspraxic - so i dont find connecting a load of wires to each other a very helpful way of setting up... using a few commands is much easier for me! i am a graphic designer by trade though and would be very happy to offer my 'services' to anyone who is interested in gui design - not being a programmer i've been frustrated at my inability to contribute back to the free software community. but i also notice so often that windows and mac in particular have the edge with the nice gui apps at the moment... its sad to say but all these nice guis are what are attracting people to those platforms... and it *does* make them a lot easier to use. i figure this is because most of the gnu/linux community are programmers first and foremost... so we've got lots of great apps... but i find the look and feel of the bare toolkits frustrating at times... so please... if you want a nice graphic design, i'd be more than happy to help! :-) bw m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:14:19 -0500, Speaker to Vegetables wrote The advantage of knobs (that actually work in a rotary fashion) is that you get built in fine tuning, by dragging the mouse further away from the centre of the dial. It's all personal though, myself I'm not too keen on too many numbers all over the place on a GUI, and prefer visual indications - otherwise I starting thinking maths instead of music. Dave

oh definately... numbers can really mess things up - unless, as it was suggested, tooltips might be a good way to keep them invisible until needed... the problem i find though with knobs is that a mouse just isnt a fine-tuned enough tool to drag a knob around - this might just be the apps i'm using currently though, and the way they've coded their knobs... if i use my graphics stylus, things improve, but i've only got one usb port and cant run it concurrently with my usb-quattro... its an interesting thought though, how much do GUIs influence our composition?... my favourite apps have always been those that fitted like an invisible glove, that never intruded on my thinking but gave me the space to do all the things where my mind was leading me... m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On/le 23 Jan 2003 00:38:33 +0100 Carles Barrobes <carles(a)barrobes.com> wrote / a écrit quelque chose comme: yeah I think you made a great point. Sorry to disagree with nearly all the others, but as a musician, I find horrible an interface cluttered with numbers. Music apps are not for joe-users, but for professionals. If actually cubase, cakewalk and reason make hardware-like interfaces, it's because their users want it. As I'm there to be flamed, it's like so-called jazzmen who listen to the technique, not to the music. I'm currentlly spending a lot of time to make an attractive desktop with nice icons and backgrounds for my family. And no, the defaults one are not so nice (kde, gnome, xfce, wmaker etc...). Jimmac, Tigert and Rasterman are great artists, but we need more of them. Linux really misses designers for now. Maybe one day GPL will come across art. cheers. Guy CLO~ ----------------------------------------------- #ICQ 37736372 ----------------------------------------------- http://perso.wanadoo.fr/guy.clotilde/index.html -----------------------------------------------

no, i think you're right, Guy... im first and foremost a composer - second job is graphic design - and i've often wondered at the sort of interfaces im given that seem to have been designed by non-musicians... not that theres anything wrong with that, but it makes it more difficult for a musician to work with.... apps (in the mac/windoze world - im making no judgement about GNU/Linux apps here!) that i find 'seamless'... that i can use intuitively without need for worrying about how they work: ProTools Ableton Live NI Spektral Delay (never entirely sure what its going to do, but its got a lovely interface - oh please please someone code something like this for GNU/Linux! ;-) MetaSynth - nice interface, i've done a lot of work with it. the manual just sucks, ignore it! apps i find horribly confusing: Reason Max Supercollider on the borderline: IRCAM AudioSculpt - something i have worked with frequently but still find the deeper realms of it unfathomable...! ReBirth - nice to play with but there seems to be no instructions that are of any use! Unity Session - pretty cool though complex -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On/le Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:58:13 +0000 iriXx <m(a)irixx.org> wrote / a écrit quelque chose comme: Yeah. And it seems that there is two strong different point of view about the subject. I won't talk about my feelings about linux audio apps in terms of user-friendliness. It's hard to code (it's an art :) and I respect the great works of others. So I wholy agree with you that an appealing UI is necessary. How can an artist be positively creative when what is in front of him hurts his taste? Giving choice and same performance, an artist will choose the prettiest between two instruments. I for one like to look at my keyboards sometimes. A real piano can give me inspiration just looking at the wood and ivory. It can be impossible to reach this kind of beauty through computers pixels, but that's not a reason not to try. People can find inspiration too in front of concrete walls or looking at /dev/urandom (the Matrix is a piece of art, not trolling). Anyway my point is choice is a good thing . And as usual, an app should provide first a command-line interface, but it should have a code-link to an ui that is skinnable to the users heart's content. iriXx, I'm very glad that you started this thread. And there is yet a positive result as volunteers stand up to help build ui components. I' d like to say that I want to help too (a little bit in graphics, html or translation). Choice is good. cheers all. Guy CLO~ ----------------------------------------------- #ICQ 37736372 ----------------------------------------------- http://perso.wanadoo.fr/guy.clotilde/index.html ----------------------------------------------- "Ta différence m'enrichit".

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:14:19 -0500 Speaker to Vegetables <speaker-to-vegetables(a)pobox.com> wrote: It the question od code. If the code s intellectual eniugh, focus on the rotary knob and use arrow buttons or +/-. Alexandre

thanks im glad someone else thinks so too! i work with another musician, we both do live sets on laptops... and we find it drives us crazy - especially when you're working in the dark!! it doesnt work too well with trackpoint mice either (then again nothing does... dangit, i need more usb ports so i can use my wacom graphire...) m~ Speaker to Vegetables wrote: -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:10:18 +0900, Jon Ellis wrote no, it'll be coming to a version of spiralsynth modular soon :) cheers, dave

On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 14:14:04 +0000, iriXx wrote I kind of feel bad that I haven't touched the original spiralloops app in ages. Hopefully a new ssm loop plugin with lots of new features will make it Ok. dave

On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:18:12 +0100, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote: That seems sensible, its what the Nord Modular does :) you can right click to bind MIDI CC's so if it was relevant you could bind keyboard shortcuts from there too. - Steve

Steve Harris wrote: thats a *really* useful feature - something i use a lot in Ableton Live for live performance (where its easier to find a key in the dark than move about on the screen sometimes!)... being able to customise your own keybindings by right-click would be great! m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 04:43:00PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote: On the contrary, I find it much easier than trying to "turn" a GUI knob. a Y-axis-only knob only requires me to: - click on the knob and hold - drag up or down to change value a "twist-analogy" knob requires me to: - click on the knob and hold - drag mouse "away" from the knob in the approximate direction it's currently pointing ... tricky - drag the mouse in a rotating motion (clockwise or counterclockwise) ... takes practice Using this method I find that I almost always make the knob go up and down a bit by accident before it settles in to what I want. This would be disastrous for recording automation. Therefore, I would request that app authors make the mouse behavior user-configurable. Please don't force the twist analogy on your poor users. Some like it, some hate it. IMHO, the "twist" motion is very natural with a real knob and very un-natural with a mouse, touchpad, trackball, what-have-you. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com Look! Up in the sky! It's THE MODESTO! (courtesy of isometric.spaceninja.com)

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:54:16AM -0800, Paul Winkler wrote: gAlan uses LeftMoseButton-> up-down RightMouseButton -> knob points at pointer... I use both methods frequently....

Mike Rawes wrote: yes, actually i was going to raise the pawful apps as a great example of lovely guis in linux - Spiral Loops would be my favourite though, just because it gets you into a totally different way of thinking about sound... the originality is what draws me to it... being an artist, the visual look and feel of an app influences the way i work with it very much.... not sure how that translates for you coders out there :)... do you find guis influence your thinking about sound or not?... they're cute, and i must admit Reason has some lovely graphic design - but a bunch of messy wires on screen are just as bad as a bunch of messy wires in the studio! i've been inclined to think there *must* be a more computer-driven way of doing things... if you're going to emulate everything on-screen you might as well just buy a hardware studio imho... now *that* sounds like the sort of thing im looking for..... something in the way of a few simple commands - like the way jack works between apps - that could link things up... well, maybe jack is heading this way too...?... having not worked with it enough i dont feel qualified to say... comments anyone? that sounds great! yes.... i'd love to have a go at that sort of thing... i need a little primer in how widgets are made - perhaps just trawling through the various libs installed on my machine might help... but if there are specific dos and dont's it'd help lots to know about them.... just a thought... maybe we should cc this over to linux-audio-dev?... thanx so much! glad you liked it :) the iriXx.org one is somewhat unfinished - part of my Ph.D studies, but i've got distracted by writing my book - which is on the copyleftmedia website... i'd love to get back to doing more .swf based work - but i just wish i had Free Software tools to do it in, i dont like being forced to use proprietary tools to do my interactive art... which brings me to another 'request'... anyone know of any Free interactive art tools?... blender is about the only one i can think of off-hand... or cinelerra maybe... even if .swf format is proprietary, maybe theres another format we could export to for interactive art?... best m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

sounds great - thats very easy for me to do! :) yes, this is normally what i'd do, create a high resolution master copy and then optimise as much as possible without losing the nice look... it'd be lots of fun to have a go! m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 13:48, iriXx wrote: What about iconic/language type stuff like live uses? ...more of an audio alphabet than fancy graphics. You could get some standardization going and make things easier and a little more object oriented. If you get that in place then folk can start messing with the symbols.

doh i meant stylised not abstracted late night loss of adjectives.... m~ iriXx wrote: -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Brian Redfern wrote: It's interesting that you should mention this. I just happened accross an SDL toolkit. (They said it was GLUT for SDL). It's hosted at www.icculus.org and is called SDL_Teapot. Taybin -- http://www.piratesvsninjas.com

On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 18:07, iriXx wrote: Sort of... I'm thinking along slightly different lines though. {I've actually been giving this a good deal of thought over the past hour or so.} If you were to define some sort of grid or matrix in xml so as to provide folk with a lot of empty spaces to fill with plugins {engines, sounds and so forth} and then go back and define a symbol for each of those spaces {function, sound, type of connection} giving some thought to syntax and function within the matrix {possibly extending this into other dimensions at some point} you'd have the beginnings of a sort of universal {electronic} musical language/application. Keeping things simple and iconic would allow you to redefine and extend things {you might take a look at this: http://www.gnu.org/software/octal/ox_api_main/index.html The guy that put this page up originally mentioned something to the effect that electronic music required a new language...what we have now not being altogether suited {as well as being a bit limiting} ...to illustrating electronic musical concepts {We need to be able to represent them quite differently... a stream of characters {a custom font} or flowcharted or placed on a 3 dimensional grid, etc...} It would be much easier for folk to simply build grid elements so you could extend or modify or replace specific parts and functions of the grid than to remake the entire thing every time one wanted to create a new application. {form being massively tied to function here} All you'd need to do would be string together different elements of it. Arts and Octal and Gnome-Think and pd and buzz, etc already have a sort of framework in place for organizing information this way... I think what we need is an object catalog... a language. It needs to be universal and standardized. Symbols need to be defined for specific modules so as to make things easly understandable. It's a higher level method of organizing high level concepts. I think it probaby needs to be moved into the third and possibly 4th dimension as well. Otherwise it's going to get to be really difficult to keep the relationships between functions clear. So.. yeah... abstracted and symbol-like is more appropriate. 3 dimensional with some means of representing placement in time are probably good too.

On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 19:59, iriXx wrote: Same here... I'm messing at a bunch of languages though... I can do basic scripting stuff and design interfaces in an ide. I could put together an interface but the engine would probably suck. I think you'd probably need the backing of someone like GNU or IBM or someone to get taken seriously enough to pull it off though... I was just thinking that one might design things towards those ends. Personally, I like the idea of display postscript interfaces... you can always extend that into 3d space. They {Octal} just updated their page today... http://cnmat.cnmat.berkeley.edu/OSC/ ...has several projects that are looking for designers. There is a link from the Oberon page to this... http://www.bluebottle.ethz.ch/oberon.net/ And... from there to here... http://www.go-mono.com/ Which looks as though it may be a solution for those of us that aren't "programmers". I get a feeling that's going to become an integral part of design/art/writing/life in the near future though...

On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 18:35, David O'Toole wrote: I interpolated a bit... You mention {actually on creativelinux} that you're not awfully fond of existant language oriented synths or of midi. I just think they {synths} need an alphabet. Midi seems a bit too specific to non computer functions. What I'm really talking is a sort of consistent, simple method of determining the contents of those mysterious little boxes and machines... I realize that text is pretty accurate... It doesn't travel well. "Delay" in English isn't real readable to folk in India, for instance... On the other hand if you had a consistent character set that could be mapped to a font the learning curve would be considerably less steep. It might be nice to be able to simply type an idea or even use ideas as modules {gnome think} A vector format {did you see my last message?} aside from being easily extruded into 3d forms would be scalable and easy for folk to use... It would make banks of effects, patches etc easy to work with. Perhaps one could even fontify the effects and samples themselves or at least alias them... then you could just type a musical phrase. If you search www.databaseaudio.com folk are doing some nifty stuff with flash... the format's suited... Add things like color mapped to the frequency of specific sounds {by the computer.} ...So that when you adjusted the frequency the color would change accordingly... you could map volume to size... move into 3 dimensions and you've got the added descriptors of height, distance, reflection, all the properties of light and so on. The interface could fairly accurately represent the music... and, inversely the music would influence the onscreen display... From there you get all sorts of truly multimedia possibilities... To take it even further... you could actually model sound graphically... nurbs, beziers, etc... ...I'm seeing this as much more effective than the staff and... it's unique to computer music. I suppose you could implement it that way.

yeah swf is great in lots of ways. Trying to use Gtk after using swf is very frustrating! I guess you know swfs can be produced nicely from php? unfortunately the format just has too many problems. Despite the fact that 95% of what is produced in Flash is annoying crap, it is very versatile, has fast rendering, good scripting etc, but its a shame it has poor host communication. However i do beleive that good freeform vector support in a widget toolkit is very important. The Free approach of course is to use Svg, which looks very promising, but just hasnt been implemented yet:-) there is some good stuff being produced in svg such as the useless but *beautiful* Gnome icons. [note to self: how does Nautilus render these?] I believe the format encourages a nicer look than slapping up cheesy 19" rack brushed metal. do you feel that Svg will become usable in the near future? best regards -- Tim Orford

start with the online manual at php.net(?) "Chapter LVII. Ming functions for Flash" its script only of course tho, no gui. But due to the excellent nesting of swfs you can use php in combination with regular bitmap/vector apps. not sure if its up your street, but it works well for me. Php rocks! -- Tim Orford

Daniel James wrote: very interesting point.... i'm wondering if its possible to code a front end to kaconnect, something like Tksysv - where you just select what you want connecting to what, in boxes, rahter than wih all those wires everywhere that i'm gonna lose track of sooner or later!!! yes, i agree, its a kind of macho thing! having seen this at work in the studio frequently as a woman composer ;-) yeah... is it an elitist thing, or is it simply that apps are written by coders rather than musicians a lot of the time?... i know only of a few coders who *are* professional musicians (most of them reside on this list :) and thats where the mac world seems to take over & sucker everyone in.... because it looks so 'simple'... remember the old ad 'i'm not a computer person?'... when the fact is they end up using exactly the same tools as everyone else.... its not actually hard for a musician to translate to computers - it just takes some self-belief.... musicians, generally, have a good head for mathematics, you have to to be able to write music.... and a good head for languages too... its just overcoming that barrier of 'ooh, i couldnt be technical'.... my former teacher in Holland - from back when i was an instrumental composer - has recently switched to using Sibelius to print all his work instead of the laborious hand-copying he has always done, and is marketing all of his music on the web. he, when i first met him, was most definately *not* a computer person - probably still isn't ! so if he can do it.... ;-) best m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 08:14:05 -0500, Dave Phillips wrote: What would be more helpful is a good routing algorithm like in one of the screenshots off the page I posted. The stright lines in pd can make simple patches real rats nests. - Steve

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 02:42:58PM +0000, Mike Rawes wrote: (cut) Maybe it's possible to use some of their code to improve PD&other apps ? v PS: haven't looked at the code yet, but I suspect the routing to be quite separate from the rest

No it's not aRts or mbox (although John Dunn's SoftStep looks like it's along similar lines: http://www.algoart.com/web/softstep.htm) Still looking - but I'm starting to think it must have been a dream. :) Dave

This thread is quite relevant to me because I'm trying to build a modular synth gui at the moment. My main motivation is that I want a JACK patchbay that has this type of GUI, but ultimately I would also like to add the ability to wire LADSPA plugins directly into the network (the difference between this and your average modular synth app is that the guis for these plugins will be drawn on top of the plugins' boxes in the network, rather than in their own windows). Also, I would release the GUI as a gtkmm widget so that it could be used in other applications. Anyway, the point of mentioning this here is that what I had originally envisaged was curved wires drawn over the top of the modules, and each wire having a control point which can be dragged around to change the curve it follows (right-clicking would bring up a menu so that the wire can be deleted, changed colour, etc). I was also toying with the idea of making ports dockable so that if you drag a module next to another one so the ports line up they will automatically be connected, making things like chaining stereo effects much quicker. However, drawing wires over the top of widgets turns out to be far from easy in gtkmm, and if people actually prefer the straight-lines-not-crossing-modules approach it would probably be better to do it like that, although I'll have to think hard about the routing algorithm. I'm quite interested in making this GUI as intuitive and efficient to use as possible, so I'd be really interested to hear people's thoughts on how such a GUI should look and behave, and what features you'd like to see. sorry for the long post, Nathaniel. On Wednesday 22 January 2003 2:42 pm, Mike Rawes wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 14:42:58 +0000 (GMT) Mike Rawes <mike_rawes(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: kUML does it too :-) There is enough good code for reusage in fact :) Alexandre

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:07:44 +0000 Steve Harris <S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: I wonder if there are any. I just saw it reouting with my own eyes ;) Alexandre

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:05:43 +0000 Steve Harris <S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: Sorry, it was UML Modeller: http://apps.kde.com/na/2/info/id/1264 As soon as I compile it, I will publish a screenshot. BTW, Dia has a similar ability. Alexandre

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 06:07:44 +0000, Steve Harris wrote: I just played with artsbuilder and its routing is very impressive, it occasioanly makes some odd choices if pushed hard, but for plausible examples its really good. For a jack patching app I'd prefer it if the modules were vertical and the grid was finer (more ports and connections). I've a suspicion that routing algorithms get expensive with high res grids though. - Steve

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 07:03:50 +0000, Nathaniel Virgo wrote: Arguably, its easier to make neat layouts. It also makes the routing algorithm much more efficient. It may not even complete in realtime if it had free positioning. - Steve

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:25:40 +0000, Nathaniel Virgo wrote: I'd rather have it freeform myself (with magnetism would be even better). Looks like a good paper. I found an implemntation of the wavefront technique in c++, but that is grid based from what I can tell. - Steve

Hi, Dave Phillips wrote: First I want to say: Pd has an interface, that is *not* intended to model hardware, and I muchmuch prefer this over eye candy like the tassmann synth. In fact, I hate interfaces like the tassman synth. I think, they impose a usage model that is not apt for computers. And as I never used "the real thing" in the form of hardware synths, I don't care much for knobs and such. I really admire the interface Ableton's Live has: Clean, bright colors, absolutely *no* shadows. This is the kind of interface, computer monitors were made for, not for brushed metal GUIs. So I would say: Yes, we do indeed need Graphics Designers, but we don't need photographers. They learn more than that at art school. I'll step into the role of a Pd guru for the moment:) The GUI-shadows aren't included in the official Pd on Miller S. Puckette's site, but you can checkout the devel_0_36 branch of Pd in our "Pure Data Externals Repository" at Sourceforge. Homepage: pure-data.sf.net, browse CVS at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/pure-data/. They are not available (or possible) as externals, you need a patched Pd. It gives you colored patch cords, shadows behind objects (which I have turned off, as you might have guessed by now), and also Jack-support and some other niceties. As Pd is multiplatform, there are more things to consider when making it prettier than graphics alone. For example handling fonts is very different on Mac, W32 and Linux. The "butt-ugly" (but ultracooli IMO) Courier font used in Pd currently is the common denominator between systems. Everyone has it, and it is easy to read. In the end Pd probably will look more like it's Max/MSP counterpart, but there are more important things to do in PD than appearance. As of now, I have yet to find a more capable and extendable software synth on Linux than Pd. There's simply nothing that comes close, if you don't count programming languages like Csound. Someone once said, and it holds true: "Pd is MAX's uglier, but smarter little sister." ciao -- Frank Barknecht

i've been working together with a musician who uses Live exclusively, on OS X... i've been pretty impressed by its practicality and versatility especially for a performance context... actually i've had a go with it and its very intuitive to use (and being dyspraxic, im a stickler for that!)... i'd love it if someone could adapt the principles of Live for linux... doesnt have to be a clone... actually what i like about linux sound applications is their originality... i can make sounds in Ceres or Spiral Loops that i can't make in windows or mac.... m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:01:55 +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote: OK, here I'm probably just showing my lack of skill with pd and co. I would definatly agree with that. Don't they have UI modules that can be used as well? I think I've seen screenshots that looked quite clean. I've not used jMax and pd to the extent that I notice any difference between them, at the moment I'm using pd occasionally because thats what comes with Planet :) Taking a week off work to learn jMax and pd is on my TODO list. - Steve

--- Dave Griffiths <dave(a)pawfal.org> wrote: Module wiring: The biggest improvement is to implement sub-patches [yes, I know there are plans for this in SSM :] - that way you can hide a lot of detail in a single module. For example, a four oscillator synth with a filter, lfo and a couple of EGs makes for a lot of modules, especially if you include math modules to scale stuff. All of these could be wrapped up in a single patch with half a dozen open inputs/outputs. At the GUI end of things - most modular synths seem to assume one-gui-per module, which again makes up for a lot of screen space used. In the four-osc synth example above, there'd be a lot of redundant knobs/sliders for ports that are actually driven by connections. this somewhat by merging related modules into a single horizontal unit. I suppose the ideal solution would be some sort of simple GUI builder so you can create a set of controls for connection to a module, sub-patch, or whatever. This could to some degree be automated (hide/show controls as connections are created/removed). I think ArtsBuilder had this last time I used it - GUI elements were treated just like modules. Positioning them was a pain though, but it's been about a year since I looked at it - things may have improved. I quite like the separation of the wiring (which really only for initial setting up) and the control (which is used when performing). I don't like, for example, the way the Nord Modular does things, by having wires/connections at the front: What if you slip and pull out a wire instead of turning a knob during a performance? Same result as tripping over a cable on stage: Oops! Mike __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:20:24 +0000, Mike Rawes wrote: That depends on your building style. I hardly ever use sub patches, my patches have too much interrealtion. I /really/ dont like a seperation of wiring and controls, that breaks my mental context. I have never used the GUI of a Nord in a live performance, I link it to a MIDI controller and use that + the front panel. Infact I've never even gigged a nord wired to a PC. - Steve

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 01:20:34 +0000, Mike Rawes wrote: I was disputing your statememt that its the biggest improvement. I think the biggest impriovement is combining the patching and parameter control UIs. OTOH an FM synth built from first principles is a good example, though most modular synths would/should have a single module to do that. More importantly you can hide only the "logic" wires, or only the "CV" wires. Wires joining two logic ports will be tagged as logic (yellow) by default, but theres nothing special about them and you can recolour them at will. - Steve

On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:59:21 +0000 (GMT), Mike Rawes wrote I'm still not entirely convinced, but like I said - it's worth trying it out, and I think it's the best way to incorporate polyphony (duplicating subpatches instead of the whole thing) I used to have the plugin windows inserted into the patch window, it's quite easy to do. Possibly with a button to "pop" them out of the widgets into top level windows, or hide them - which would shrink the module back to it's original state. The only thing I'm not sure about is handling the other modules positions when they change size. I've kind of got used to how it is (I've implemented module name changing BTW - so you can correlate module and it's control window easier) but there is nothing wrong with experimenting. I'd also like to try putting some window placement code into the current scheme, like that Ion WM - it's perfect. Probably time to take this off LAD I think. Dave

I'm thinking along the lines of a plugin that spawns another ssm window with in and out modules (which map to the ins and outs on the subpatch module in the parent patch), but I'm not sure yet. It could be as simple as a ssm plugin. dave

Hi, Mike Rawes schrieb: Definetly. IMO subpatches in a modular synth are as important as "Undo" in a text editor. They not only can hide things, they make modular and object oriented development with lots of re-use possible. In this regard it also is crucial, that subpatches accept arguments like functions in most programming languages (C, Python,...). The newer versions of Pd (>0.35) have this nice invention of "graph on parent" subpatches. This means, that GUI elements (sliders, knobs...) in subpatches - but no cords - are shown in the surrounding, parent patch, like a see-through patch. With this, one can build one-gui-per-module GUIs, but it isn't enforced. Or, what I did in my sequencer abstractions for Pd, one can build pure-GUI objects that don't actually have a lot of module action inside. (screenshots at http://footils.org/cgi-bin/cms/?show_article=14 and http://footils.org/cgi-bin/cms/?show_article=13) ciao -- Frank Barknecht

Hi Dave, Dave Griffiths schrieb: Ahum, yes, of course, I didn't think of this. But this is a failure, that was forced by the hardware. As I wrote in my first mail in this thread, I think it is inherently wrong to model software after hardware. Imagine how a textprocessing software like Word would look, if the developers would have tried to achieve the look and interface of a typewriter? Most commercial audio software sadly looks like typewriters. ciao -- Frank Barknecht

Hi, Steve Harris schrieb: But jack needs supbatches and colored wires then... ^_^ ciao -- Frank Barknecht

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 02:16:41 +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote: Yes, thats exactly it. Thanks Dave. The equivalnet on a true modular synth patch is grouping the related modules closer together physically. Though often thats too much hastle on real hardware so you dont bother, but its easy in virtual ones :) - Steve

yeah.... being able to minimise patches... that would be the sort of functionality i'd love to see in a lot of other applications / contexts too... (it might be an idea for how to fit more Spiral Loops onto a screen?...) has anyone used KDX peer to peer software here? you can minimise every window into a dock, and then a single-click maximises it... it sems this sort of function would be ideal in music apps... or being able to hide sections the way Max patches can do..... m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:39:36 +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote: Yes, this is a very good idea. I would guess its neccesary to break out subwindows for complex things (like big sequencers) but most things can be squeezed into reasonably sized modules with care. The Nord Modular is a good example of this. It has the most usable UI of any virtual modular synth I've used. http://www.clavia.se/pictures/nordmodular/patchwindowlarge.jpg The combination of really well drawn patch cables, consistant sockets and interfaces, good colour hinting and input chaining makes it comparativly simple to work with. Something that SyncModular can do (and I think pd etc.) is create sperate UI panes that can be linked to a subset of the controls to provide a visually simple contol surface. The UI panes just have sliders, knobs etc. that can be dragged around and labeled. that way the patch can be treaded like a normal synth by users without seeing the rats nest that makes it go. - Steve

On Thursday 23 January 2003 11:39 am, Dave Griffiths wrote: Have a way of hiding the module's gui and shrinking it back into a little box. I think you may have mentioned something like this on one of the ssm lists before but I think it's a really good idea. You'd need to somehow push other modules out of the way when the gui was expanded and pull them back when it shrinks, but I think that's doable.

Dave Griffiths wrote: Live hides a lot of its functions by switching between screens... the sample editor overlaps the plugin interface, and by clicking on a tab on the bottom you can switch between the two... the session editor and sequencer are seperate windows too (so far i havent even had use for the sequencer!)... m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 09:39, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote: http://www.oberon.ethz.ch/native/snaps/tile.jpg

On Wednesday 22 January 2003 5:52 pm, Frank Barknecht wrote: Does it allow you to change the background colour as well? Personally I find black-on-white displays hard to look at for long periods of time, which is the main reason I've never given PD a good try.

On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 07:06 AM, Steve Harris wrote: Interesting that you would mention Macintosh and this in the same day, as this is how Quartz Extreme on OS 10.2 works. All of the UI code is fobbed off onto your video card, if it has enough memory. (If not, it uses standard Quartz). Since I have a Mac (the dual 1Ghz model) with a good enough card and OS 10.2, I can attest that the results are actually quite nice. Using OpenGL for your UI also gives you some nifty options you don't get under standard 2D drawing. I seem to recall a Linux-related project to make a window manager that was OpenGL running on a video card. I can't recall the name of it offhand, though. And I agree, we need graphic designers. I may try my hand at it, if I find some free time. (At this point, that's a big if. :) Regards, Darren Landrum

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 04:09:41PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote: I went looking for it, apparently it's been renamed to fresco: http://www.fresco.org and it's not a window manager, it's a windowing environment (i.e. it completely replaces X with a different API) -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 09:36:44 +0000, iriXx wrote: Its pretty simple, the knobs are just a horizontal strip with the frames side by side. switches are two images or two frames side my side and sliders are a background, two ends and the "thumb" part as sperate images. I can put the source images for my UI code online if it will help. visually they aren't good, but they show the principle. I used PNG format, as it has good transparency support. - Steve

Should we need that kind of machine for running audio apps under Linux? Isn't this just bloatware? Doesn't it rule out less processor-intensive approaches, such as embedded systems? Linux free software shouldn't have to emulate proprietary software - there's the chance to avoid the mistakes of the past. For example, Audacity is so much better than Cool Edit Pro for hard disk recording performance, even on Windows. The Audacity interface is so clear that musicians I know with absolute zero computer knowledge can grasp what to do with it in about thirty seconds. Cheers Daniel

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 11:14:40AM +0100, Lukas Degener wrote: Sorry, I have currently no time for that :( It's precision :) But language doesn't really matter if the message comes across. The idea of a skinnable GUI is very attractive, I know that xmms do it, but their way of doing it is considered a very ugly hack, so i don't know if there are any open (free) implementations available for you to peek at. As to the different ways of controlling knobs, if you use an event based system, you can make an interface onto which you could plug different ways of controlling the same control (mousewheel, sliding axis, ...), but that's generaly accepted practice if you care about model-view-controller separation, which I think is good. best regards, vincent

using bitmaps also makes things a ton easier for us graphic designers who have limited experience of coding to be able to help :-) m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

do you know of a beginners guide to widget-writing?.... thx m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

Taybin Rutkin wrote: cool, thanks.... bearing in mind i'm a good graphic designer but a really really *bad* programmer... ;-) m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 11:27:07 +0100, Lukas Degener wrote: Thats OK, but it only leaves it open to C++ programmers and the work can only be used on Qt programs. If you support bitmaps then it can be used by any software (with a bit of sclaing and/or cropping). - Steve

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 02:06:20PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote: On top of that, you'd also have rotation and scaling with very little CPU overhead so you don't even have to bother providing several frames of your knobs, while getting higher precision. Also one has things like QGLWidget in QT and I'm sure there are similar constructs in the other major gui-toolkits. Maybe one could start a project to create a library of 'standard' widgets (knobs, faders, waveform viewers etc.) for the different toolkits, they could be easily customised by providing different textures... The only problem I see is that some video cards still don't have 3D accelerated drivers... Christian Henz

You can count me too for graphics and web design. -- .---------------------. | Emiliano Grilli | | emillo(a)libero.it | | Linux user #209089 | '---------------------'

oh yeah, i'd forgotten that one... i started work on a web-based app in shockwave that was somewhat similiar... modular thing based on colourful blocks... *sigh* i wish there were tools like shockwave for gnu/linux... dangit why am i stuck using non-free stuff.... m~ Dave Griffiths wrote: -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

Taybin Rutkin wrote: hehe yup as well as the 'too much information' school! kinda fun tho... m~ -- iriXx www.iriXx.org copyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info(a)copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk _ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp *** stopping make sense ***

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 09:06:10 -0800, Paul Winkler wrote: My reading was that there was implicit mixing going on, but maybe I misunderstood and its actually doing a bad job of representing. It does look unlikly now I actually look at it in detail. - Steve