Am 20.02.2016 um 08:30 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: guitarix use zita-convolver direct, so no config files for jconvolver. (Ralf, you may try the ttf-roboto font, it is chosen because it shrink the GUI size ;-) ) @david There is the old jc-gui, which generate config files for jconvolver. I didn't know if it still works, I ain't use it any-more, but, you could try it if you wish. https://github.com/zzzzrrr/jcgui

Am 20.02.2016 um 09:24 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: Your picture is a result from your "hate" against our style, don't use the clear option with our git version, it ain't work any-more, in fact, it is removed. The only result you get from using the artefacts which leaves on you pc, because you didn't clean up before update from git, is, that our style files ain't get loaded. Here is a picture which show how we "design" it. Just note, the Moog Filter isn't re-designed (for now, there is a reason that there is no release with the new UI design) to the new style, so it is a bad example. http://de.tinypic.com/view.php?pic=35k1wtf&s=9#.VsglQF9lSPA However, you can see that the wide of the Rack is given by the EQ plugin above. You say, you would prefer a scroll bar for the wide, but, have you ever write a GUI? Any action have influence to other actions, and believe me, for the guitarix rack, it isn't sufficient to use a scrollbar for the wide. You are absolutely not forced to use two racks side by side, that is a option for those who use wide screen monitors and prefer it this way. Standard is a single rack. The option could be chose from menu, or from the buttons above the rack. And, well, there is a reason that you chose a theme and a font, the very same is true for the guitarix app. As a developer, I've the freedom to do so, and, 99% of the guitarix users love it. I know, we cant make it sufficient for all, that's a pity, but that the way it is. When we didn't "design" our app, others may say that it is "ugly" (well, including me). Maybe, the webui fits more your eyes? http://de.tinypic.com/view.php?pic=5oxbnl&s=9#.VsgpgV9lSPA http://de.tinypic.com/view.php?pic=jtnfvb&s=9#.VsgpmV9lSPA

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 14:02:31 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: PS: $ cp -rp .config/guitarix/ .config/guitarix_backup $ guitarix This didn't change the design. However, perhaps better, since this outdated view at least allows to clearly read the values, the new look you showed by the screenshots doesn't. I'm using moderat contrast/brightness settings for the CRT.

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 17:17:16 +0100, Hermann Meyer wrote: I'm using a package and a package manager ;). I only made ttf-robot an optional dependency, but this doesn't affect anything else of the update process. [rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ pacman -Qi guitarix-git Name : guitarix-git Version : 0.34.0.r139.g68994a4-1 Description : a virtual guitar amplifier for Linux Architecture : x86_64 URL : http://guitarix.sourceforge.net Licenses : GPL Groups : None Provides : guitarix guitarix2 gx_head Depends On : gtkmm liblrdf boost-libs zita-convolver eigen bluez-libs lilv ffmpeg webkitgtk2 Optional Deps : meterbridge: sound meters [installed] ttf-roboto Required By : None Optional For : None Conflicts With : guitarix guitarix2 gx_head Replaces : None Installed Size : 95.49 MiB Packager : Unknown Packager Build Date : Sat 06 Feb 2016 03:19:14 PM CET Install Date : Sat 06 Feb 2016 03:24:50 PM CET Install Reason : Explicitly installed Install Script : Yes Validated By : None

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 18:00:19 +0100, Hermann Meyer wrote: Unless there's no bug affecting "pacman", the official Arch Linux tool, yes, even if a buggy, unofficial tool to build guitarix should have been used, the packages will be upgraded, removed, installed using the official tool and I'm even not using a testing repository, so "pacman" is the current stable, official supported release on my machine. [rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ grep guitarix /var/log/pacman.log | grep upgrade [2013-07-20 12:41] [PACMAN] upgraded guitarix-git (20130507.2031-1 -> 20130720.2257-1) [2014-01-21 16:30] [PACMAN] upgraded guitarix-git (20130720.2257-1 -> 20140120.2398-1) [2014-07-05 16:33] [PACMAN] upgraded guitarix-git (0.29.0.57.gb725a6d-1 -> 0.30.0.0.gab3ead4-1) [2015-04-06 21:29] [ALPM] upgraded guitarix-git (0.30.0.0.gab3ead4-1 -> 0.32.3.r33.gdde5285-1) [2015-07-25 15:30] [ALPM] upgraded guitarix-git (0.32.3.r33.gdde5285-1 -> 0.32.3.r69.gfe2168c-1) [2016-01-04 01:35] [ALPM] upgraded guitarix-git (0.32.3.r69.gfe2168c-1 -> 0.34.0.r76.g8d2a959-1) [2016-02-06 15:24] [ALPM] upgraded guitarix-git (0.34.0.r76.g8d2a959-1 -> 0.34.0.r139.g68994a4-1)

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 14:02:31 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: Perhaps it would be more clear to distinguish on and of states of virtual LEDs, if a light reflex on one side and a shadow on the other side caused by light from outside the LEDs is visible, if the LED are off and if the LEDs emit light from inside the LEDs, there could be a bright ring at the inside edges of the LEDs, then a less bright ring inside that bright ring and a bright spot in the middle of the LEDs and outside of the LED there could be a corona from the emitted light. Much better would be a very dark LED without any effect, if the LED is off. Theoretically it's also correct the way it's now, emitted light from inside the LEDs in the upper left corner and less brightness to the lower left corner and no corona at all, but since a monitor/display always is emitting light and the position of the bright and less bright light doesn't change, if the viewer changes the position, it could be confused with light reflexes and shadows from outside the LEDs, when LEDs are off. IOW it's not a clear choice to use this style for virtual LEDs that are turned on. However, the best approach for those virtual switches might be to add the words "off" and "on" and no LEDs at all.

Thank you Hermann, I can't test it now, but will do so ASAP. On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:05:00 +0100, Hermann Meyer wrote: So maybe IceCat, Palemoon etc. likely will work too. Regards, Ralf