Zebralette 3 Spline Editor & UX Discussion

[Fannon]

I think it would be good to make it easier to find and switch to the guide curves. Right now you need to right click an icon (of many) that isn't labeled in a way that makes it obvious that the guide curves are behind it.

Another idea, but not so sure if it can be realized reasonably: On the main view, it might be nice to optionally show guides, too. Especially if they're used in OSC FX.

For example, by adding them into the header of the editor?

2024-02-24 07_23_57-_Untitled - paint.net 5.0.11.png

[lattetown]

Are you building Zebralette using the JUCE framework?

No, we don't.

Ah, well it's the open source audio framework that iZotope uses which exposes its UX accessibility features. You should check it out! BTW, several plugin makers are using it now: Arturia, Moog, Spitfire, Steinberg, and Valhalla all use it.

[Urs]

It's open source, but neither free nor would it change anything. JUCE does not have the editing tools and widgets we need. JUCE is also not just a set of UI widgets, it's a complete framework for production of audio software. It has none of the aspects and inner workings that all of our products are built with. Reimplementing our software in JUCE would take years, which I'm not prepared to do just to get the tab key.

It also would not remedy the situation: I don't think it would be too much effort to hook into accessibility features for a few controls like knobs and sliders. But hooking our spline editor, our graphic EQs, our Mapping editors, our preset management system, our Grid Control, our Racks, our ModMatrix Selectors and all these other controls that are extremely complex into an accessibility system would still require an unsurmountable effort that we, a team of 5 developers can simply not afford. And exactly that work would still be needed to be done if a switch to JUCE was possible. It doesn't happen by itself.

[Urs]

And again: Some of our software can be almost completely controlled via keyboard, in some hosts. Diva for instance. I'm happy to bring that back into active development, but it won't change the fact that our spline editor in Zebralette is a visual tool that in my opinion no keyboard control, screen reading or otherwise accessibility tool will make as usable for visually impaired people. A completely text based input might be able to do that, and that's where my focus would rather be.

Again, if someone had some pointers on how software like Adobe Illustrator or Affinity Designer is made accessible towards visually impaired people, I'd happily pass that on to the team.

[Fannon]

I also wonder how much overhead comes with the JUCE framework. One thing about the u-he plugins I very appreciate is how fast they are to load. It gets to the point where it's actually faster to start Reaper with a project that has an u-he synth inside of it than just loading one Arturia Plugin in an already running DAW. Crazy.

But this cannot be entirely JUCE framework fault, because the Valhalla plugins load fast enough (but also only have a very basic UI).

[Urs]

Yeah, I like to have full control over the way graphics files load, even how vector graphics raster. We extend the capabilities of our UI engine as we need it. I don’t benchmark other engines but I always check for options to make our engines faster.

[jooster]

Why do nice curves in the OSC Editor? Lemme explain; with the harmonic log axis on, placing points on whatever harmonic one wants the curve becomes a set of straight lines connecting each of the points. Fine, clear. But why modify these lines to something smooth? The spectral content _in between harmonics_ as it is drawn is not generated. As a matter of fact, the straight lines are not so meaningful either, perhaps bars drawn at the harmonics do better to indicate the resultant spectrum.

Just to demo my point; when creating a pure sine in wavetable, curve spectrum and the curve peaking at "1", second point at "2" at the bottom (so flat line all the way to the right), changing the curve with "beautify" function does not change the spectral content i.e., no different sound. I can pull that curve between fundamental and harmonic 1 every which way and there is no spectral difference.

I am not suggesting the curve tools are not necessary (I understand these are universal tools applicable in MSEG and other OSC editing circumstances). I am suggesting that (if all the stuff above is correct), drawing bars at harmonics makes more sense - alternatively, have a tool that allows me to quickly draw harmonics at places where I want them rather than having to set 3 points (harmonic, one left, one right) as it is now.

Hope I am making sense ...

[pdxindy]

alternatively, have a tool that allows me to quickly draw harmonics at places where I want them rather than having to set 3 points (harmonic, one left, one right) as it is now.

Hope I am making sense ...

Check the shapes section

[jooster]

alternatively, have a tool that allows me to quickly draw harmonics at places where I want them rather than having to set 3 points (harmonic, one left, one right) as it is now.

Hope I am making sense ...

Check the shapes section

yes good point, I did have a look at that before but found it to be a bit cumbersome for this purpose. I can add a "peaky" shape (which again suggests there is spectral content generated left and right of the peak/harmonic) but then am still left with moving/editing 5 (!) points if I want to change things. Yes it's all possible I understand, I just want the "tool" to be so intuitive that it goes away while I am creating sounds. (Sorry if I come across as a complainer, not intended if I do).

[pdxindy]

Check the shapes section

yes good point, I did have a look at that before but found it to be a bit cumbersome for this purpose. I can add a "peaky" shape (which again suggests there is spectral content generated left and right of the peak/harmonic) but then am still left with moving/editing 5 (!) points if I want to change things. Yes it's all possible I understand, I just want the "tool" to be so intuitive that it goes away while I am creating sounds. (Sorry if I come across as a complainer, not intended if I do).

There is GridMoveY and GridStep both which allow setting individual harmonics (with Harmonic Grid) No need to move/edit points at all.

[jooster]

There is GridMoveY and GridStep both which allow setting individual harmonics (with Harmonic Grid) No need to move/edit points at all.

Ah hadn't notice those - GridStep creates bars - too bad it can't also move/modify the Y level - would be nice if cursor could grab the horizontal peak and move it up/down. Also, GridStep creates bars with varying width, that's not necessary for setting harmonics. GridMoveY is ... weird (IHMO). It moves everything up/down which is nice if you want that, in my case I just want the peaks to move.

So yes it can all be done, but as we are writing/commenting on the Editor's UX, I see this as a UX improvement area. Specifically encapsulating a) the notion that only harmonic levels matter, the levels in between harmonics are not generating content, and b) a drawing tool specifically for setting levels for those harmonics to optimize that workflow. My 2ct anyway.

[pdxindy]

Ah hadn't notice those - GridStep creates bars - too bad it can't also move/modify the Y level

I set the Y axis to 24 grid divisions... then GridStep has enough resolution.

It would be helpful if Grid Move Y had an option to hold say Shift to contain it to a single grid division.

[jooster]

I set the Y axis to 24 grid divisions... then GridStep has enough resolution.

It would be helpful if Grid Move Y had an option to hold say Shift to contain it to a single grid division.

OK, got it. With grid X == 32 and Y == 24 that is getting close to what I want albeit it bit finicky to draw. Besides the Shift key modifier you propose, it would be nice if the curve could scale when changing X axis settings (grid type and x/y values) so it is a bit more forgiving to me first choices. It too would be nice to have default settings that are preserved across ZL3 sessions (grid type lin/log, x/y values)

Thanks @pdxindy for sticking with me on this, I am getting there...

[pdxindy]

OK, got it. With grid X == 32 and Y == 24 that is getting close to what I want albeit it bit finicky to draw.

Forget the X axis setting... use the Harmonic Grid option. That shows the individual partials.

[jooster]

OK, got it. With grid X == 32 and Y == 24 that is getting close to what I want albeit it bit finicky to draw.

Forget the X axis setting... use the Harmonic Grid option. That shows the individual partials.

That's what I do; everything is log axis (harmonic grid) for me. So with HG and X=32 I can modify/design up to 31 harmonics. A bit more than practical but still neat - the higher harmonics pretty much do clicky-noisy stuff, not needed for most situations but I like to have the same grid in front of my nose all the time. Wish the harmonic grid has the major harmonics labelled (beyond #3) and/or a color indicator for even/odd.

I have a panel with lots of midi knobs, I am dreaming that this could control the levels of each harmonic sort of like an EQ