What about ACE 2?

Official support for: u-he.com
User avatar
Urs
u-he
25465 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:23 am

The concept was of course inspired by the ARP 2600, which has patch points that are labelled with their normalled modulation sources. Those naturally don't change either.

But yeah, it would be nice to also show the targets to these modulation jacks/knobs. Maybe assuming that everyone simply knows it's the filter's cutoff was a bit of an omission on my side.

User avatar
KVRer
28 posts since 6 Apr, 2020

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:50 am

Urs wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:23 am
The concept was of course inspired by the ARP 2600, which has patch points that are labelled with their normalled modulation sources. Those naturally don't change either.
For sure, I understand that this design was intentional.

However, as someone coming to this synth from Bazille, I have found this design frustrating and off-putting. I would prefer it if, as chuckwood has suggested, the 'default signal flow' was set up using patch cables just like any user-created patch. That way, all labels on the synth would remain true and informative regardless of any patching. My suggestion was for there to be an option added to ACE 1.x in the settings that would clear the 'default signal flow' and remove all of the related labels. I believe that would make the synth easier and more enjoyable for me to learn.

Anyway, enough from me on this topic. Hopefully I have clearly conveyed the rationale behind this suggestion.
Last edited by Blogbert on Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:10 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
KVRAF
21405 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:52 am

There's a reason why normalled connections exist. Easier to make it output sound, and less cable clutter too. It would not make the synth easier, it would make it more complicated for people that are NOT you. :P

User avatar
Urs
u-he
25465 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:15 am

Well the idea of optional normalisations (multiple, exchangeable) came up back then, but I was still a lonely developer in a bedroom. I would do it differently today, I would even bring it back up, but now I don't have any time for anything due to other reasons. Maybe one day...

KVRAF
8273 posts since 16 Aug, 2006

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 5:26 am

Blogbert wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:50 am
However, as someone coming to this synth from Bazille, I have found this design frustrating and off-putting. I would prefer it if, as chuckwood has suggested, the 'default signal flow' was set up using patch cables just like any user-created patch. That way, all labels on the synth would remain true and informative regardless of any patching.
I use a modified version the Plugmon "Monolith" skin. One benefit to that is that the mod source labels are dynamic and appear directly under the control being modulated with depth controlled in a Massive-like mod system. So if you patch something else into the filter ADSR, the label will update. It at least solves the problem of labels not reflecting what's really happening. The thing I don't love is that the skin uses icons and abbreviations for the mod sources, which I don't love, but nothing some light image editing can't fix. :wink:

User avatar
KVRer
28 posts since 6 Apr, 2020

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:07 am

EvilDragon wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:52 am
It would not make the synth easier, it would make it more complicated for people that are NOT you. :P
... So you're saying that despite my preferences, there are also other people, who have their own preferences, which may be different from mine?!

Image

In that case, I retract my suggestion immediately!

User avatar
Banned
1796 posts since 8 Sep, 2019 from Calenberg

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 11:24 am

Blogbert wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:07 am
EvilDragon wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:52 am
It would not make the synth easier, it would make it more complicated for people that are NOT you. :P
... So you're saying that despite my preferences, there are also other people, who have their own preferences, which may be different from mine?!

Image

In that case, I retract my suggestion immediately!
Sometimes I discover I'm not alone on this small world :tu:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, kanntu meine musi hoeren da:
https://sonoryth.bandcamp.com/
Signature Sound

User avatar
KVRian
817 posts since 6 Jun, 2016 from San Marcos, Texas

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:39 pm

I like the ACE presets a lot. "MIDI Y" amazes me. Which I think might be a community preset.
I don't really understand the interface well though.
If things relabeled themselves, that would be pretty sharp!

User avatar
KVRAF
18467 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:52 pm

Blogbert wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:50 am
Urs wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:23 am
The concept was of course inspired by the ARP 2600, which has patch points that are labelled with their normalled modulation sources. Those naturally don't change either.
For sure, I understand that this design was intentional.

However, as someone coming to this synth from Bazille, I have found this design frustrating and off-putting. I would prefer it if, as chuckwood has suggested, the 'default signal flow' was set up using patch cables just like any user-created patch. That way, all labels on the synth would remain true and informative regardless of any patching. My suggestion was for there to be an option added to ACE 1.x in the settings that would clear the 'default signal flow' and remove all of the related labels. I believe that would make the synth easier and more enjoyable for me to learn.

Anyway, enough from me on this topic. Hopefully I have clearly conveyed the rationale behind this suggestion.
It's nice to have one synth each way. The first time I tried Bazille, I was not able to make a sound or do anything. Ace was a good gateway to modular wiring. It's still easy to use for the total beginner, but can be wired all sorts of ways by the experienced user.

At this point, I too would rather Ace be like Bazille, but I think that it is good it stay as is for those who are starting out like I was.

KVRist
247 posts since 12 Jan, 2016

Post Tue Aug 04, 2020 8:02 pm

Rishabh Rajan made a great tutorial for ACE, makes life easier

User avatar
KVRer
28 posts since 6 Apr, 2020

Post Wed Aug 05, 2020 4:36 am

pdxindy wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:52 pm
Blogbert wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:50 am
My suggestion was for there to be an option added to ACE 1.x in the settings that would clear the 'default signal flow' and remove all of the related labels.
At this point, I too would rather Ace be like Bazille, but I think that it is good it stay as is for those who are starting out like I was.
Fair enough.

KVRAF
2733 posts since 3 Mar, 2006

Post Wed Aug 19, 2020 11:21 am

I mean I'd be happy if the labels under the CV knobs just disappeared as soon as you plugged something else in just so you don't have a connection still labelled "ADSR" that is no longer attached to the ADSR... But a drop down menu so you can choose multiple "cable-less" connections for commonly used stuff to cut down on spaghetti would also be awesome (as long as it went blank when overridden by a cable)

User avatar
KVRAF
21405 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia

Post Wed Aug 19, 2020 11:29 am

^^^^^ That is an excellent idea!

KVRist
210 posts since 12 May, 2004

Post Wed Aug 26, 2020 9:38 pm

Duplicate post.
Last edited by Weasel-Boy on Wed Aug 26, 2020 9:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
On a number of Macs

KVRist
210 posts since 12 May, 2004

Post Wed Aug 26, 2020 9:41 pm

Urs mentions that he was inspired by the ARP 2600. I have one. I bought it back in 1979. I was never confused about the 2600’s normalled connections from day one because the 2600 had the physical real estate above and below the jacks to label what was normalled to it and what target it was headed to. ACE doesn’t have the luxury of that extra labeling area. But, it’s software. And with that in mind, I too, would prefer the option to right click on a jack, pick a source from a list, make the connection and change the label in one go...simply to reduce wiring clutter.

My wrinkle would be when you stick a plug in it, the label changes to the name of the source from the other end of the cable. For example plugging a cable from the LFO’s output into the filter’s CV input (currently labeled adsr) would change it to: LFO. Unplug and it reverts to the last selection made by the user from the drop down. My attitude is that these connections should be liquid and identifiable. Additionally this could make it possible for a user to set up a custom template without a single cable involved. That’d get my vote.
On a number of Macs

Return to “u-he”