Plogue OPS7 (bit-accurate DX7 emulation!)

[fmr]

Why isn't the operator level available as a mod destination ( when richt clicking it ) ?

Is that a DX7 feature?

So, on one hand, you agree with an absurd and archaich GUI, but OTOH ask for modern approaches. It seems you have to make up your mind. Either you want realism or modernity.

[MadBrain]

Why isn't the operator level available as a mod destination ( when richt clicking it ) ?

Check the Operator [x]/Extended/ModLevel target (you need to turn on 'extend'), which should do what you want.

[davidv@plogue]

+1. This is another aspect of a modern GUI, and of improving the user experience.

I just don't see it sorry, here's our rationale (like it or hate it)

Completely unedited, adlib on a Saturday before starting supper:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGiu4lvwmh4

Cheers

[davidv@plogue]

One crucial thing I forgot in that video:
We want to keep sysex-compatible stuff at one place and anything else in "top presets". As soon as you use effects, or use extended "illegal" operator parameters (like new waveforms), then that sound becomes incompatible with the hardware, Volcas, a million other hardware clones and other plugins. SYSEX is the common denominator to exchange sounds. We have nothing against the other plugins at _all_, the workflow of one might be best for you. Or say you have an older machine and OPS7 doesn't run on it and you still want to use the sounds you've created in OPS7, etc.

[Lucastyle]

+1. This is another aspect of a modern GUI, and of improving the user experience.

I just don't see it sorry, here's our rationale (like it or hate it)

Completely unedited, adlib on a Saturday before starting supper:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGiu4lvwmh4

Cheers

Perfect functionality if you ask me, that random button is awesome if you want to seat for hours playing random patches.

[EnGee]

Personally, I'm fine with the GUI and workflow The thing might be useful (but still accessory) is to use the two empty spaces and fill them with algorithms categorized by the number of carriers, so we can immediately choose the algorithm we want. I made an ugly illustration of it below:

Using empty space for algorithms chart.jpg

Anyway, I can just go through the dial and choose the one I want, so it is not an essential feature.

[fairlyclose]

Personally, I'm fine with the GUI and workflow The thing might be useful (but still accessory) is to use the two empty spaces and fill them with algorithms categorized by the number of carriers, so we can immediately choose the algorithm we want. I made an ugly illustration of it below:

Using empty space for algorithms chart.jpg

Anyway, I can just go through the dial and choose the one I want, so it is not an essential feature.

I prefer being able to choose from a graphic like this (well perhaps not exactly like yours )
But that is quicker for me too

[fmr]

Personally, I'm fine with the GUI and workflow The thing might be useful (but still accessory) is to use the two empty spaces and fill them with algorithms categorized by the number of carriers, so we can immediately choose the algorithm we want. I made an ugly illustration of it below:

Using empty space for algorithms chart.jpg

Anyway, I can just go through the dial and choose the one I want, so it is not an essential feature.

I prefer being able to choose from a graphic like this (well perhaps not exactly like yours )
But that is quicker for me too

Oh look, I'm not the only one, after all

And what about the waveforms? Don't you think it should be better to actually "see" which waveform we are chosing, instead of "guessing"? And the envelopes? Shouldn't it be better if we could just pick handles of moving them, simultaneously editing rates and volumes? Or are we back in 1983?

Actually there is a reason why software editors became so popular so soon. I think it wasn't because the DX7 interface was so "perfect" that everybody was happy with it. Ask David Zicarelli - he can tell you a few things about it.

"It was 1983. Yamaha revealed the milestone synthesizer, the DX7. One of the unique contributions in this keyboard was that it was one of the first synths to have MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface). All sorts of cottage businesses grew up in the wake of this synthesizer, offering sounds, software and hardware add-ons. Atari was just starting to make its name in the music industry. Many software firms quickly made editors and librarians for the Atari platform that would support the DX7. Steinberg as well as C-Lab, Hybrid Arts and Dr T's Software all produced excellent editors and librarians dedicated to the DX7 and its 4-operator cousins..."

[fmr]

David Zicarelli's editor, created in 1985. Words aren't necessary. This was in 1985 - THIRTY SIX YEARS AGO

We are in 2021 - Software evolved. GUIs evolved (a lot). Yet this old software already presented a better GUI than what it's in here, IMO

DX7 Editor.png

[briefcasemanx]

Choosing from a graphic algorithm representation is good.

[EnGee]

Personally, I'm fine with the GUI and workflow The thing might be useful (but still accessory) is to use the two empty spaces and fill them with algorithms categorized by the number of carriers, so we can immediately choose the algorithm we want. I made an ugly illustration of it below:

Using empty space for algorithms chart.jpg

Anyway, I can just go through the dial and choose the one I want, so it is not an essential feature.

I prefer being able to choose from a graphic like this (well perhaps not exactly like yours )
But that is quicker for me too

In MODX (FM-X) you can search for the algorithm in a matrix like depending on the carriers and chains, but that for 88 algorithms and 8 operators might be necessary. For 32 algorithms, I think it is still useful for choosing the algorithm by clicking on its icon preferably

[gentleclockdivider]

Why isn't the operator level available as a mod destination ( when richt clicking it ) ?

Is that a DX7 feature?

So, on one hand, you agree with an absurd and archaich GUI, but OTOH ask for modern approaches. It seems you have to make up your mind. Either you want realism or modernity.

No it's not ..but have you discovered the advanced tab yet ?
All those parameters are automatable (unlike the dx 7) , so adding operator level to the list seems logical
Seems like you have a personal issue with me mate , not that I care

[fmr]

Why isn't the operator level available as a mod destination ( when richt clicking it ) ?

Is that a DX7 feature?

So, on one hand, you agree with an absurd and archaich GUI, but OTOH ask for modern approaches. It seems you have to make up your mind. Either you want realism or modernity.

No it's not ..but have you discovered the advanced tab yet ?

No "mate". I was waiting for you to show it to me

[gentleclockdivider]

Why isn't the operator level available as a mod destination ( when richt clicking it ) ?

Check the Operator [x]/Extended/ModLevel target (you need to turn on 'extend'), which should do what you want.

Yep , but it's not available when right clicking the operator volume , which is the much faster way
And modulation is not animated

[foosnark]

this old sofware already presented a better GUI than what it's in here, IMO

No. Just no.