Replacing 2Caudio Reverbs

[jens]

The sections-menu on the left has several entries/buttons that are redundant:

- Clicking on "REVERSIDE" does the exact same thing as clicking on DEVPROAUDIO above.
I would expect that clicking on the company name/logo opena an info screen like this, so the REVERSIDE
button can be safely removed.

- It is quite similar with the "PRESET"-button. The preset-page can also be accessed by clicking on the preset-name on the top, which is expected behaviour. Thus also the "PRESET-button can be removed.

- Either remove both the FILTER and EQ pages altogether, or remove the miniature appearance of the filters in the TIME-section. Personally I think the latter is sufficent though. You can increase its size/gain screen estate for it by removing the parameters and graphics from the SPACE-section, which are another redundant duplication.
And if you remove the the not required "EDIT"-button, you have more screen estate available to fully write "MATERIAL", "DECAY", "LR EQ" and "LR EQ" on the respective buttons. I will talk more about these filters in another post.

[jens]

If you have graphic representation of certain functions, as is the case with the filters and the distance/geometry pab/etc section, I would seek to make as many parameters controleable right on this GUI-element - and then of course remove their otherwise redundant controls.
That alone will clean the GUI up a lot and make it easier for the user to control Reverside.

Also, these graphical elements generally should show as much info as possible.
(For inspiration, maybe have a look at the HOFA SYSTEM AlgoVerb.)


Don't be shy to - modestly - introduce a key-modifier.

E.g. for the filters, ctrl/cmd to control Q is a very common implementation.

You can also use ctrl/cmd in other places throughout the GUI.



Talking more about the filters, I think they should be greyed-out when disabled, instead of switching to a flate state in TIME-section or disappearing altogether in their own respective sections.

More later.

[jens]

As I said above, the distance/geometry pan/etc. graphical representation element itself should allow the user to control all the parameters it represents:

- the way I understand it, both "Distance" and "Displace Y Position" could be controlled by allowing both the Source and the Microphone dots to be dragged back and forth individually. I think this would also make it more it a lot more immediate/direct and easier to put both in their respective certain spot.

- Above I mentioned dragging the Microphone dots; I would add another ("Mic Center"?) dot that is their middle (with a slightly diffferent colour and some grapical elements that connects all three dots), which, when dragged, moves both of the in unison as is the case now the case with most controls.

- Displace X Position could be controlled by moving this Center dot.

- Mic Seperation could be controlled by dragging either MIcrophone dot left/right

- Geometry Pan could be controlled by simply moving the Source dot left/right.

- Rotate X/Y Position could be controlled by dragging either of the four dots left/right while clicking crtl/cmd. (To make clear that this parameter exists, a simple not fully opaque Symbol in the background could illustrate this function.)

With that, all the six main controls below this graphical element would be redundant and could be removed. This would free up a lot of screen estate and thus allow for it (the GUI-element) to be much bigger.

[jbraner]

And we have to really hear something happening when we move these.

[jens]

All the on/off buttons on the side are redundant. And so are (for the main part of them) the controls below.

As an exception from the general redundancy-rule, you could add an "EASY"-panel as we know it from Lexicon, etc. where alln the most important parameters can be found on the same page.

There the on/off buttons could be added, plus it would be the place to offer some Macro-buttons (plus perhaps A/B/C/D buttons, etc.).

With a complex plugin such as Reverside, I think its best to stick with the well established tried-and-tested GUI methods for the most part of it - unless you have a really good and well thoughtout alternative.

[jens]

And we have to really hear something happening when we move these.

True, but for now I want to stick to the GUI itself exclusively in order to not complicate matters even more.

[jens]

Colours:

- I would remove the colour editor altogether for now. The way it's implemented isn't too user-friendly. It could be added in better shape back in in a as a shiny new feature.

Instead I suggest to:

- rather offer a few (3-5) really well-working presets. That's especially important since:

- I think the plugin direly needs colour coding. E.g. the mixer is really a bit of a mess with all these controls.

Colour the Panel buttons (or their text) and colour individual parts such as ER and LR each in their respective colour, then colour the related controls in the mixer accordingly.



More later.

[2ca]

replying to John's feedback:

A) colors: I have about 10 good color schemes presets I just need to make some adjustments to the skin to make them work, I'll do that in a next build

B) position controls in Early Reflection (ER).
Notes: these affect ERs only (well the LRs are also affected but so much). It does not affect dry signal path at all unlike one could expect from a *positioning tool*. to make it work this way one has to use HRTF and a shared instances display to make the process of placement convenient. that's a subject to another product that would integrate all that in user friendly way.
Also to make the effect more pronoucned one has to take into account head shaddowing. This effect can be simulated with material filters' panners but the yeah the whole process is not that straightforward.

Denis,
DEVPROAUDIO
https://devproaudio.com

[2ca]

Jens, thanks for the detailed feedback and suggestions, I'll comment later

[jbraner]

replying to John's feedback:

A) colors: I have about 10 good color schemes presets I just need to make some adjustments to the skin to make them work, I'll do that in a next build

That will be good - some good starting points and then users can tweak a little.

B) position controls in Early Reflection (ER).
Notes: these affect ERs only (well the LRs are also affected but so much). It does not affect dry signal path at all unlike one could expect from a *positioning tool*. to make it work this way one has to use HRTF and a shared instances display to make the process of placement convenient. that's a subject to another product that would integrate all that in user friendly way.
Also to make the effect more pronoucned one has to take into account head shaddowing. This effect can be simulated with material filters' panners but the yeah the whole process is not that straightforward.

Denis,
DEVPROAUDIO
https://devproaudio.com

OK - I guess I thought it would be different based on the graphics etc.
There are already so many parameters - I wonder if it's necessary to have the graphical representation of source and mics, since it doesn't really make a huge difference.

I don't mean this as criticism in any way - just offering some feedback.
We all want this to be a top quality reverb plugin


PS - I sent some emails re: the preset save ("save as") screens.

[ThomasHelzle]

Well, so far I was not able to even open the plugin here on my laptop, so I can't give any feedback sadly.
But looking forward to a stable PC version!

Just a heads up: We found the issue, it seems that it was old leftover skin files from very early versions.
Thanks Denis!

Cheers,

Tom

[jens]

B) position controls in Early Reflection (ER).
Notes: these affect ERs only (well the LRs are also affected but so much). It does not affect dry signal path at all

Sure, but even if I set Reverside to fully wet and ER/LR to zero it still sounds quite off and outright unpredictable - and especially the Geometry Pan gives quite unexpected results and fully left even yields wildly different results than fully right.


It sounds absolutely stunning otherwise though - the most realistic ER engine I have heard so far I'd say, so it would be really great if this feature could be improved in order to give more expectable and predictable results.

[2ca]

regarding ER positioning:
A) it's important to keep Shape param at low values like < 20% to get more prominent effect as this param randomizes the reflection pattern some, I might improve that some
B) Geometry Pan max L/R positions indeed might sound different, it depends on how asymmetric the total config is. I mean if L or R is placed close to a wall and another hanging free or source is close to one mic, then swapping L for R could yield strange patterns

Denis,
DEVPROAUDIO
https://devproaudio.com

[jens]

regarding ER positioning:
A) it's important to keep Shape param at low values like < 20% to get more prominent effect as this param randomizes the reflection pattern some, I might improve that some

hm... even if I have Shape set to zero or 1, modulation switched-off, just ER, no cross-mixing, etc. I just can't ever get the Geometrie Pan to clearly (i.e audibly) define the LR position according to this Pan setting. It's always doing something that seems arbitary to me (the changes in sound can be radical though and that even with just very small parameter changes). So I'm not just talking about -100 vs 100. It's the same with e.g. -25 vs 25.

It's as if the randomization that takes place was so severe that the actual current parameter-value would be rendered almost irrelevant in the wake of this randomization.

[2ca]

ok, I'll look into it