New "Weirder-Looking" Effect Interfaces vs. Classic

[blairjack37]

I'm developing audio plugins and I know people have strong feelings about wacky/very unique audio effect interfaces and UI. I would love to hear WHY that is and why some producers/engineers prefer the old classic style (rectangle with knobs etc.) Or do you like weirder style things when trying to make weird sounds!

my plugin is on the extreme end of crazy interfaces (a big pot of soup that you cook), if you want to see what I mean the website is https://www.zigzagzaudio.com/

[t.o.t.s.]

I can only speak for myself but sound work is my livelihood. Sometimes technical. sometimes creative, often times both. I like experimenting but I don't like guessing. It's my job and I need to turn projects around daily. So any interface that isn't telling me what I need to know to use the tool efficiently gets thrown out or thrown into a deep and nebulous folder of often unused plugins because there isn't enough time in the day to figure out something obscured by arbitrary design choices.

[CinningBao]

In this community I would imagine there are more folks looking to just select a good tool for the purpose and get good feedback from the interface. There may be a few users who like to do more than just move the knobs around to get the sound you're looking for, but most people who do it for aliving, like t.o.t.s, just want the thing to do the thing with nothing getting in the way.

And I'm one of those; I don't want to play games or do anything beyond using the tool to get the sound I need.

I look at your plugins and think "hmm, these are definitely not targetted at me".

[blairjack37]

In this community I would imagine there are more folks looking to just select a good tool for the purpose and get good feedback from the interface. There may be a few users who like to do more than just move the knobs around to get the sound you're looking for, but most people who do it for aliving, like t.o.t.s, just want the thing to do the thing with nothing getting in the way.

And I'm one of those; I don't want to play games or do anything beyond using the tool to get the sound I need.

I look at your plugins and think "hmm, these are definitely not targetted at me".

Totally get that, thanks for your perspective! As I'm developing more projects I want to keep some of the chaos and creativity, but yeah also try to balance that with clarity / predictability.

[hightyde]

I have to agree with the others. While I totally respect your out of the box thinking and innovative-ness, I tend to look at this plugin as “not for me”. If I wanted to play games, I’d just get games. When it comes to audio, like others have said, I just want plugins that do what they are supposed to do without any extra fluff.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I don't think I actually use a single plugins with a particular wierd, or ornate GUI. I have a few installed, because they were freebies, but I don't use them.

I need tools that are easy to use, make sense to me visually, and provide feedback about what they're doing (e.g. "that rate knob is a little over halfway up"). I don't want cutesy stuff, anything weird, anything oddly steampunk or ornate. The most decorative thing on a plugin can be a logo or a screw - and even screws are problematic because some plugins use them as "trimmers" for something, while others just treat them as decorative. Like male nipples, the latter is useless.

So for me, keep it simple.

[Gamma-UT]

It's horses for courses. There are some devs out there who have successfully embraced the crazy like Freakshow where hardly any of the UI makes sense. There was also the (in)famous Sausage Fattener which got as much love as hate.

I don't think your approach works for me. I like to know at least roughly what's going on so cryptic names for functions aren't great. But if it works for you, then that's fine. But some people will doubtless complain endlessly about it.

You'd think people working in a creative field would recognise other people have their own creative ideas. And yet some people spent years complaining about a dinosaur on a plugin.

[Teksonik]

I grew up using hardware so I feel comfortable with hardware style GUIs. I tend to dislike plugins that look like video games or look like they're aimed at the My Little Pony crowd.

Any GUI's workflow can be learned given enough time on task but learning to tolerate something you hate looking at can be more of a challenge.

[bitman]

Classic only please.

[elxsound]

As mentioned, I respect the creative angle, but I need tools to make quick decisions. Time is often a luxury and if I need to guess, I won’t use it.

If something sounds great and is unique, then I would simply map it to macros in Ableton Live and use it that way. So as long as that’s possible, and it’s something unique, I’d still use it that way.

[osiris]

You mean like this

[Zeisner]

I avoid inconvenient GUIs and anything related to gamification. I also dislike anything with bright/vibrant colors that is not a volume meter. And I consider plugins useless if their parameters can't be fully automated. Even having a ghost mode that can't be switched off on a spectrum analyzer or goniometer crosses the line. Or scattering knobs and sliders in "creative" ways to make a GUI look "nicer".

[t.o.t.s.]

You'd think people working in a creative field would recognise other people have their own creative ideas. And yet some people spent years complaining about a dinosaur on a plugin.

I dunno. Creative or otherwise... if I'm buying paints, brushed, pencils.. I'm buying tools, not someone elses' creative vision. WHILE I'm creating that's the absolute last thing I'm interested in seeing. I feel the same with plugins. I'm buying a tool to facilitate my creativity or work. At that point I'm not interested in buying or looking at some other person artistic endeavor. That being said I'm down with the idea of a plugin in being a creative gesture and I might even take a look at it but I'm absolutely not pissing with it while I'm working, it's unlikely I'll buy it, and unlikely I'll used it after than initial look see.

[rod_zero]

I would say there are 3, not two.

First, the classic skeumorphic design that looks like hardware, this is good for plugins that are emulations, it enhances engagement, it is familiar for many people. I is also a marketing device for many companies trying to sell nostalgia or "the dream" of working with expensive hardware. But there are plugins where even if they are emulations they still suck, as shadow hills master compressor, that is hard to use. a LA2 or a moog model d are easy, recognizable and you know where the stuff is and does.

Second, the "design for the computer" school, where the GUI delivers a more appropriate interface designed to use with a mouse, provides more information (fabfilter Proc, proL, saturn are main examples), are not flashy and are good for working for hours (ableton live, valahalla). A common improvement is that the signal flow is more clear, although not always, and modulation system can also be more flexible and easy to use. EQ have also benefited form this approach a lot and I think they are the biggest gap with the HW counterparts.

Third, the crazy or experimental ones, some that make no sense (ohmboys back in the day, delay lama), some that are experimental because the plugin is trying to do new things as Synthplant, or various by Sugarbytes as Tornado, Obscurium and aparillo.

Developers can do each of those types right or wrong, because what matters is usability, but for the third one you normally expect it only for experimental plugins where the risks of a new GUI style goes hand in hand with whatever the plugin is trying to do.

[vurt]

You mean like this

jack dark did some great plugins, guis aside, some creative stuff!