Examples of good usability in hi-fi equipment

[Keith_W]

I am surprised nobody has mentioned Bang & Olufsen yet. They make the most gorgeous looking equipment and they usually sound good.

Take a look at this beautiful remote control. Easy to use, feels great in the hand. The downside is that it's not programmable, it's expensive, and only works with B&O equipment.

This is an old (pre-smartphone) B&O phone that had an integrated music player. Even today it is still unbelievably stylish. When it first came out in 2007, everyone was using Nokias and Blackberries and I thought it looked amazing.

The Beosound 9000 CD player was sleek and looked like a modern sculpture.

Needless to say, all the buttons and knobs on any B&O product are perfectly judged. They operate with a satisfying tactile feel and they feel really good in the hand.

 

[MarcosCh]

Nobody mentioned my volume knob??

 

[radix]

I recently got a McIntosh MR-64 tuner (1970s vintage). That thing is fun to operate, especially the tuner dial.

The Anthem STR preamp is pretty nice too, as it lets one rename all the inputs and create all sorts of virtual inputs with different behaviors.

 

[restorer-john]

Nobody mentioned my volume knob??

It appears to have serious lag/latency unfortunately. I nearly gave away my Rigol DSO due to to encoder latency and overshoot. Luckily firmware updates fixed it.

 

[buz]

Native Chromecast support.

 

[badboygolf16v]

Squeezebox was the best thing that ever happened for me. Anything that does away with vinyl and cassette and allows unfettered access. Revolutionary.

 

[sergeauckland]

Squeezebox was the best thing that ever happened for me. Anything that does away with vinyl and cassette and allows unfettered access. Revolutionary.

Although Squeezebox doesn't meet my ideal criterion of 'knob a function', its functionality and ease-of-use outweighs the negatives. It's the best example I can think of, of a software and menu-driven item that actually performs admirably. Thanks for this must be given to the community that maintains Squeezebox and LMS, the server software, and keeps it current. How many other software products become unusable not because the hardware fails, but because the manufacturers either cease to exist or stop updating/maintaining the software when they move onto the Next Big Thing.

S.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I believe that the rotary volume control is essential in an audio system.
but ..
I haven't read the entire thread, to know if SONOS hasn't neen mentioned... but SONOS, any model qualify for great usability. They are easy to setup, easy to use and, IME, sound good.
Their Room Correction works well.
I set up a SONOS HT for a friend, and it was one of the easiest thing AV, I have ever setup:
Put the SONOS ARC soundbar under the TV. The most difficult thing could be to find the eARC HDMI from the TV multiple HDMI out..
Put the SONOS Sub next to it and plug it in an AC outlet.
Install two SONOS 1 in the back/side. Just plug them in an AC outlet.
Once all are, plugged they are (always) on.
Run the SONOS App, the darn things ( Soundbar, sub, surrounds) show up on the APP, with no fuss... Put them on your Wi-Fi network, invoke TRUEPLAY (their room correction).
30 minutes later...
DONE.
Decent HT performance. Decent Music Performance. Non-audiophiles are happy with good performance. Audiophiles are surprised by overall performance.
Anyone with a smartphone (IOS or Android) can control it , send music to it... People now just use their TV as usual with the TV's own remote control but now, with decent surround sound, it even provides a modicum of some sound effects coming from overhead sensation. Decent rumbles (you can always add another SONOS Sub) and good bass for music. Balanced, "usable" sound .
No wonder they are so popular.
I am not sure there are many more usable audio products out there.

Peace.

 

[tomchris]

Looks like 70s-80s stuff with lots of knobs/buttons/switches are popular, probably an age cohort thing but I'm sure the liking is genuine.

I would not call it an age cohort thing as such. A lot of audio equipment designed in the 1970s made extensively use of milled aluminium parts. This was ubiquitously replaced by cheap moulded plastics in the 1980s due to recession, improved/cheaper manufacturing, cost cutting etc. Of course, things are not as clear-cut. Whereas material-wise, some products were made of a lesser quality, other things where improved upon.

If you look at the field of study of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), it focuses on optimizing how users and computers interact by designing interfaces that satisfy users’ needs. The subject is multidisciplinary covering computer science, behavioral sciences, cognitive science, ergonomics, psychology, and design principles. Today, we can all acknowledge that man-machine interactions have grown significantly and become omnipresent.

For example, If you look at GUI design elements, you have switches, knobs, checkboxes, sliders, buttons, menus etc. - mostly trying to resemble things from the physical realm.

What I find fascinating is how to optimize the user experience when designing interfaces.
As a consequence, I also find it fascinating how others perceive the use of design elements, i.e. volume knob vs volume slider vs volume buttons.

 

[Multicore]

Exhibit D: Tokyo Flash watches. Website here. Your challenge is to tell the time:

Damn, Kieth, now I want at least one Tokyo Flash watch. >%{

 

[MattHooper]

I would not call it an age cohort thing as such. A lot of audio equipment designed in the 1970s made extensively use of milled aluminium parts. This was ubiquitously replaced by cheap moulded plastics in the 1980s due to recession, improved/cheaper manufacturing, cost cutting etc. Of course, things are not as clear-cut. Whereas material-wise, some products were made of a lesser quality, other things where improved upon.

If you look at the field of study of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), it focuses on optimizing how users and computers interact by designing interfaces that satisfy users’ needs. The subject is multidisciplinary covering computer science, behavioral sciences, cognitive science, ergonomics, psychology, and design principles. Today, we can all acknowledge that man-machine interactions have grown significantly and become omnipresent.

For example, If you look at GUI design elements, you have switches, knobs, checkboxes, sliders, buttons, menus etc. - mostly trying to resemble things from the physical realm.

What I find fascinating is how to optimize the user experience when designing interfaces.
As a consequence, I also find it fascinating how others perceive the use of design elements, i.e. volume knob vs volume slider vs volume buttons.

I find a turning knob so much more pleasant to use than buttons, for volume. For my DAW I us an Apogee Duet as my audio interface and it has a nice, smoothly operating knob/dial for volume.

But when I use remote controls for volume - be it for my two channel preamps or my AV system - turning the volume up or down of course means pressing down on a little button and waiting until the volume has reached the right point. Buttons on such remotes rarely have nice feel - they are more like a little thing sticking in to your skin as you press it - something I want to stop doing as quick as possible.

(Hence...my commissioning of a knob-based remote control).

 

[Blumlein 88]

I find a turning knob so much more pleasant to use than buttons, for volume. For my DAW I us an Apogee Duet as my audio interface and it has a nice, smoothly operating knob/dial for volume.

But when I use remote controls for volume - be it for my two channel preamps or my AV system - turning the volume up or down of course means pressing down on a little button and waiting until the volume has reached the right point. Buttons on such remotes rarely have nice feel - they are more like a little thing sticking in to your skin as you press it - something I want to stop doing as quick as possible.

(Hence...my commissioning of a knob-based remote control).

I agree I have resigned to some things being volume buttons. If they at least change by .5 db or 1 db per push it is okay. I much prefer a slider or knob (knobs the most). It can be done. My Antelope audio interface has a nice feeling knob for adjusting levels. In fact I should put it on this list as it is very nice to interface with.

 

[Multicore]

I used two of these Behringer PEQs for several years. They are nice and easy to navigate. Clearly marked knobs. The buttons to engage a filter light up to make clear which are operating. I actually used them in musical performance in a feedback loop. Had to be pay careful attention to where everything was or things could get out of hand quickly.

 

[Axo1989]

I would not call it an age cohort thing as such. A lot of audio equipment designed in the 1970s made extensively use of milled aluminium parts. This was ubiquitously replaced by cheap moulded plastics in the 1980s due to recession, improved/cheaper manufacturing, cost cutting etc. Of course, things are not as clear-cut. Whereas material-wise, some products were made of a lesser quality, other things where improved upon.

I didn't live through that, but if the pre-80s designs are associated with higher quality construction then that helps explain the preference/nostalgia exhibited here. Personally I'm not strongly attracted to those examples, but I recall the haptics of my dad's 70s Pioneer amp was pretty nice.

If you look at the field of study of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), it focuses on optimizing how users and computers interact by designing interfaces that satisfy users’ needs. The subject is multidisciplinary covering computer science, behavioral sciences, cognitive science, ergonomics, psychology, and design principles. Today, we can all acknowledge that man-machine interactions have grown significantly and become omnipresent.

For example, If you look at GUI design elements, you have switches, knobs, checkboxes, sliders, buttons, menus etc. - mostly trying to resemble things from the physical realm.

What I find fascinating is how to optimize the user experience when designing interfaces.
As a consequence, I also find it fascinating how others perceive the use of design elements, i.e. volume knob vs volume slider vs volume buttons.

I'm familiar with the discipline, the skeuomorphic software volume knob is an often-cited example of misguided UI design.

I find a turning knob so much more pleasant to use than buttons, for volume. For my DAW I us an Apogee Duet as my audio interface and it has a nice, smoothly operating knob/dial for volume.

But when I use remote controls for volume - be it for my two channel preamps or my AV system - turning the volume up or down of course means pressing down on a little button and waiting until the volume has reached the right point. Buttons on such remotes rarely have nice feel - they are more like a little thing sticking in to your skin as you press it - something I want to stop doing as quick as possible.

(Hence...my commissioning of a knob-based remote control).

Despite enjoying the buttons on my old Krell (close to the opposite of your preference) I enjoyed your quest (not yet fulfilled I guess) for the hardware remote volume knob. We don't all do Devialet, after all.

Edit: smudges and dust John, for shame.

 

[MaxBuck]

My own opinion about excellent functionality and utility is best exemplified by the Bluesound Node and the associated BluOS application. No knobs, toggle switches or meters necessary to get exactly the music I want to hear at the volume I want to listen at. Just a phone or tablet.

 

[restorer-john]

As a consequence, I also find it fascinating how others perceive the use of design elements, i.e. volume knob vs volume slider vs volume buttons.

In HiFi, linear potentiometers are a terrible compromise. They were not used until around the early-mid 1970s and were trickle down from the 'professional' scene where mixing consoles and to a lesser extent linear controls in aircraft cockpits were regarded as 'high-tech' and 'space age'.

Radio Shack/Realistic even called their slider control for volume "glide path" LOL.

Linear pots are dirt and dust magnets- the entire carbon track sits horizontally or vertically exposed to the air and barely protected by perhaps a felt or plastic dust washer. A rotary pot has its carbon track protected inside a metal can and lasts decades longer.

Up/Down, +/- controls are simply space saving and cost saving. Space on the front panel and cost- two plastic actuators and a few tiny tactile PCB switches are much cheaper than machined and anodized aluminium knobs, mounted rotary pot and a punched steel escutcheon to support it.

On a PC, the slider works well, but let's face it, we pretty much all use the mouse wheel to adjust it anyway- which is, another round knob. Depicting a skeuomorph design type of round knob and operating it by a mouse or +/- keys is just a horrible experience- slider depiction is better IMO.

I do think it's very interesting that DJs are embracing traditional rotary pot mixer styles, something not seen since the very early days of disco in the 1970s when mixers were often hand made to order.

 

[restorer-john]

Here's some modern rotary pot mixers for DJs:

The best rotary mixers to buy in 2022: 13 best mixers for DJs

Looking to switch to using rotary mixers for your DJ-ing needs? We've put up a list of some of the best mixers out there for those who are tired of knobs and faders.

musictech.com

 

[MattHooper]

My own opinion about excellent functionality and utility is best exemplified by the Bluesound Node and the associated BluOS application. No knobs, toggle switches or meters necessary to get exactly the music I want to hear at the volume I want to listen at. Just a phone or tablet.

It's interesting what different people can "bump on" in terms of user interface.

I got the Bluesound Node a while back and loved how it really was plug and play. But it has a few quirks, one of which is driving me mad: when you have a list of tracks and select one to play, no indicator pops up beside that track to show which one is playing! Literally every single other music app I've ever used has had some sort of "playing now" icon or bouncing meter or something beside the playing track, so when you are scanning the list you can instantly see it and for instance select the next track if you are sampling. This is such a strange oversight that is a continual bit of friction during use, it's actually pushing me to finally trying Roon.

 

[DWPress]

I had a NAD 1300 pre amp that I loved but traded away a few years ago as I've been away from analog sources and unbalanced ICs for awhile now. It had a lot of features, a really good phono stage with button and levers and knobs all nicely arranged and solid to the touch. It paired nicely with the 3 NAD 2200's I had, both having "lab" output/inputs.

John Atkinson summed it up better than I can in Stereophile:

NAD's "Monitor Series" 1300 ($398) provides two buffered tape loops, an external processor loop (which can also be used as a third tape-recorder loop), a headphone output, a "null" switch, switchable bass equalization to extend the low-frequency range of small loudspeakers, and treble and bass controls, each with a choice of three turnover frequencies: 3kHz, 6kHz, 12kHz, and 50Hz, 125Hz, 250Hz, respectively. An 18dB/octave infrasonic filter, cutting the response below 20Hz (–3dB at 14Hz) can be switched out by pressing a button; the default position of having the filter in-circuit seemed intuitively wrong to me.

The null circuit replaces the normal conventional stereo feed to the output sockets by the difference (L–R) between the two channels. It can therefore be used both to optimize cartridge alignment and to adjust an FM antenna to give the best rejection of multipath distortion and extraneous noise on the subcarrier.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Here's some modern rotary pot mixers for DJs:

The best rotary mixers to buy in 2022: 13 best mixers for DJs

Looking to switch to using rotary mixers for your DJ-ing needs? We've put up a list of some of the best mixers out there for those who are tired of knobs and faders.

musictech.com

I prefer knobs, but if you are doing say 24 tracks or maybe even 12 then slides make it easier to see relative levels at a glance. If it is 8 or less give me knobs. After working some church sound rigs with 24 track mixers I understood a bit more why most of those are slide controls. You could still make an equally good to work with unit with 24 tracks, but you have to be careful and do a good job in how they are laid out, labeled and marked. Little tiny knobs to fit the tracks on a limited surface however are terrible.

I've also wondered if on mixing desks it is easier or cheaper to make motorized slides than it is knobs.

The old Universal Audio console mixers were all knobs.

Maybe I could find one of these and use it for a Dolby Atmos system. Let the pre/pro feed this and I could adjust things as needed for my 7.4.2 channels from there.