For me, as you've probably gathered, it's the ergonomics rather than the color choices that raises questions. Overall, the design is very pleasant. But if it's nice, it also needs to be effective. So, okay, improving the contrast is good, but eliminating redundancies, simplifying the interface, making it more efficient, and more technically in line with what's already out there (and which has proven its effectiveness), seems more important to me than a clunky, neon-lit design (which isn't entirely the case here, thankfully).
There's no shame in drawing inspiration from what's already been done. And if you want to be a pioneer, you shouldn't sacrifice the technical foundation; that is, understand the ins and outs of why you're creating something.
As was my question about volume management, my question about the number of decimal places for delays and gains isn't random; it stems from years of experience with dedicated software, from rew to vituixcad, manipulating multiple DSPs, and fine-tuning DIY speakers... the same goes for delays and gain (on outputs)... which frankly don't need to be a constantly adjustable variable, but rather something that, at best, is rarely adjusted. [Besides, I don't really see the point of delay on inputs except to compensate for a discrepancy between an audio track and the video images... but anyway... generally, this is compensated for through the host software, the television, or something else, but not at the DSP level].
That being said, there are still some innovations here, such as on-the-fly headphone correction and crosstalk reduction—very useful features for those who will use them or can already use them.
But that's why I asked a few days ago if this project wasn't exceeding Troy's ambitions. It's clear that his initial focus was on the general user experience (autoEQ for headphones, dynamic range compensation, etc.), but it seems to be adapting gradually (and quite willingly, I must say) to other, more technical and ambitious uses (ADAT, crossover management for DIY speakers). This desire to satisfy users but also to push himself further, striving to create an "Audio Swiss Army knife", is remarkable. To him, I would say to think clearly, to take a step back, to be willing to question some of his choices without sacrificing his creativity. But also to consider technicality, practicality, ergonomics, and ease of use, and then illuminate the whole thing with a relevant design.
There's no shame in drawing inspiration from what's already been done. And if you want to be a pioneer, you shouldn't sacrifice the technical foundation; that is, understand the ins and outs of why you're creating something.
As was my question about volume management, my question about the number of decimal places for delays and gains isn't random; it stems from years of experience with dedicated software, from rew to vituixcad, manipulating multiple DSPs, and fine-tuning DIY speakers... the same goes for delays and gain (on outputs)... which frankly don't need to be a constantly adjustable variable, but rather something that, at best, is rarely adjusted. [Besides, I don't really see the point of delay on inputs except to compensate for a discrepancy between an audio track and the video images... but anyway... generally, this is compensated for through the host software, the television, or something else, but not at the DSP level].
That being said, there are still some innovations here, such as on-the-fly headphone correction and crosstalk reduction—very useful features for those who will use them or can already use them.
But that's why I asked a few days ago if this project wasn't exceeding Troy's ambitions. It's clear that his initial focus was on the general user experience (autoEQ for headphones, dynamic range compensation, etc.), but it seems to be adapting gradually (and quite willingly, I must say) to other, more technical and ambitious uses (ADAT, crossover management for DIY speakers). This desire to satisfy users but also to push himself further, striving to create an "Audio Swiss Army knife", is remarkable. To him, I would say to think clearly, to take a step back, to be willing to question some of his choices without sacrificing his creativity. But also to consider technicality, practicality, ergonomics, and ease of use, and then illuminate the whole thing with a relevant design.
Last edited:
