[Stock] Mastering

This forum is for sharing patches created with the updated Combinator, as well as backdrops and any backdrop assets.
Forum rules
This forum is for sharing patches created with the updated Combinator, as well as backdrops and any backdrop assets. If you would like to share a patch here as an attachment, you must zip it first. Otherwise you can host your patches elsewhere and share the links here.
DJ FALAFEL
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Sep 2020

Post 15 May 2023

Hello!
My first patch combinator for mastering (Premastering maybe )
Any feedback will be appreciated!
Patch : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I9x3ro ... share_link
Demo : https://drive.google.com/file/d/188hYCi ... share_link
preview.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
jam-s
Posts: 2700
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Location: Aachen, Germany

Post 15 May 2023

I have not checked out the patch itself, yet, but from the screenshot I think the background image is too dark. This leads to the impression that the knobs and the meter are floating in the air/rack which looks kind of odd.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 10948
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 16 May 2023

jam-s wrote:
15 May 2023
I have not checked out the patch itself, yet, but from the screenshot I think the background image is too dark. This leads to the impression that the knobs and the meter are floating in the air/rack which looks kind of odd.
I agree, even just a brushed metal texture would solve that.

Just considering the UI:
The other thing I see is the tiny On/Off button, especially compared to the big Imager button.
There's a design concept called Fitts Law which dictates how big a target should be related to how far you have to travel to hit it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts%27s_law
I would also factor in the importance of the control plus how common it is to access it.
I would conclude the master on/off is important and common (for A/B comparisons. Considering the distance as an additional factor I'd make that button the biggest on the UI.

Finally, you have three buttons and each is a different design . The two buttons on the bottom row are offset to the left with no reason I can see. Some control 'grouping and arranging would be helpful IMO. All said, if this is just for you, then keep it as it is. But even then, some improvements could possibly be made but they would be totally your call!

Here's my personal mastering Combinator for reference:
Screen Shot 2023-05-16 at 11.25.57 AM.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Selig Audio, LLC

DJ FALAFEL
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Sep 2020

Post 16 May 2023

Thank you for your feedback I will update the interface

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 10948
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 16 May 2023

DJ FALAFEL wrote:
16 May 2023
Thank you for your feedback I will update the interface
It's really up to how you will use it IMO. My suggestion would be to try to think about 100% it from that angle.
For example…
If you find yourself going back and forth between two main controls, try putting those two controls right next to each other, and in whatever YOU feel is the most prominent area of the UI (center, upper left, lower right, etc).
If you don't often use a function but still want it on the panel, make it smaller and off to the side of the UI.
If you relate to color, use it on the background to group controls or draw attention to important controls/areas.

The coolest aspect of working this way is you can 'design' the device over time, adapting it as you actually USE it. Especially as this is an early work for you, do a "save as" when you make changes so you can go back if needed. Most of all, have fun - you can't 'break' it!
Selig Audio, LLC

DJ FALAFEL
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Sep 2020

Post 16 May 2023

Is this better?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 10948
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 16 May 2023

DJ FALAFEL wrote:
16 May 2023
Is this better?
IMO Much better because it's a simpler/less cluttered looking design. NOW, to fine tune, be more precise with your layout. Many designers (and architects too) start with a grid so that every control falls on that grid at some point. Your main row of knobs has totally unequal spacing between the controls - no two are exactly alike!

How to "grid"? There is no visible grid available, so I use two options. On big projects I 'print' a backdrop with a grid overlay so I can load it on the combinator. When I'm done I re-render without the grid overlay.
You can alternatively use the Right Arrow which moves the selection by 1pixel on its own, by 4 pixels if you add shift, and by 16 if you instead add Option (Mac).

So in your example, I'd start with the center knob that aligns vertically with the On/Off button above and before anything else I'd move those both a little to the left (32 pixels, or "option/click" x2) to make room for your right side graphics.
Then I'd move either the knob to the left or right of the center knob to be literally on TOP of the center knob (to align from the same starting point). Then Option/Click 7x (112 px) to the left/right. Repeat for the opposite side. For the outer knobs you move them on top of the two knobs from the previous step, then option/click 6 times for 96 px. This visually 'groups' (subtly in this case) the two left and two right knobs because they have related functions (if I'm understanding correctly).

This is basically using the grid of 16 px, so that every control is a multiple of 16 from each other, which is chosen only because the fact you can quickly move in increments of 16. This is not necessarily a strict rule you must follow throughout the interface, but at the very least it is a good starting point in my experience.
This also make it easy to add labels in the background image instead of from the knob text, which is a handy way to work on bigger projects that have repeating elements such as three oscillators - on the front panel you wouldn't label the Octave switch Octave VCO1, it would just be labeled "Octave". But so would the other two oscillators, and when programming you want a unique name for each control to make sure you know which one you're working with, while on the panel label you use the less specific name for a less cluttered UI, visually speaking.

Like this:
Screen Shot 2023-05-16 at 5.04.24 PM.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Selig Audio, LLC

DJ FALAFEL
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Sep 2020

Post 17 May 2023

Thanks a lot for your feedback selig!

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests