The idea of adding value quantization as an option to the editor is
interesting. However, I'm afraid of it being non-obvious and possibly
distracting for new users if not implemented properly. "Why can't I draw
smooth lines??". The controller framework is purposefully generic, but
that doesn't mean it cannot be smarter. The primary issue here is that the
controller can drive multiple automatable controls, even those of other
controllers. Therefore, there is no "one true discrete value set" for the
LFO's base knob.
Having said that, the problem is simplified if only one controller is
connected. Perhaps some of the LFO's knob's parameters can inherit those of
the controller if only one control is connected. If multiple controls are
connected, then perhaps it can inherit the values if all connected controls
share the same discrete values. If the controls are all discrete, but do
not have the same discrete values, then maybe a union can be used. If any
of the connected controls are non-discrete, then the controller's controls
must remain non-discretized.
An interesting experiment, but not something I see myself getting into
soon. I do not know if controls have the ability to change their
min/max-value and to signal this fact to other objects off the top of my
head. This would be required as the controller is connected to additional
controls. Comments?
-- Paul
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Johannes Lorenz <[email protected]
> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> true, the numbers are converted. But the problem is: how to draw the
> automation for the controller's base knob? Say we got 5 discrete values,
> then you will have to divide 127 by 5 in your head and then draw carefully,
> hoping you draw the wanted discrete value.
>
> > That being said, perhaps
> > people would want a discretized LFO waveform for whatever purpose. I'd
> > consider just adding a quantization knob to the current LFO controller.
>
> You mean a knob which changes the Model from FloatModel(...,0,127) to
> IntModel(...,0,N)? Or something like increasing the stepSize for the
> FloatModel? I thought of the same. But if the user had some automation with
> the value 0.5 and changes then from FloatModel to a boolean IntModel, then
> 0.5 would be invalid. I don't think invalid values are good.
>
> Another approach for this might be to let the user choose a discrete
> pencil for the automation editor and leave the controller like it is. This
> might also be useful in many other situations. What do you think about
> this?
>
> Regards,
> Johannes
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more!
> Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies
> and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step
> tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> LMMS-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
