Skeumorphism anyone?

[metropolis_4]

I think the new Dyna Cabs made me start thinking about this.

Sometimes I wish models in digital gear were more similar to having the actual physical gear they are based on. And could be configured and used the same as having the physical gear.

Example:

I pull up a Deluxe Reverb amp model and it contains the preamp, power amp, reverb, speaker, cab, everything just like having the real amp sitting there. Same controls on the front panel, same inputs that can be selected, I can disconnect the internal speaker and plug into an external cab, etc. The ability to have an AB pedal I can throw in front to change between the channels,

Or I pull up a Mark IV and it contains all the same front and back panel controls, all channels, etc.

The UI models we have are fine and have their benefits, but sometimes they have limitations too that the real amps don’t have

 

[James Freeman]

Yes, but not the price that goes with it.
Currently the price for a plugin with 1-3 skeuomorphic amp models is roughly 100$.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I think in situations where it makes sense it’s VERY important. There are many intentional visual clues that go into designing gear. A lot of thought goes into that stuff and maintaining the best and most familiar aspects of it go a long way to giving the user an idea of what results to expect (and how to achieve them).

Skeumorphic on its own doesn’t mean good or bad to me - sometimes things become hard to read or are hidden out of sight. Sometimes this will be the case while there is lots of unused space on the UI. There are also some excellent non-skeuomorphic designs for some plugins, but it’s really just about what makes most sense. I think if it’s emulating real gear, then usually a good skeuomorphic approach is ideal.

It drives me nuts when people get overly opinionated one way or another on this - to me it just comes down to good or bad design. s”Skeuomorphism has a ton of advantages and binning it off because of some personal bias is dumb IMO.

 

[Mongillo19]

The QC does this to an extent (push/pull, fat, etc as it corresponds to the physical amp) and it's something I wish other digital devices would do

 

[Jarick]

I'm not sure I care about skeuomorphism or knobs vs sliders, so long as the software is easy to use, looks clean, and sounds great. The biggest upside to skeuomorphism is there tends to be a lot less clutter and menus and options, which I prefer.

I will say that I *LOVE* physical knobs, far more than I like using a mouse. The closer I can get to having functionality like a real amp and pedals is great. I would even strongly consider getting some kind of USB controller which is just a bunch of knobs and sliders, if I could program it to work with what I want.

 

[the-trooper]

Eh, difficult to answer but leaning more to no.
There is certain appeal in nice looking UI but it can get overbearing real fast, just take a look at Amplitube.

I think the new Dyna Cabs made me start thinking about this.

They look great to me. Clear and concise, one look and you know immediately where the mic is. As opposed to what L6 did with their new speakers and skeuomorphic interface for them, which is in complete clash with the rest of the program, and images don't tell you all that much.

 

[Digital Igloo]

Oldie but goodie copy pasta:



There are many reasons why we chose to go with a flat design and sliders instead of skeuomorphic panels with knobs:

• Sliders allow for much easier parameter control on touchscreen-based PCs (and eventually, touchscreen-based Macs)
• Knobs on touchscreen-based UIs can’t be close to the bottom or top of the display (if you slide up and down) or left or right of the display (if you slide left and right). So you end up with lots of space just to accommodate slide areas far outside the actual UI component, whereas sliders can fill the entire area
• Sliders have much higher granularity (both visual and control-wise) than knobs. You can also pull off clever things like dragging/sliding father away from the slider results in finer value changes. Knobs can’t do this elegantly
• Sliders allow for instantly jumping to a particular location in the GUI element’s travel; knobs don’t
• Slider length can easily scale when resizing windows; knobs could conceivably shuffle their order when resizing, but then it's harder to find the right one
• Sliders allow for better and cleaner application of sub-indicators, such as min and max values, snapshot values, or meters. It’s not just a slider, it’s information on how that slider is assigned and how its values are ranged
• There are instances where parameters may disappear or be renamed, depending on the settings of other parameters; sliders make this behavior much more transparent
• Helix models often have different parameters (and number of parameters) between the mono and stereo versions; sliders make this disparity much more transparent
• The studio-to-stage-and-back promise of Helix hardware and Helix Native plug-in is immensely important to the platform; there's an intrinsic advantage in maintaining visual consistency between the two
• Perceived preset switching delay in Helix hardware is partly due to redrawing components on the screen; redrawing huge custom panels would exacerbate this
• The knob position of some amps are much harder to ascertain quickly compared to a slider—especially Fender knobs
• Accurate panels that reflect the real amp and pedals often require radically disparate panel dimensions, meaning the plug-in size would blow up
• Accurate panels require the user effectively re-learn the UI and layout of every amp and cab, along with their quirks (UA plugins drive me completely bat$#!% insane because of this—Yes, I know that's how some API EQs are laid out, but why do the plug-in's knobs have to be upside down?!)
• Some people mistakenly equate quality of panel graphics with quality of modeling ("Oooh, did you see the fingerprints on the metal there? It's gotta sound the best!"); chasing that dragon is a lesson in futility and we'd rather spend our resources on system architecture and sound design
• Accurate panels imply to the user a specific rev of a particular piece of hardware, even if the plug-in supports switching between multiple revs or may represent an idealized amalgam
• Accurate panels require dozens of knob positions (and if you do it right, multiple versions at different viewing angles) which take a lot of time and redraw resources. Not an issue if you have five amps; definitely an issue when you're adding more all the time
• Accurate panel aesthetics often subconsciously sway users toward (or away from) specific models instead of trusting their ears ("Oh, I won't use this model because it looks like a metal amp")
• Accurate panel aesthetics require legal involvement to determine if any trade dress might be violated
• Individual panels often take up the majority of a plug-in's overall download/install size
• Accurate panels with knobs often require dedicated graphic designers or outsourcing to design firms, if only because our designers have a lot of other stuff to do (fun fact: one particular GUI design firm in Germany creates the panels for dozens of MI companies, which is why so many look alike)
• We'll often tweak and re-tweak models right up until release; it's also not uncommon to swap in a different model or add/delete/replace/rename parameters at the last second. Since accurate panel iteration takes a lot of time to get right, it could literally delay firmware updates (or hardware releases!) by weeks
• Everyone else does hyper-accurate panels—even super cheap iOS amp sims—and skeuomorphism doesn't hold nearly as much weight as it once did
• Several other reasons we can't talk about because they deal with future features

Conversely, there are only two reasons to go with skeuomorphic design with knobs:

• Subconsciously, people think the plug-in might sound better because it looks like a real amp or pedal; for example, a few mistakenly believe Logic's compressor sounds better now, simply because of new skins
• "Ooooh... pretty."

I won't claim any of our decisions are objectively correct—this is design, after all—but this might provide some context as to why we landed where we did.

 

[Desertdweller]

The biggest problem I have with modelers is that they seem so detached from reality. My ideal modeler would be the FM9 or Axe FX 3 if it visually displayed the amp in question and I could move the knobs and sliders on the front and back, similar to the Amplitube amp models.

 

[mikah912]

The biggest problem I have with modelers is that they seem so detached from reality. My ideal modeler would be the FM9 or Axe FX 3 if it visually displayed the amp in question and I could move the knobs and sliders on the front and back, similar to the Amplitube amp models.

This sounds like a horror movie. You'd want a tiny LCD screen to fit a cramped picture of an amp head dead center on it with tiny ass knobs and switches that are all but impossible to hit?

 

[metropolis_4]

Maybe skeuomorphic isn’t exactly the term, not necessarily UI I’m thinking models that are functionally identical to their physical counterparts and can be interacted with in all the same ways.

Like my Deluxe Reverb example.

 

[AutomationBias]

Honestly, I think it looks corny.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Helix Native/HX Edit and FM9-Edit FTW

 

[Desertdweller]

This sounds like a horror movie. You'd want a tiny LCD screen to fit a cramped picture of an amp head dead center on it with tiny ass knobs and switches that are all but impossible to hit?

Nah the editor. I never use the screen

 

[Orvillain]

I think it's the wrong question. Things should be easy to use, regardless of how they look. I'm as comfortable with Ableton Live as I am Reaper, and I'm as comfortable with my Elektron Digitakt as I am drum software like Superior Drummer and BFD3.

I was looking at delay pedals (again) today and reminded myself about the Meris LVX. That pedal is so incomprehensible to me as a device, in terms of pure UI and UX, and it has nothing to do with skeumorphism and everything to do with how absolutely fucking batty everything is laid out, and that bloody spider-web navigation system. Blergh.

Compared to something like the TC Toneprint editor for example, it just falls flat on its face for me.

 

[Orvillain]

I think I'm more likely to pick up another Empress Echosystem. Why? Coz it's got tons of options, but it is really simple to navigate.

 

[mikah912]

Nah the editor. I never use the screen

I guess the idea is for Fractal or Line 6 to "Neural DSP-ize" hundreds upon hundreds of amps, cabs and FX in scalable and high-resolution versions?

I just remember how excruciating that was when I used to use Overloud TH-3/U. Scrolling through pictures of long signal chains and trying to mouse-click/move just right to adjust knobs. Some of the amp switches, in particular, were nigh impossible to adjust. Different strokes and all....

 

[Digital Igloo]

I guess the idea is for Fractal or Line 6 to "Neural DSP-ize" hundreds upon hundreds of amps, cabs and FX in scalable and high-resolution versions?

You mean for Fractal or Line 6 to "Line 6-ize" hundreds upon hundreds of amps, cabs, and FX? Line 6 did skeuomorphic panels of real amps before anyone else, starting with Amp Farm way back in 1999.

 

[mikah912]

You mean for Fractal or Line 6 to "Line 6-ize" hundreds upon hundreds of amps, cabs, and FX? Line 6 did skeuomorphic panels of real amps before anyone else, starting with Amp Farm way back in 1999.

You right, DI. Respect where respect is due.

 

[TSJMajesty]

functionally identical to their physical counterparts and can be interacted with in all the same ways.

I would like this with the effects in the Axe III. Maybe if I understood modulation effects better, it wouldn't matter as much...

 

[Jarick]

This sounds like a horror movie. You'd want a tiny LCD screen to fit a cramped picture of an amp head dead center on it with tiny ass knobs and switches that are all but impossible to hit?

Scribble strips on the amp panel or gtfo