What are your favourite plugin UI's?
- Thread starter Orvillain
- Start date
newholland
Roadie
- Messages
- 339
waves j37!
for whatever reason i also love soundelux tilt! so simple.
soundtoys radiator makes me happy.
for whatever reason i also love soundelux tilt! so simple.
soundtoys radiator makes me happy.
TheTrueZoltan!
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,079
FabFilter Pro-Q, FabFilter Pro-C, Toontrack EZdrummer, Line 6 Helix Native
TheTrueZoltan!
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,079
I don't know if it makes sense to think about UI and workflow separately.
norminal
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,440
Coincidentally, this.
- Messages
- 7,304
It does.
UI = the way things look
UX = workflow, the way things work
Two completely separate disciplines. I'm only asking about the former.
TheTrueZoltan!
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,079
Okay then… I love the overhauled look of the Waves Renaissance plugins. So clear and clean. Oh, and if it‘s really just about the look, those Neural plugins are undeniably pretty.
Last edited:
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,771
oof this could be long. For me it largely depends on what it is trying to achieve.
Fabfilter definitely deserve a special mention. I like them because they are clearly designed to be used with a mouse. VERY intuitive, the proportions of what you see on the screen make sense, its very context dependent to the point where you rarely have to customise things. Good use of knob types, colours, and looks similar enough to what we expect an EQ/compressor/limiter to look like.
Valhalla, with the caveat that the newer ones have improved a lot from the older ones. Using Valhalla Vintage or Delay as an example of good, despite the flat look, they use colours, different knob sizes. clever positioning of knobs, a loose left to right and top to bottom design. Vintage was a turning point from UberMod and Room in that all of the controls were visible on the screen at once. So many reverb plugins suffer from having pages of controls to tab through with no priority or even grouping sometimes. Being able to combine relevant controls and prioritise them makes it much nicer and more intuitive to use. They also did well to only show the most essential parameters to the user - careful thought has gone into what the user has access to. Oeksound Soothe uses a lot of the design approach of Valhalla but on a plugin Valhalla probably wouldn't have made. Lots of the points above would be relevant for Soothe too.
I love the Waves Renaissance stuff for similar reasons - they are nice to use with a mouse, everything is visible and logically positioned. Different controls have different knob types (and even different drag directions). Fast, intuitive, no nonsense.
It's not my favourite ever or anything, but for a complex plugin it's a big achievement - Superior Drummer 3, because it's almost like an entire DAW, but it runs nicely inside a DAW without most of the headaches that plugins like this have (say Maschine). It's on the complex end, but it's intuitive, things are where they are supposed to be, it's contextual and organised enough, customisable where it needs to be. Even being able to change the window size and scaling interchangeably of each other is such a nice touch for making it nice to use no matter where or how). For something trying to do so much, it's nice to use.
I really love skeuomorphic designs when done well, but their success is very specific to each particular plugin. as they are relying on the users familiarity with a real piece of equipment. I love the UAD's GUI's for the most part.
With this example, the original hardware already has lots of useful design characteristics that are worth preserving and work well when being used by a mouse. 4 big important main controls that draw your attention? I like being able to click through ratios, I feel like having it the way they do gives some kind of order that you work in (as opposed to if it was on a knob like the other controls). Less important controls either have buttons or different (smaller) knobs and draw less attention. Very few controls in total (just like all the above) but the ones you do have are well considered.
Another random example, but what I like here is it works well in the same way that Valhalla OR the Distressor do. Skeuomorphism has nothing to do with the fact that they used different knob styles and sizes, a left to right direction, a choice of when to use continuous controls and when to limit to less options, evoking similar hardware to give the user some level of expectation and familiarity.
May as well do a NDSP plugin as another type of plugin.
What's good?
- a clear left to right concept for signal flow (input knob on left, output on right, pedals on left, cabs on right, low gain amp on left, high gain on right). Also a top to bottom concept. All very intuitive and easy to find things. Something like Amplitube or ToneX has you moving the mouse all over the screen to perform all kinds of tasks. the NDSP window is using space in a very consistent manner, you're never really going in circles.
- flat controls for utility functions, skeuemorphic for the gear gives a good contrast. On Helix you have Gain and B/M/T having the same visual importance as sag and bias. Our brain has to read the text to know what we're controlling - on an NDSP plugin you can just immediately draw your eye to the first knob and assume it'll be gain. You don't have to scroll though text or click several times to find what you need (think about how many clicks it takes in Amplitude to adjust a mic position).
- Skeuemorphism gives good clues about what gear you are using, how you expect to use it, what sort of sounds it should produce. Pedals use typical colours Green is a tube screamer, orange is a BB Boost. There is good general contrast on the plugin - when something is supposed to pop out and catch your eye, it does, and when something is less important it keeps out of the way. Knobs are big enough and spread out enough so that you aren't accidentally changing settings. You can scroll the amp knobs without your mouse landing on top of a different control - this can be great when using the plugin while standing up, possibly with your weaker hand or reaching at an awkward angle. A cluttered interface requires more precision, more reading, more scrolling and looking around and gets in the way. Readability is always good (and I'd imagine a non native English speaker would have no problems understanding the plugin).
- Only the most essential controls are exposed to the user, and there is a clear sense of purpose with what the user has available on any one page. There is a clear direction from start to finish on what to control and when.
I could do another post of plugins that I just think look nice, with no reference to what they are trying to do or how effectively. Some plugins can look beautiful and not really detriment the use of it, others need to be the complete opposite. So much of a good GUI is tied to what it is trying to achieve.
Fabfilter definitely deserve a special mention. I like them because they are clearly designed to be used with a mouse. VERY intuitive, the proportions of what you see on the screen make sense, its very context dependent to the point where you rarely have to customise things. Good use of knob types, colours, and looks similar enough to what we expect an EQ/compressor/limiter to look like.
Valhalla, with the caveat that the newer ones have improved a lot from the older ones. Using Valhalla Vintage or Delay as an example of good, despite the flat look, they use colours, different knob sizes. clever positioning of knobs, a loose left to right and top to bottom design. Vintage was a turning point from UberMod and Room in that all of the controls were visible on the screen at once. So many reverb plugins suffer from having pages of controls to tab through with no priority or even grouping sometimes. Being able to combine relevant controls and prioritise them makes it much nicer and more intuitive to use. They also did well to only show the most essential parameters to the user - careful thought has gone into what the user has access to. Oeksound Soothe uses a lot of the design approach of Valhalla but on a plugin Valhalla probably wouldn't have made. Lots of the points above would be relevant for Soothe too.
I love the Waves Renaissance stuff for similar reasons - they are nice to use with a mouse, everything is visible and logically positioned. Different controls have different knob types (and even different drag directions). Fast, intuitive, no nonsense.
It's not my favourite ever or anything, but for a complex plugin it's a big achievement - Superior Drummer 3, because it's almost like an entire DAW, but it runs nicely inside a DAW without most of the headaches that plugins like this have (say Maschine). It's on the complex end, but it's intuitive, things are where they are supposed to be, it's contextual and organised enough, customisable where it needs to be. Even being able to change the window size and scaling interchangeably of each other is such a nice touch for making it nice to use no matter where or how). For something trying to do so much, it's nice to use.
I really love skeuomorphic designs when done well, but their success is very specific to each particular plugin. as they are relying on the users familiarity with a real piece of equipment. I love the UAD's GUI's for the most part.
With this example, the original hardware already has lots of useful design characteristics that are worth preserving and work well when being used by a mouse. 4 big important main controls that draw your attention? I like being able to click through ratios, I feel like having it the way they do gives some kind of order that you work in (as opposed to if it was on a knob like the other controls). Less important controls either have buttons or different (smaller) knobs and draw less attention. Very few controls in total (just like all the above) but the ones you do have are well considered.
Another random example, but what I like here is it works well in the same way that Valhalla OR the Distressor do. Skeuomorphism has nothing to do with the fact that they used different knob styles and sizes, a left to right direction, a choice of when to use continuous controls and when to limit to less options, evoking similar hardware to give the user some level of expectation and familiarity.
What's good?
- a clear left to right concept for signal flow (input knob on left, output on right, pedals on left, cabs on right, low gain amp on left, high gain on right). Also a top to bottom concept. All very intuitive and easy to find things. Something like Amplitube or ToneX has you moving the mouse all over the screen to perform all kinds of tasks. the NDSP window is using space in a very consistent manner, you're never really going in circles.
- flat controls for utility functions, skeuemorphic for the gear gives a good contrast. On Helix you have Gain and B/M/T having the same visual importance as sag and bias. Our brain has to read the text to know what we're controlling - on an NDSP plugin you can just immediately draw your eye to the first knob and assume it'll be gain. You don't have to scroll though text or click several times to find what you need (think about how many clicks it takes in Amplitude to adjust a mic position).
- Skeuemorphism gives good clues about what gear you are using, how you expect to use it, what sort of sounds it should produce. Pedals use typical colours Green is a tube screamer, orange is a BB Boost. There is good general contrast on the plugin - when something is supposed to pop out and catch your eye, it does, and when something is less important it keeps out of the way. Knobs are big enough and spread out enough so that you aren't accidentally changing settings. You can scroll the amp knobs without your mouse landing on top of a different control - this can be great when using the plugin while standing up, possibly with your weaker hand or reaching at an awkward angle. A cluttered interface requires more precision, more reading, more scrolling and looking around and gets in the way. Readability is always good (and I'd imagine a non native English speaker would have no problems understanding the plugin).
- Only the most essential controls are exposed to the user, and there is a clear sense of purpose with what the user has available on any one page. There is a clear direction from start to finish on what to control and when.
I could do another post of plugins that I just think look nice, with no reference to what they are trying to do or how effectively. Some plugins can look beautiful and not really detriment the use of it, others need to be the complete opposite. So much of a good GUI is tied to what it is trying to achieve.
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,771
Some stuff I don't like (And why)
This is from Total Mix but many plugins fall fowl of stuff here
- All the knobs look the same, same sizes, same colour.
- Parameter ranges are way too big and not considered for any kind of use (pre-delay goes from 0-1000)
- very little visual feedback
While Im at it on TotalMix FX
In some context, this GUI would be fine. on a channel insert as part of some included mixer FX, it's so off-putting. The knobs are small, closer together. I'd rather something with less controls, more program dependency. On something like this, few controls, and perhaps just preset time constants for slow/fast and hi or low ratio. Speed and ease of use are more important at this stage than precisely dialling something in. Further more, attack and release curves and envelopes vary so much between compressors that you really just need to use it and learn how it behaves. With something that has such a wide range of controls, you really have to spend some times to learn its quirks. Can I be bothered to learn how Rise Time works? Is the auto level going to be more hassle than it's worth? Surely an on/off with one or 2 modes would be fine. Something like waves renaissance compressor, or RVox or even the SSL channel strip (go figure they knew what to do) would work way better. I'd rather just buy a HW distressor and be done than dealing with this.
This one makes me a bit sad because it is without doubt one of the best reverbs ever created and is borderline abandonware at this point.
The original GUI's for R2 and Pheonixverb were never great, but in their day and with their more limited feature set, and at a time when there wasn't so many good reverb plugins, you'd make do.
This one has SOME good elements, but it's almost like an early sketch than a final design. Some aspects of the GUI move from left to right and top to bottom, but other things are scattered wherever they fit. Why is the mix knob where it is? Why are some controls always visible while others are on tabs? why do they all use the same knob style and colour and size? Which controls are most important? which ones are for fine tuning? Some controls affect others while others are totally independent of everything else. There's so much potential to tidy this. Weirdly this one reminds me somewhat of the Axe Edit approach. Their GUI for Excalibur is even worse.
Special mention for this because it looks like its from 1992 and yet its fairly new:
Horrible choice of colours, seemingly random choice of when to use the most basic knob or slider, stuff randomly shoved in wherever it'll fit, nothing at all that draws you to any one control or area of the screen, nor anything that informs the process in how to use it.
Not sure I can bring myself to do another post mortem on Amplitube but Im sure you know where I like it and where I don't.
This is from Total Mix but many plugins fall fowl of stuff here
- All the knobs look the same, same sizes, same colour.
- Parameter ranges are way too big and not considered for any kind of use (pre-delay goes from 0-1000)
- very little visual feedback
While Im at it on TotalMix FX
In some context, this GUI would be fine. on a channel insert as part of some included mixer FX, it's so off-putting. The knobs are small, closer together. I'd rather something with less controls, more program dependency. On something like this, few controls, and perhaps just preset time constants for slow/fast and hi or low ratio. Speed and ease of use are more important at this stage than precisely dialling something in. Further more, attack and release curves and envelopes vary so much between compressors that you really just need to use it and learn how it behaves. With something that has such a wide range of controls, you really have to spend some times to learn its quirks. Can I be bothered to learn how Rise Time works? Is the auto level going to be more hassle than it's worth? Surely an on/off with one or 2 modes would be fine. Something like waves renaissance compressor, or RVox or even the SSL channel strip (go figure they knew what to do) would work way better. I'd rather just buy a HW distressor and be done than dealing with this.
This one makes me a bit sad because it is without doubt one of the best reverbs ever created and is borderline abandonware at this point.
The original GUI's for R2 and Pheonixverb were never great, but in their day and with their more limited feature set, and at a time when there wasn't so many good reverb plugins, you'd make do.
This one has SOME good elements, but it's almost like an early sketch than a final design. Some aspects of the GUI move from left to right and top to bottom, but other things are scattered wherever they fit. Why is the mix knob where it is? Why are some controls always visible while others are on tabs? why do they all use the same knob style and colour and size? Which controls are most important? which ones are for fine tuning? Some controls affect others while others are totally independent of everything else. There's so much potential to tidy this. Weirdly this one reminds me somewhat of the Axe Edit approach. Their GUI for Excalibur is even worse.
Special mention for this because it looks like its from 1992 and yet its fairly new:
Horrible choice of colours, seemingly random choice of when to use the most basic knob or slider, stuff randomly shoved in wherever it'll fit, nothing at all that draws you to any one control or area of the screen, nor anything that informs the process in how to use it.
Not sure I can bring myself to do another post mortem on Amplitube but Im sure you know where I like it and where I don't.
Last edited:
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,771
newholland
Roadie
- Messages
- 339
aw fairchild! thats a good one. i thought of that tubetech too! i never use it though 
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,285
I like the Logic Pro EQ and Compressor. Easy to understand, crisp and clean.
The problem is that the Logic plugins are all over the place. Some have clearly never been updated and are either tiny, or a blurry mess on a 4K screen. There is no consistency between them where some are very utilitarian (fine for simple plugins), others look dated and some like these are reasonably modern without going way too far into trying to make it look like real hardware.
From Universal Audio I like the Century Channel Strip for similar reasons: function over form. I find that their other plugins are a mixed bag where I would cut e.g the Studer 800 in half because so much of the screen is taken by irrelevant stuff. Many of their plugins are a victim of the hardware designs they emulate, e.g the Manley EQs are very busy.
Last edited:
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,771
Maybe the top 3rd of the plugin doesn't have any controls but I actually really like this design and think it's one of the better tape machine emulations. The spinning tape graphics can give you information at a glance on what tape speed and type you are using. It evokes the feeling and experience of the hardware but with a lot less in the way.
I also happen to love the Manley EQ - it would annoy me to deviate from the original design. I'm not sure I'd say it's busy in any way, aside from being able to see both channels individually. It's strange that mentally, my brain disregards the entire right half of the UI because I'm rarely unlinking channels. But I actually find this fast and intuitive to use, and is one of the few analog modelled EQ's I use on every single mix. Pulsar Audio did an emulation of the Massive Passive too, and included an optional parametric "click and drag" type view. Weirdly it actually completely took away the whole point of using that kind of EQ in the first place to me, and I'd rather just use Pro Q4 if I want to EQ like that. With a passive EQ like the massive passive, there are a lot of weird band interactions happening and it makes more sense to just listen to the result. If you can see the curve you're dialling in, you'll just end up with very similar results to what you'd get on a standard EQ.
I like the Century EQ visually and sonically but I tend to just use the individual plugins that make it up (610, 1073 and LA3A).
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,285
I find the Studer 800 just wastes so much space. Those hidden controls (which look a bit crap to be honest) could be done in another way and whatever those channel things with lights are on top make no sense to me, as a person who has never operated a tape machine.
This to me a good example of why you can go too far in replicating the hardware design ideosyncracies where the plugin just takes a lot of screen space for no good reason.
To me the busy looks of the Manley comes from the way each band is arranged close together with a whole lot of labeling around it. Again, the way the real thing is. That Pulsar plugin doesn't really do anything to reduce that. Like you said it probably makes it just worse because the visuals might feel wrong due to the way it functions.
UA and Pulsar could e.g hide the other channel if you are using it in mono for example, just to reduce the amount of info in one window.
I'm sure the real Manley feels fairly intuitive to use when you can quickly grab a knob and tweak, but that doesn't feel quite the same with a mouse.
newholland
Roadie
- Messages
- 339
maag! man i love that eq so much. :lol: one of my absolute favorites... and the UI, besidedly, is just cheerful :lol:
- Messages
- 7,698
KHAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!!!!!
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,433
I find the obsession with how UI's look interesting. No shade. Not macro issues like being blindingly bright, or unreadable. But the focus on minutiae, on something that is just a representative picture of code that sounds "something like" the picture.
As Spock would say, "Fascinating".
As Spock would say, "Fascinating".
newholland
Roadie
- Messages
- 339
i dunno- its AN aspect. if i have to be stuck in a visual medium for an inherently non visual medium, its nice to not make it misery. frankly, i hate computer recording BECAUSE it makes me look at shit. i dont want to. but things that emulate hardware help it suck less, to me anyhow.
