
Originally Posted by
nem0nic
Right. I agree completely. So where are the required buttons for effect control? Are they the buttons below the knobs? If so, why disassociate the 2 groups? That makes the controller less intuitive.
There are functional groups that imply a workflow. For example, if I have a fader and 3 unlabeled pots above it, are you really saying that most users won't decide to map those pots to EQs HI/MID/LOW top to bottom? How about if there is a linear fader next to a platter. If the fader isn't labeled PITCH, do you really think any user will be confused about it's implied functionality? Think they'll try mapping that big platter to the volume?
Probably not. We work with these functional groups every day. There are unwritten rules for product design that apply to ALL classes of product. Good design means that the product should be intuitive.
I'm not saying it's easy. Quite the opposite. And if you start off with bad design, your job is that much harder.
You have no idea what you're talking about here. First of all, they're not a manufacturer. They rebadge stuff from ODMs (mostly Hanpin) and sell it. Second of all, they're not fast growing (mostly because their distribution model is terrible).
Even if that's the intended goal, good design is a must or your sales will be severely limited.
But again, the problem isn't that the functions aren't known. It's a matter of workflow. If I have to spread a functional group out, that breaks up the workflow and makes things harder to use. Most of the time, this isn't even something you think about directly - you just realize that using thing X is uncomfortable or distracting. When you experience this, most of the time it can be attributed to a design flaw.
DJTT doesn't make VCI-100s.
And the MIDI Fighter has a very clear and proven workflow. A 4 x 4 grid of buttons used to "perform" sounds has been used since 1988 (where it appeared on the original MPC60).
Bookmarks