Harmony Central Forums
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

31870887

Collapse



X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Two things...



    If I watch the iPad strip while scrolling, I can get within one bank of the desired bank every time, and often land on the correct bank. I think this is because you can easily see the rate at which it changes, so it's easy to anticipate where the bank will land.



    So then I tried Noodler's suggestion about anticipating the bank, but without looking at the iPad. This time, I was very surprised to again find that I could land within one bank of the desired bank. When I tried this yesterday I was often off by two or three banks, so I kept doing it in case I just got lucky. But no, the iPad had "trained" me to know when I was going to end up on the bank.



    I do agree that it could be made a little slower without consequence, but I wouldn't want it too much slower. Then again I arrange my patches so I don't have to go through wild bank swings in the middle of a song, and between songs, it's not an issue. 90% of the time I get where I want to go with individual footswitch taps.
    Simplicity, my new album project, is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

    Subscribe, like, and share the links!

    Comment


    • And now...it's time for "Mr. Science"!



      I took a really quick video of the bank scroll, laid it on the Vegas timeline, and measured the time difference the display stayed on a bank before switching to the next one. Aside from the first press, which takes longer, every subsequent time difference was exactly 1/5 second.



      The interval was so consistent that given the crystal-controlled nature of processor clocks, it seems highly unlikely that this would be subject to uniti-to-unit variations.



      But hey, I get to do all this test and measurement stuff while we wait for the update! And put my new Olympus LS-20 video camera to good use Hmm, maybe I should do S/M, THD, IM, and frequency response tests on the audio interface. Seemed pretty good to me, I bet the specs would hold up well.
      Simplicity, my new album project, is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

      Subscribe, like, and share the links!

      Comment








      • Quote Originally Posted by DigiTechRep
        View Post

        The purpose of scroll is to skip past chunks of banks, not to use it to land on a bank. The concept is that if you have a deeper bank, you scroll past 2 or 3 banks, then tap to the correct bank. It was never intended as a sole (heh) way to navigate from bank to bank. In our testing this is indeed how people intuitively used the scroll. Step on it for a second, release, tap-tap, done.




        Wow! I don't know whether to be shocked at the impracticality of such an INTENTIONAL design which would require SEVERAL taps (including PLANNED over-correction) instead of one, or to simply be frustrated that once again, my personal preferences are seemingly thwarted. You say "in our testing, this is how people intuitively used the scroll", but that sounds like a skewed evaluation since it would seem this may have been placed before them without alternative choices. The better question is: Was there any test marketing done (such as my timing test) to see which of several timings were most desired? Or was it perhaps a committee (of 1?) that made this brilliant decision? (Sarcasm intended, but please don't take it personally.)

        Comment








        • Quote Originally Posted by Anderton
          View Post

          And now...it's time for "Mr. Science"!



          I took a really quick video of the bank scroll, laid it on the Vegas timeline, and measured the time difference the display stayed on a bank before switching to the next one. Aside from the first press, which takes longer, every subsequent time difference was exactly 1/5 second.



          The interval was so consistent that given the crystal-controlled nature of processor clocks, it seems highly unlikely that this would be subject to uniti-to-unit variations.




          Again, very interesting. I trust your measurements, but I hope you can surmise from my degree of picayunishness (yes, it's a word!) that my measurements are accurate and I've conducted the test numerous times with/without the iPad connected. I get 1/10th second. Yours is exactly HALF that speed (still to fast for me as per the BEAT THE iPB CLOCK test). And the previous commenter said 1/2 second (though sounded like it was not measured properly).



          The only possibilities I see are: either we have different clock speeds/processors, or we have different firmware versions. I'm gonna call tech support and see if I can get to the bottom of this.

          Comment








          • Quote Originally Posted by paka
            View Post

            Again, very interesting. I trust your measurements, but I hope you can surmise from my degree of picayunishness (yes, it's a word!) that my measurements are accurate and I've conducted the test numerous times with/without the iPad connected. I get 1/10th second. Yours is exactly HALF that speed...




            How did you measure it? The Vegas timeline is definitely accurate.



            But really, Paka, be honest with us now...are you overclocking your iPB-10?
            Simplicity, my new album project, is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

            Subscribe, like, and share the links!

            Comment








            • Quote Originally Posted by Anderton
              View Post

              How did you measure it? The Vegas timeline is definitely accurate.



              But really, Paka, be honest with us now...are you overclocking your iPB-10?




              Now that should be predictable: If you follow my posts, you will know that I'm overclocking everything, including my BRAIN!



              Tested using long cycles and a stopwatch (40 cycles of 20 banks happens in 80 seconds after deducting for the initial pause before scroll). This is precisely 10 banks/second or 0.1 sec per bank.

              Comment


              • Moving house so I've been away for a while with my ipb-10 packed away... Now almost all settled down & time to start making music again! I'm looking forward to the next update. Glad to hear its about to go into final testing phase. For me, the last update did not fix the iPad1 crash issue. Yes it reduced the occurrence not was not a complete cure. So I'm hoping this update will improve stability further running Nexus on my iPad1. Thanks DTMan for your continued presence and patience.

                Comment








                • Quote Originally Posted by Anderton
                  View Post

                  The interval was so consistent that given the crystal-controlled nature of processor clocks, it seems highly unlikely that this would be subject to uniti-to-unit variations.




                  Hey Anderton, what's your firmware version on the iPB (shows in Nexus Settings and I think Nexus has to be connected to the unit).



                  Mine's 1.18.0.0.

                  Comment








                  • Quote Originally Posted by paka
                    View Post

                    Hey Anderton, what's your firmware version on the iPB (shows in Nexus Settings and I think Nexus has to be connected to the unit).



                    Mine's 1.18.0.0.




                    Mine says 2.01.0.9



                    Kidding! Actually it's the same as yours.
                    Simplicity, my new album project, is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

                    Subscribe, like, and share the links!

                    Comment


                    • Ok, you had me there for a second! Well then, that would seem to eliminate the firmware as being the difference. I bought my unit as "open box" on eBay, so maybe someone DID figure out how to overclock the processor! I'm wondering if there's an undocumented button combo on the iPB that controls or changes the scroll speed, and maybe I pressed it by accident. Programmers are known for creating "back doors" as an easy way to make changes during testing, so it is possible however unlikely.

                      Comment








                      • Quote Originally Posted by paka
                        View Post

                        I understand there are those who do not see the timeout as a "problem". There are also many people who are happily submitting to being X-rayed at airports and for them it is no "problem". But this is not the point. We have a condition created by the developer, which for some is a problem and for others can be "lived with" through mitigation. Just because it can be mitigated does not mean it shouldn't be changed so that it works in a way that is best for EVERYONE, including whiners (like me), and those accepting of what is dished out (like yourself).



                        Ask yourself 2 questions:

                        1. How does the 2.7 second timeout reversion serve me?




                        The answer to number 1 is easy.....



                        At a recent gig, I had a bit of a "dork spasm" and inadvertently stepped on the wrong button in an attempt to scroll to a different bank (hit up when I meant to hit down). Rather than frantically try to get where I originally intended to go, I patiently waited for three seconds and just started over. It was a lifesaver in that case.



                        I look at the timeout as a rescue against accidental button hits. Perhaps that's what Digitech intended with such a short timeout.....?



                        Looking at it the other way, if I'm even remotely organized, I know where I want to go with any bank/patch change at any given time, and 2.7 seconds is more than enough time to accomplish a switch. It's the times where I screw up that the automatic "return to home base" is a big help.

                        Comment


                        • I dont think there is any right or wrong answer here on on any these timing/timeout scenarios. It's a user preference based on how they use the unit.



                          So if it's a user preference, why not just make these timing elements user configurable (if feasible) in some future update of firmware/software? The real question might be "Is it feasible?" or must all these timing/timeout elements be "hard coded"?
                          iPB-10 Ready Reference Web Site
                          My new home for forum discussions : DigiTech iPB-10 USER FORUM (at TGP)

                          Comment








                          • Quote Originally Posted by MediaMan09
                            View Post

                            I dont think there is any right or wrong answer here on on any these timing/timeout scenarios. It's a user preference based on how they use the unit.



                            So if it's a user preference, why not just make these timing elements user configurable (if feasible) in some future update of firmware/software? The real question might be "Is it feasible?" or must all these timing/timeout elements be "hard coded"?




                            This is what we are planning to do, we have higher priorities for future updates but we will try to slot it in at some point.

                            Comment


                            • All this discussion of timing is interesting, but I've heard a rumor that the iPB-10 also includes effects that can process the sound of a guitar. Is this true?
                              Simplicity, my new album project, is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

                              Subscribe, like, and share the links!

                              Comment








                              • Quote Originally Posted by MediaMan09
                                View Post

                                I dont think there is any right or wrong answer here on on any these timing/timeout scenarios. It's a user preference based on how they use the unit.



                                So if it's a user preference, why not just make these timing elements user configurable (if feasible) in some future update of firmware/software? The real question might be "Is it feasible?" or must all these timing/timeout elements be "hard coded"?




                                A rational voice. However, virtually anything is feasible, I think you mean cost-effective. If DT management decides it's not cost-effective to set up user preferences on these TWO timing issues, I certainly can understand that. But even if they decide these parameters must remain hard-coded, they should consider more conservative settings based on user feedback/testing. Reading back to page 27 or so, I see that DigiTechRep did explain that these settings are a legacy from RP1000 and GSP1101. What needs to be understood by them then, is that bringing in an iPad display/control system is a game changer and makes these legacy settings totally obsolete for the current product. Having a VISUALLY rich control system demands more time for users (esp. new ones and prospective customers (!!)) to get their bearings.









                                Quote Originally Posted by R2112
                                View Post

                                At a recent gig, I had a bit of a "dork spasm" and inadvertently stepped on the wrong button in an attempt to scroll to a different bank (hit up when I meant to hit down). Rather than frantically try to get where I originally intended to go, I patiently waited for three seconds and just started over. It was a lifesaver in that case.



                                I look at the timeout as a rescue against accidental button hits. Perhaps that's what Digitech intended with such a short timeout.....?



                                Looking at it the other way, if I'm even remotely organized, I know where I want to go with any bank/patch change at any given time, and 2.7 seconds is more than enough time to accomplish a switch. It's the times where I screw up that the automatic "return to home base" is a big help.




                                I fail to see how that 2.7 seconds was a "lifesaver". Even without reversion, the bank/patch would not have changed; your sound would not have changed. It would have remained in "bank select" mode, patiently awaiting your next move. In fact, I believe your initial panic was likely induced by your learned response that you had some sort of time limit to respond. It's an unconscious behavioral control mechanism, like the old "Skinner box" experiments - you know, where the rats got zapped if they hit the wrong button, and got rewarded with food if they hit the right button. (I for one, don't like being treated like a rat!) You may have felt saved, but in reality, it was the iPB's CONDITIONING which caused you to panic, and then made you wait (unnecessarily since you could have just tapped bank down twice without waiting).



                                What I'm seeing here among those that want to support these settings is a lot of rationalization. Many people are willing to fit into DT's mold by saying "I can get along with it", "If you organize your patches the right way", "It was a lifesaver". There are those of us who feel strongly (including MANY supporters when they were new to the unit) that we don't want to be rushed, and we don't want to be conditioned to induce panic. Am I the only one that makes frequent new patches, changes settings alot, and doesn't want to have to re-organize my banks if my set list changes? Is everyone really that organized? Or are they just willing to submit to the way things are?



                                The crux of the issue is this: What is the REAL REASON for the reversion in the first place? Ther is ONLY one that I can see: There is no exit key for "bank select" mode, so if a selection is never made, the lights would keep on flashing indefinitely. I have suggested the solution several times: a double tap on any patch would exit bank select mode WITHOUT selecting. But this solution seems to have eluded DT designers, and I wish they would consider it (or some other "exit key" solution).



                                Until we get a reasonable resolution, I'm gonna start calling the iPB my Skinner Box - affectionately of course!

                                Comment













                                Working...
                                X