Size

[ColinP]

Hi, I've been considering purchasing your recent modules but the controls are so tiny and the density is so high that even at full zoom it's a little bit difficult to see what's going on.

OK so I'm in my 60's but I usually manage well enough but I actually needed to dig out some reading glasses (which I don't normally use even to read small print) in order to see the controls on the MIDIMOD4 module clearly.

Any chance of alternate versions that use up more HP in return for increased visibility/usability?

[Waverley Instruments]

Hi there, and thanks for the interest in our modules and feedback regarding the UIs.

We do try and cram a lot of functionality into a small space, it's true. However, we didn't think our designs / layouts were taking it too far compared to other modules, but if you're having issues, perhaps we have for some! Sorry about that.

We're not sure about the practicalities of offering alternate versions unfortunately and would hope that at 150% zoom, all our UI text should definitely be legible.

There is another possibility that there might be a platform-specific font rendering issue making legibility more challenging, so we could look into that. Are you on Windows by any chance?

Thanks, -Rob

[ColinP]

Hi Rob, thanks for the prompt reply.

Yeah Windows. I'm using a 14" screeen with 2169 x 1440 pixel resolution but I set the Windows display zoom setting at 150% except in special circumstances.

The image quality is fine it's just slightly too cramped. If I use Zoom Interface 2X in VM Settings then obviously I can get everything huge but zooming is a pain as then I can only see a tiny subset of patches. So I'd need to zoom in and out a lot more than usual. I appreciate it's a trade-off and know from my own projects how difficult it is to keep modules compact but I'd prefer to use more HP than go beyond a certain density. Using more HP means I can just put fewer wide modules in a cabinet and use zoom levels that I'm used to.

On reflection putting out variant versions for people like me with small screens and aging eyes would be a major hassle agreed. I just thought I'd provide you with a little feedback. Maybe with future work it's something to keep in mind.

Best Regards, Colin

[Waverley Instruments]

Thanks Colin,

It's a good reminder that everyone's running different setups, and in the absence of UI guidelines, maybe all the developers should agree not to go below a certain font point size. Perhaps it's something CA could also keep in mind during their review process, although I can imagine devs getting upset if they get requests to re-work UI layouts. It's a tricky one.

I actually work on a smaller 13.3" screen at a higher resolution of 2560 x 1600 all day long, but it's a MacBook Pro with Retina display and I've also been wearing reading / close work glasses for a good while now.

If I can't read 4 pt text on my Mac then I know it's time for a new set of glasses!

[ColinP]

I wouldn't want to see strict UI guidlines imposed. It should be a matter of choice for end users to decide if they feel a module is suitable for them. Although your recent UI's don't work for me I'm sure most people will wonder what on earth I'm fussing about.

Things would be very different if zoom and scrolling worked more smoothly in VM. I'm used to zooming and scrolling using touch and am forever putting two fingers on the screen only to be reminded yet again that VM doesn't respond to gestures!

Anyway best wishes and I'm looking forward to future releases from WI to see where you go.

[UrbanCyborg]

It's a good reminder for the rest of us, Colin. I work on a 43" Dell monitor at 150%, and am sometimes surprised at how unreadable my modules can be on a laptop display. The smallest text I use is 6 pt Bold, and I only use that on the logo text; everything else is between 8 pt and 14 pt (large for the module title). The one I first saw this with was my Notepad module, where I tried to keep the control interface small, so as to leave more room for text.

Still, I think that difficult-to-read text is better than no text at all; there are some fine developers who leave it off for the most part so as to get more controls in a smaller footprint (no names, but I'm sure you can all think of a few). That kind of philosophy favors power use over ease of learning, which is kind of the bit split between the Mac and Windows worlds, where the Mac is generally somewhat easier to learn, but harder to do complex things on, while Windows is, to some extent, the reverse.

Reid

[Steve W]

I also have a hard time reading things on modules, but rather than having size standards, I'd prefer if each module had a button that would make the module expand and contract.

[UrbanCyborg]

But expand or contract how? Seems to me that that would impose big onus on developers, as well as making the code quite a lot larger and more complex. It can't just be a matter of scale, because the overall scale percentage would still apply, with its fixed pixel count between rails (for a specific monitor size). You'd have to write modules to morph along specific lines for each component. Messy.

Reid

[Waverley Instruments]

Something I'd love to see in an update, Voltage Modular 3.0 perhaps...

The option for a freeform floating window layout view which makes the issue Reid raises go away, so that each module becomes a re-sizeable window - well, strictly speaking, the modules would be individually re-scalable. No extra code necessary - the modules already scale up to 150% just fine.

I get the whole Eurorack skewmorphism thing, but maybe it's time to move on

Anyway, could help in the case Colin has highlighted here?

Personally, I'd like the ability to scale and layout modules depending on what I'm doing. For example, for a live performance, I might want my mixer and sequencer zoomed-in, front and centre, nice and big, with everything else zoomed out and positioned around the edges of the display as I won't really be touching those during the show.

My re-sizeable €0.02

-Rob @ WI

[Steve W]

But expand or contract how?

Something I'd love to see in an update, Voltage Modular 3.0 perhaps...

The option for a freeform floating window layout view which makes the issue Reid raises go away, so that each module becomes a re-sizeable window - well, strictly speaking, the modules would be individually re-scalable. No extra code necessary - the modules already scale up to 150% just fine.

Waverley Instruments has been reading my mind for a few months with regard to modules/bundles. They have done it again with the expand/contract suggestion!!! Originally, I thought of a button that expanded and floated out the module, but since the original thread where I floated the idea was really a "What I'd like to see" list, I made the suggestion as the result I'd like to see with no references of how it could/should be implemented. So, when the size issue came up here, I just brought over the idea from there. [See below.]

It occurred to me that since some third-party module makers have windows that open (such as for changing settings), that approach might be possible, but I had in mind something global (available for all modules) such as what Rob described possibly as part of VM 3.0.

I agree with the accolades for CA and 3rd-party developers and optimism for more good things to come in 2023 and beyond.

Collapsible cabinets. The ability to extract and expand cabinets with one click.

I agree collapsible cabinets would be nice. For me the ability to hide active, on-going visual stuff [animated graphics] should save valuable CPU resources.

Along these lines, it would be nice also to have a button on each module that would expand and contract the module. This way modules not being worked on could be small and modules being worked on could be large while being tweaked.