Wish Indicate Stereo/Mono in the Grid [to reduce "no stereo" user issues]

[yyz67]

Every week or more often a user has an issue with "losing stereo" in a preset. This is almost always due to a block that sums to mono (also 2290 delay effect can be lost if there is a mono block downstream).

For example the Amp block and Cab block (by default) sum to mono:




WISH: Indicate if a block has stereo or mono ins/out via something like (both on unit and in AE).

For example, dots on either side of blocks ("jacks") could indicate number of effective in/out pass-through channels:



Yeah, it's not perfect as some blocks like Drive have a mix that could be set less than 100% (default) allowing stereo pass-through. And in the other direction, most stereo blocks with mix set to 100% (e.g. as in a parallel chain) sum to mono but usually there is a dry (stereo pass-through) shunt in this case.

I might attempt another version that indicates mix as a factor.

 

[guitarnerdswe]

Every week or more often a user has an issue with "losing stereo" in a preset. This is almost always due to a block that sums to mono (more rarely the 2290 delay?).

WISH: Indicate if a block has stereo or mono ins/out via something like (both on unit and in AE):

Mock up of 'cable' version:
View attachment 78744
Mock up of 'block' version (dots indicate number of channels):
View attachment 78754

Yes the CAB block can be either, but this would go a long way.

[My to do: Mock up a Delay with stereo pass-through and sum to mono. Mock up a CAB with both indicators.]

The issue with the 2290 sim is that it phase flips one of the channels, cancelling out the effected signal.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

The issue with the 2290 sim is that it phase flips one of the channels, cancelling out the effected signal.

That's why following it with a mono block downstream can cause issues....

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

+1, BTW. The dots are a simple, elegant solution to indicate without too much UI change.

 

[chris]

I understand the intent, but I think people will have the same questions.

 

[Dave Merrill]

I agree that the dot indicators are a simple and uncluttered way to indicate this.

I also agree that the 2290 is a special problem. If you already knew about its special phase behavior these markings could help you not get tripped up by it, but they wouldn't point you towards the actual issue with the 2290.

Maybe there should be an asterisk next to the output dots on that block? At least then you might ask the question, "ok what's that about?", so you'd do the research to figure it out.

 

[yyz67]

@chris, I guess my thinking is to cover 80-95% of the cases with a simple visible indicator. If it's visible people can be easily reminded to look at the blocks rather than have to remember how each works or look in the block guide for each block in the chain. Plus on a real pedal board one can identify mono and stereo effects. It's not perfect but something. If the manual was updated to explain the dots on ins/outs then reading TFM would prime folks to be aware of it.

The 2290 is a special case that requires tribal knowledge .

Would be cool to have a "block context menu" item to bring up the section in the manual related to the block. (Yes, this would add complexity to AE and risk of manual being behind in terms of updates.)

 

[guitarnerdswe]

That's why following it with a mono block downstream can cause issues....

True. I must have read the OP to quickly and misinterpreted it.

 

[yyz67]

@guitarnerdswe You and @Joe Bfstplk had it right. I later edited the OP to clarify the issue with the 2290. The issue is more general tho.

 

[guitarnerdswe]

@guitarnerdswe You and @Joe Bfstplk had it right. I later edited the OP to clarify the issue with the 2290.

What? So you mean I'm not totally crazy? Bummer!

 

[yek]

+1, BTW. The dots are a simple, elegant solution to indicate without too much UI change.

Not simple. There's a dependency on parameter settings. For most stereo-capable blocks there would have to be an algorithm which examines the block and determines whether the output is stereo or not. Some blocks have multiple parameters determining if the output is mono or stereo.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

Not simple. There's a dependency on parameter settings. For most stereo-capable blocks there would have to be an algorithm which examines the block and determines whether the output is stereo or not. Some blocks have multiple parameters determining if the output is mono or stereo.

*visually simple.

 

[Dr. Dipwad]

+1 for the idea in general.

As for the specifics? Not sure, but, +1 to whatever the discussion-thread comes up with after everyone talks it over.

(Sometimes the best process is to start with an imperfect, "straw-man" version of an idea, and then use that to prompt discussion, out of which an optimal version of the idea will hopefully evolve.)

 

[yyz67]

@yek, yeah you are totally right to do it 100% correctly. And having the UI "adjust" to the specific block setting is probably far too complex for the reward. But the AMP block is mono in always!

 

[GlennO]

Not simple. There's a dependency on parameter settings. For most stereo-capable blocks there would have to be an algorithm which examines the block and determines whether the output is stereo or not. Some blocks have multiple parameters determining if the output is mono or stereo.

I think he's just asking for a visual cue about which blocks collapse the input to mono. That seems like a worthwhile idea. Whether the block does any processing that affects the stereo image is a whole other matter of course.

 

[yek]

I think he's just asking for a visual cue about which blocks collapse the input to mono. That seems like a worthwhile idea. Whether the block does any processing that affects the stereo image is a whole other matter of course.

Well, the goal of the wish is described in the OP. If the dots would not truly indicate the stereo output, there would be no point in adding them.

 

[Admin M@]

I'm against it. It's cluttered, and it could not be truly meaningful without a lot of work.

Too many effects have too many settings that make this potentially misleading. Quick cases in point:

Volume: What if left and right pans are centered?
Chorus, Flanger, etc.: What if spread is 0%?
Reverb: How do you show that the wet is made by summing the dry at the input?
etc. etc.

 

[Dave Merrill]

Not simple. There's a dependency on parameter settings. For most stereo-capable blocks there would have to be an algorithm which examines the block and determines whether the output is stereo or not. Some blocks have multiple parameters determining if the output is mono or stereo.

*visually simple.

Simple for users.
Not necessarily simple to implement in full detail.

 

[yek]

I think he's just asking for a visual cue about which blocks collapse the input to mono.

There are only two: Amp and Drive. Those who ask the questions as mentioned in the OP, will not get the answer from two blocks with a single dot.

 

[GlennO]

There are only two: Amp and Drive. Those who ask the questions as mentioned in the OP, will not get the answer from two blocks with a single dot.

He has a simple wish for a visual reminder about those small number of blocks that collapse input to mono. He mentioned he thinks that would avoid confusion on this issue 85% - 90% of the time. If you want to argue against his idea, probably the way to do it would be to show those numbers are too high.