Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
WARNING -- Exclusely GEAR (- not music -) oriented message (with "rant"
content)!
Bob -- You mention:
>One of the things we have
>been looking very closely at is the reuse of buttons for
different
>functions depending on the state of the machine (JamMan in this
case).
While the idea may indeed be valid and useful, it's well thought-out
execution is most critical. Bob you go on to add:
> I must admit that I have been very frustrated with the limited
user interface of the
> JamMan, particularly the display.
Bob -- GOD BLESS YOU!!!
Let me offer these thoughts.
In June 1995 I bought a JamMan. I was looking forward to lots of fun.
Instead, I found:
- the interface confusing,
- the manual somewhat high on what one could do but very low on how one
does it
- the little peddles somewhat cheap for a (then) $400 unit. (and why
supply only one when TWO are needed for full functionality?)
Specifically I was disappointed in the interface. The little "window"
with LEDS and numbers was -- in my personal -- were poorly conceived. I
felt cost cutting concerns (from Alex & Vortex sharing the same knob &
"window" placement) had possibly gone too far and impared JamMan's
usability. Unfortunately, knowing the mode I'm in by checking which of
three tiny LEDS stacked one atop the other is not a good enough
indicator for me. What if the unit is 10 feet away? What if the unit
is low in a rack so from an angle it's hard to see which light is lit?
I returned the unit after three frustrating weeks to get my money back.
I was greatly disappointed.
In June 1996 I discovered and bought an Oberheim Echoplex. I was
looking forward to lots of fun.
Indeed, I found:
the interface easy understand -- the well conceived
footcontroller making the biggest impact!
the manual clear enough I could understand and feet comfortable
Clearly, I'm just one guy. Many hundreds of people are Very Happy with
their JamDudes. Obviously, JamMan can be used succesfully by a great
number of people. I may have just not "gotten into the head" of the
thing. The interface was the stumbling block.
Let me offer this. I have done market research for software companies
for a while now. They will often do a series of FOCUS GROUPS -- where a
groups of 6-12 individuals fitting a "likely buyer" profile are brought
in and asked in a loose yet structured dialog to use a product. Their
experiences are recorded. They are sometimes filmed. Problems they
encounter are looked at. Improvements are made. And there are
companies that SPECIALIZE in user interface testing and design.
When I bought my JamMan I contacted Lexicon marketing and offered to
conduct soem FOCUS groups. Clearly it was too late. But I wanted to do
something.
I suggest looking at TCElectronics products and Baybank terminals for
ideas. It seems to LCD screens on LEXICON devices would be a great
"palette" to display info.
I'll be quiet now and wait for the flames to roar.
David Kirkdorffer
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sellon, Bob [SMTP:bsellon@lexicon.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 1997 9:22 AM
> To: Loopers-Delight
> Subject: RE: Improving looper interfaces
>
> One point to keep in mind is that refining a user interface does not
>
> always mean modifying the physical controls. One of the things we have
>
> been looking very closely at is the reuse of buttons for different
> functions depending on the state of the machine (JamMan in this case).
>
> For us, this started with Tap which, on the first prototype (a
> modified
> PCM 42) was two separate buttons: Start and End. The thinking is that
> it
> is easier to have one control that you must manipulate a certain way
> than
> to have a separate control for each function. With a growing feature
> set,
> the separate control approach will leave little room on stage for the
>
> performers. The trick is finding the right combination of functions
> for a
> particular control (aftertouch, etc..) so that functions are still
> easy
> to get to. This is a lot harder than it seems and I've/we've certainly
>
> made some mistakes but I do believe this is fertile ground. One of the
>
> reasons the guitar is such a popular instrument is that it provides a
>
> relatively simple interface with an incredibly wide degree of control.
>
> Travis mentioned that he would rather see money spent on the feature
> set
> than on the interface. While I agree with the sentiment, I must admit
>
> that I have been very frustrated with the limited user interface of
> the
> JamMan, particularly the display. We've had tons of feature
> suggestions
> but getting advanced features into the box usually means you have
> parameters to tweek. How do you display BPM on a box like the JamMan.
>
> Good luck. The bottom line is, you don't want to blow the budget on
> the
> user interface but you have to be not careful to put in too little.
>
> Bob Sellon
> Lexicon/Stec
>
> ----------