I’m reading up on the way the pages are organized. And sorry if this comes off terse, dealing with a sick cat and just at the pet hospital, nothing personal, just flow of thoughts!!!
First - I find the page icons confusing. What does an eye or a book have to do with the options in the device? I think pre-production it’s totally fine, but if this scales up, I would think maybe more obvious icons (heck, even letters like C for compression and R for reverb, T for tape, etc).
Second - I am curious about why parameters that seem related are on different pages. Like LP and HP filters would make sense right next to each other, not on separate pages. Two pages of tape and tape related things make sense, but now they’re spread among 3 pages. Wow and flutter settings could all be on the same page, or most of them.
Just some thoughts about the layout. Maybe there’s some organization stuff in just not seeing while reading the manual and the unit isn’t in front of me.
I haven’t had a good chance to run through it yet, but looking forward to it!
Sorry to hear about your cat! Pet stuff is always stressful
And no, this is all great feedback! I appreciate the critique. You are totally right that there isn’t any rhyme or reason behind the symbols. Ribbons to me has always felt super playful so I kind of like that they aren’t literal. Mainly though, it was hard to come up with icons that capture exactly what’s on each page, so the idea was to use images that are distinct and easily identifiable and let people create their own associations as they explore the pedal.
For me it was really important that the front panel convey high level what Ribbons is capable of, so hitting on those 4 main effects - tape age (LP), wet/dry mix, wow & flutter, and dropouts. I also knew I wanted the Touch parameters and reverb to be on the same page. Beyond that, I tried to make parameters that are related to each other feel easily accessible by lining them up on the same knob (e.g LP / HP filters, dropouts depth / frequency, wow & flutter depth / balance). I’m open to layout adjustments if they help make things feel more intuitive! It’s just a constant puzzle and tricky to make a change without knocking something else out of place.
A couple others outside the forum have also mentioned that the layout is a little confusing. Maybe I have to let go of this feeling and try a different approach:
I’ll try to dedicate some time to reimagining other possible UI layouts / artwork using the main constraint of 4 knobs + 4 pages. I can pitch some alt versions that would be possible to implement and open it up for discussion sometime in the next few weeks. This could include a combination of: different icons/text on the front panel, more text, a re-org of where parameters map to.
If I did do a full tear-up for the production run I’d offer an optional upgrade/enclosure swap out for beta testers at-cost which would be ~$20 + shipping $15 + free shipping.
If you had a similar experience of finding the UI confusing and think this would be worth pursuing let me know.
If you think Ribbons wins user interface of the year please chime in
This comment is not about functionality/features, but just the layout of the pages/knobs.
Each knob is labeled with the name of the corresponding feature of the first page, with dotted lines drawn to the different page icons. Are the 4 knobs on page 1 supposed to be a key to what the 4 pages do? What is the logic behind the organization of the knobs/pages? I feel like having connected settings spread across multiple pages could feel a little disjointed for some users. For example, if I’m trying to dial in the Wow & Flutter, I need to jump across 3 pages to modify these – likely multiple time as I might want to change the W&F mix/depth after changing the frequency parameters.
I am wondering if the following groupings would be easier for other users to navigate:
Page 1 - Mixer/Utility
LP Filter
Tape Effect Mix (needs to be on Page 1, right?)
Compression (swap with Crinkle or Noise?)
HP Filter
Page 2 - W&F
Wow Frequency
W&F Mix
W&F Depth
Flutter Frequency
Page 3 - Degradation
Crinkle
Dropout Depth (swap with LP?)
Dropout Frequency (swap with HP?)
Tape Noise
Page 4 - Reverb & Touch
Same as current
There are a bunch of ways to combine the different controls on 1&3 (and 4, I guess?), but I feel like W&F needs to be on a single page.
Hey @randycrouton I just moved your post over to this thread. I just answered a question very similar to yours above.
Tbh I really like your layout idea and I’m already thinking about an enclosure re-design. I think your pitch is a great starting point! Thank you for sharing.
Yeah, I like @randycrouton’s control layout. For me, the icons are more of an abstract idea, so I don’t mind them the way they are. I think if the controls were organized as above, I could probably stop looking at the manual. Especially if they were laid out in a way that felt intuitive. Maybe:
Page 1:
Compression Effect Mix
LP Filter HP Filter
I think if I drop the “front panel shows a flavor of what ribbons can do” I would ditch the W&F mix knob and give wow and flutter their own depth knobs. I only combined them because I wanted the front panel to say “wow & flutter”. So it would be:
Alright so I need to decide whether or not I should make changes to the parameter layout and enclosure artwork.
I’ve created two polls to help guide my decision. These will close on Friday (4/22). After voting, you will be able to see the results but your response will be private.
Updating Ribbons parameter layout and artwork
The current artwork and parameter layout for Ribbons is confusing. It would be better if the pages were laid out in a more thematic way (like this) and the artwork updated to reflect this. I would be OK with getting a new enclosure in ~4 weeks (cost would be $15 + free shipping).
I’m OK with Ribbons as-is. Don’t make any changes to the artwork or parameter layout.
0voters
If changes are made to the parameter layout, when / how should they be released?
Release software update for new layout ASAP. Even though the front panel says “tape age, mix, dropouts, w&f”, I would prefer a more thematic layout (like this) for the time being.
Wait until new enclosures are made to release a software update. I think re-arranging the parameters with the current artwork would be confusing.
The concept of the pages as described by @PeterBregman is exactly what I was going for but didn’t have time to delve into at the Vet! Definitely like that layout.
I get that the visuals are just ‘fun’ but if you’re going through the process of redefining the layout, I would encourage at least a somewhat more intuitive look to the icons.
Page 1 - mixer/utility could be the symbol for a LP filter (like the EQ, where it’s a line that slopes downward at high frequencies)
Page 2 - wow and flutter could be an image of a cassette or tape of some sort?
Page 3 - Degradation - could look like something with cracks in it or something (if we’re going for abstract)
Page 4 - Reverb/touch - maybe like a small image of a mountain/cave/cavern?
I appreciate the way it is for the reasons you mentioned, but I look at those icons and can see myself always needing to rely on the manual to remember what a spiral, an eye, a hand, and a book relate to.
Also - while the goal may be playful, if something isn’t intuitive or easy to digest, it ends up becoming the opposite of that for the end user. I would hope the pedal itself is playful and the pedal LOOKS playful, but if it could at all be more intuitive, I would encourage that. Maybe my suggestions are stupid - which is definitely possible.
Still haven’t had a chance to dig in though. I played it once but was too confused so I had to leave it (did not review the manual - so this was my issue).
100% happy with it though - I love this concept and cannot wait to explore more.
I’m going to explore / present some different options to the group but I think you’re right – the icons AND pages should be more thematic.
I think the only other thing I need to decide on is what to do about the knob text. I’m seeing a couple different options here:
Totally explicit / all parameters or abbreviations of params are available on the front panel (I want to try this approach and see how messy it gets)
Knobs are thematic or less explicit (lots of options here… knobs are labeled ‘one’,‘two’,‘three’,‘four’ or maybe a common theme can be identified… e.g. ‘top knobs are depth controls, bottom are frequency’)
The right answer is to have 4 small LED screens that display the parameters
hahaha - but seriously, I do NOT at all mind the way it is presented now. But if your page one is LP/HP filter, it will be seen more as a filter rather than W&F/tape/strange pedal. So I could see that as an issue. In that sense, not listing page 1 parameters would almost be better.
One thought if you do the first option… consider the 4 parameters per knob going around the knob in a circle, color coded to the page (page 1 black, page 2 white, page 3 pink… or whatever). Could be too much, but I like that layout on my AN1x. Or they could all be white words with color coded backing (not sure how hard this is to test and look at).
I think anything other that explicitly stating all options on the first page, I’d say just describing Page 1 as it currently is is probably best.
Thing is - I can’t stand my Strymon gear with hidden features that I have to look through the manual to obtain. It’s very frustrating. I’d rather they just labeled the secondary features so I knew what I was doing. I know it’s a design/philosophy thing… I’m not a designer and anything I would design would end up looking like utter garbage. But as an end-user, I know what I like.
Having the knobs labeled as one, two, three… to me would be a very unimaginative way to approach it, so I would think it doesn’t fit this pedal’s philosophy at all.
I’m here for this as well; it seems very intuitive and logically consistent, and my mind can very easily be wrapped around this arrangement of parameters.
I also like @Midera’s proposition for iconography, and was thinking very similar thoughts towards the idea that having easily discernible iconography really (for me) helps open up that “playful” realm that you’re prioritizing in the design. I think both about Teenage Engineering and the OP-1 and about Mutable Instruments’ design (in my case Beads, as that’s the only module of theirs I own), and how both of these manufacturers IMO have done such an amazing job of dropping you right into that playful space, and how IMO they have both very successfully leveraged a very simple yet descriptive iconography in their designs.
I would second the sentiment that somehow finding a way to get all of the parameters on the panel would be ideal, and something like this might be an elegant solution? Hidden/unknown parameters also will very quickly turn me off from a piece of gear, or at the least it will compel me to ignore aspects of the functionality of the gear in lieu of setting the parameters where I like them and then just kind of ignoring them moving forward.
These suggestions regarding looping (bouncing) might better fit as a new topic, although the concept of extra pages fits.
I’d worry this is leading to feature creep, although perhaps there’s a way to implement it without being too difficult to do? Up to Jaak of course.
To add extra pages, this could be done by having multiple LEDs lit when switching. So the button goes beyond page four: Page 5 would have LEDs 1+2 lit. Page 6 would have LEDs 1+3 lit (or 3+4).
I would defer to the developer for whether these features are even possible. Extra pages seems viable, but would then also ruin the concept of having each page with written labels on it as suggested previously (each page color coded in a circle around the knobs).
Finally joining the convo after some time with Ribbons. I will say after a bit of time, the interface isn’t bad, especially with all the LED interaction. But the re-arranging of the pages as others have outlined would make it much more intuitive. I’m a big fan of clean and simplistic graphic design on the pedal face tho!
