News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Tom Hanks on Typewriters by beat on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @02:19PM (#12211940)
As a musician, I've recently started working with analog synthesizers. Digital synths tend to be very alienating devices, at least for me - you don't really program them, you just select a preset that sounds kind of like what you want. Software synths even more so. Then I picked up an Arturia Microbrute, and the visceral thrill of twisting knobs to get the sounds really turned me on! There are no presets. Want to repeat something? Figure out how you did it before, or put an overlay on the keyboard and mark it with ink to get the knob positions. And because knob-twisting is such a part of it, I find myself altering the sounds in realtime. As a guitarist, that sort of intimate tonal control is much more familiar to me.
Re:Tom Hanks on Typewriters by superuser2 on Friday August 05, 2016 @03:17PM (#12235052)
Sound engineers have long recognized the necessity of keeping analog-style physical controls around, even when they are just inputs to a computer.

Nobody who can help it is going to mix with a keyboard and mouse. Faders and knobs (excuse me, "encoders") rule the day.

Re:Tom Hanks on Typewriters by rhizome on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @05:10PM (#12213443)
Re:Tom Hanks on Typewriters by digi_owl on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @04:15PM (#12213011)
Yeah i wonder how much of it has to do with instant feedback. Turning that knob or throwing that switch tells you without seeing what you have done. With touch, or key combos, you often have to glance at a screen to tell if it actually went through or not.

I think a similar thing is at play with people's love for the modem handshake squeal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV8DEJ8ydJQ

You could tell, once you heard it enough times, how well the connection was.