Let's Talk

We are currently looking for beta testers around the world to help test our forthcoming application Har-Bal 3.0
To apply to be a Har-Bal 3.0 beta tester all you need is to be a current/registered owner of Har-Bal and contact us with your request via email from our contact page.
Currently there is no manual provided. Registered users will have no problem navigating around the new version
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Possible Bug

Post by HarBal »

ByronSanto wrote:I rendered a wave file (44.1k/16bit) and noticed that some of the right side had spilled over to the left side. The right side had no spill over. I only used the L/R filters with no compression, Air or M/S filters.

I tried rendering multiple times with the same result every time


I can't seem to reproduce this problem at all. I've constructed three different test file cases, a Left only channel with band limited pink noise, a right only channel with band limited pink noise and a Left low passed and right high passed pink noise case. When applying independent L & R filters to those cases the behaviour was always what I suspected and I did not observe any inter-channel leakage.

That being said, I believe you actually saw it but I'm not clear on how or why it happened. Is it just that I've fixed something recently or is there some staleness or corruption to the filter files, I'm not sure.

I'll keep my eye out for this problem but I'm yet to reproduce it.

cheers,


Paavo.
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

Jyri T. wrote:The navigation between sections must be a one-clicker. There are two bars visible, why don't you let the user to go from one section to any other instantly. Paavo said earlier that is it so difficult to click twice and I say yes, because a) the designated button is microscopic and, more substantially, b) this way it is really difficult to compare two sections (since you have to jump from a section to whole song and then back to the other section). And for crying out loud, what's the point in deliberately designing your program to be intricate?


I would certainly not be so arrogant to say that there is no room for improvement in the segment navigation though I don't think it is as difficult as you have described.

Lets say you've clicked on the first segment and it is zoomed into it but you now want to navigate to a different one. I presume you know which one you want to navigate to so the way I do it is to click and drag the "visible zone" on the upper bar so that it is in the segment you want to move to, then release the mouse and click on the bottom bar. So it's one drag and one mouse click operation. Certainly not a lot of effort in my book and I don't see it as intricate.

The main problem as I see it with the time-line control is not a lack of functionality but a lack of knowledge of the functionality. At some point I plan to add hover over animation to the bits you can click on and drag to make it more self evident but I don't think there is a great deal missing from it.

On the issue of comparing sections, that too is not hard. Again, if you've selected one segment but now wish to compare it with another drag the "visble zone" to the segment you want to reference, then click and drag the "R" in the top right hand corner down to the bottom bar and release the mouse button and there you have it. Again, it's just two drag operations without any need to de-select the current segment.

Jyri T. wrote:I have been able to produce some hickups:

- HB3 crashed on me after I tried to open an HB2 filter.
- The loudness matching seems to be at least occasionally up to a few decibels off (or I unknowingly messed up things).
- The filters acted weirdly a couple of times. I opened a filter and as soon as I engaged it, the limiter indicator jumped to the roof and the song would play like it was compressed to instant death and then some. Reopening the file the second time stopped the weirdness.
- The playback has been acting funny a couple of times (e.g., it sounds thinner that should, after stop and re-play sounds good again).
- Automatic spectrum resizing after an adjustment is a major PITA! Just when you locate the problem part of the spectrum, the program decides to change the scale. I want an option to turn it off!
- The navigation bars act funnily if you click on the upper one while working on a section.


HB3 does not understand HB2 filters. I did think of adding some support for it but decided against it because the differences between the two are huge and I didn't see much benefit in it. If you try to open them it won't work, but I shouldn't crash either so I should fix that.

Loudness matching is more than just matching levels. That little something extra is not something easily codified (not by me at least) so automated loudness matching will never be perfect. I noticed similar issues myself when re-coding this for HB3 but I spent a great deal of time testing it and found nothing wrong with the code. I recall a case of matching levels between a modestly compressed track with a completely squashed track and finding the squashed track sounded 2dB quieter even though the average levels were the same! That probably stems from the squashed dynamics, yet another reason to avoid it.

I've made a fix to do with file locking (I don't know if it is in your build) that may explain some of the errant behaviour though I have a feeling I still have some cryptic ones left to solve.

As for the remainder, I'm on the verge of burn out having been working on the code for how many years I don't know, so I am very reticent to do anything substantial to the current interface until after a release and a holiday. You'll have to wait until the dust has settled on HB3 before much UI optimisation takes place.

Release is delayed in any case, because in my porting to Mac I have uncovered some file format related design issues that needed fixing and the experience has left me set on not releasing until after the Mac port is functional to ensure that I don't release a malformed format and then have to deal with the design fault later. I also lost quite a bit of time settling on a new build environment for the Windows platform (I've now switched to Visual Studio 10) and then having to deal with STL and ANSI C library issues with Microsoft's latest implementations. I've literally lost a whole month dealing with this rubbish but I'm finally going forward again.

cheers,


Paavo.
Jyri T.
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:46 am
Location: Lapland, Finland
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by Jyri T. »

HarBal wrote:Lets say you've clicked on the first segment and it is zoomed into it but you now want to navigate to a different one. I presume you know which one you want to navigate to so the way I do it is to click and drag the "visible zone" on the upper bar so that it is in the segment you want to move to, then release the mouse and click on the bottom bar. So it's one drag and one mouse click operation. Certainly not a lot of effort in my book and I don't see it as intricate.

The main problem as I see it with the time-line control is not a lack of functionality but a lack of knowledge of the functionality. At some point I plan to add hover over animation to the bits you can click on and drag to make it more self evident but I don't think there is a great deal missing from it.

On the issue of comparing sections, that too is not hard. Again, if you've selected one segment but now wish to compare it with another drag the "visble zone" to the segment you want to reference, then click and drag the "R" in the top right hand corner down to the bottom bar and release the mouse button and there you have it. Again, it's just two drag operations without any need to de-select the current segment.


Hmmmm... I still think it's unnecessarily complicated --- because it works against the (Windows) standards. The power users will eventually get it, I'm sure, but I think there's a learning curve there that you could well avoid with doing things more "Windows-like".

E.g., why do you need to hold down the mouse button AND click on "ctrl-S" (which normally stands for Save) for splitting the section? Why isn't just simple "S" enough once you have the cursor in the right place?

All this has to do with the learning curve and work flow. The more intuitive (read: in line with the standard Windows behavior) the program is, the more it gets use --- thus the more you can sell it.
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

Jyri T. wrote:Hmmmm... I still think it's unnecessarily complicated --- because it works against the (Windows) standards. The power users will eventually get it, I'm sure, but I think there's a learning curve there that you could well avoid with doing things more "Windows-like".


Windows interface standards were once adhered to though curiously enough they are commonly ignored these days by many software vendors including Microsoft! What was once a well defined interface standard has morphed into something completely different. The current example of this shifting goal post is the Microsoft ribbon which I have no level of admiration for.

Jyri T. wrote:E.g., why do you need to hold down the mouse button AND click on "ctrl-S" (which normally stands for Save) for splitting the section? Why isn't just simple "S" enough once you have the cursor in the right place?


That minor different you point out here seems like splitting hairs to me. I don't see pressing S or pressing Ctrl+S as a substantive difference. Furthermore, track splitting for EQ'ing has no precedent as far as I'm aware so there is a necessary concept to be learned for new users.

Jyri T. wrote:All this has to do with the learning curve and work flow. The more intuitive (read: in line with the standard Windows behavior) the program is, the more it gets use --- thus the more you can sell it.


Again, I don't see a major difference between what it currently is and what you are suggesting and that is reason enough for me to politely ignore it, not because I'm wanting to be belligerent, but I know from experience that what you find intuitive others won't. There are a multitude of opinions on what constitutes intuitive and If I implemented your model of "intuitive" I am confident I would get as many complaints on that as I'll have with this. Ultimately it is a time waster as far as I'm concerned.

As for reducing the learning curve, I could argue from a devils advocate point of view, that making it more accessible to people with no knowledge on the subject matter and no desire to learn could actually be detrimental to my position because the correct use of Har-Bal necessarily requires an intimate understanding of what the software is doing, what the graphs actually mean, and what techniques should be applied, all of which are not encompassed in usability. So in my view, I only see and only want to see Har-Bal as a specialist piece of software simply because of the knowledge required to use it well, a knowledge that goes beyond the user interface and usability.

These observations have been reinforced on a number of occasions by HB3 (and earlier incarnations) reports about supposed usability issues that literally have made no sense to me. Reports that showed a lack of understanding in the process leading to illogical suggestions.

The real learning curve with HB3 is not the UI. It is understanding how it should be used.

cheers,


Paavo.
Jyri T.
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:46 am
Location: Lapland, Finland
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by Jyri T. »

HarBal wrote:
Jyri T. wrote:E.g., why do you need to hold down the mouse button AND click on "ctrl-S" (which normally stands for Save) for splitting the section? Why isn't just simple "S" enough once you have the cursor in the right place?


That minor different you point out here seems like splitting hairs to me. I don't see pressing S or pressing Ctrl+S as a substantive difference. Furthermore, track splitting for EQ'ing has no precedent as far as I'm aware so there is a necessary concept to be learned for new users.


You missed my point, which was having to press the mouse button WHILE you type ctrl-S. The holding down the mouse button part just feels unnecessary.

HarBal wrote:Again, I don't see a major difference between what it currently is and what you are suggesting and that is reason enough for me to politely ignore it, not because I'm wanting to be belligerent, but I know from experience that what you find intuitive others won't. There are a multitude of opinions on what constitutes intuitive and If I implemented your model of "intuitive" I am confident I would get as many complaints on that as I'll have with this. Ultimately it is a time waster as far as I'm concerned.

As for reducing the learning curve, I could argue from a devils advocate point of view, that making it more accessible to people with no knowledge on the subject matter and no desire to learn could actually be detrimental to my position because the correct use of Har-Bal necessarily requires an intimate understanding of what the software is doing, what the graphs actually mean, and what techniques should be applied, all of which are not encompassed in usability. So in my view, I only see and only want to see Har-Bal as a specialist piece of software simply because of the knowledge required to use it well, a knowledge that goes beyond the user interface and usability.


Fair enough. I merely wanted to give feedback as a user who has to use a number of different video and audio editing and managing programs. I just happen to find it most irritating when programs are designed from an "IT engineer point of view" instead of the "user point of view".

Best,
Jyri
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

Jyri T. wrote:You missed my point, which was having to press the mouse button WHILE you type ctrl-S. The holding down the mouse button part just feels unnecessary.


Ah well, here I beg to differ. The point of having to hold down the mouse button at the same time is one of accuracy. The most accurate way to find the appropriate split point is while playing the track and mouse button down on the point you think is a good split point then letting go and listening for the location encompassing all that you need it to. If it doesn't sound right you move your location left or right and try again. When you've found it then you press ctrl+S to fix the split.

Obviously, in playback the track position is moving so if you don't have a requirment of mouse button down then your edit point will be where the position is at the time you press it. Someone else suggested the exact same thing as you to me and suggested that they could choose split points while listen and just pressing S at the appropriate moment. The problem with that, at least from my perspective, is accuracy. Even if you have perfect timing there is a latency between what you hear and where Har-Bal thinks the playback location is at the time you press S so when in playback the split location can essentially never be accurate. You can't even compensate for that latency because it is not strictly constant as it can change depending on how the windows Kernel schedules time slices to the various components of Har-Bal.

You could restrict it by saying that you could only create splits when not in playback but that is an unecessary road block in my view. Beyond that, not requiring you to press and hold the mouse button makes split creation implicit and modal. The position of the split is implied by the location of the track position. Requiring it makes the split location explicit, which is far better in my view.

I don't design UI's lightly without thought for the consequences, though I get the impression some people think that I construct things on a whim.

On another topic, you mentioned your dislike of the zoom functionality in HB and how it slows you down. For me I find it perplexing that it should present such a big problem because zooming is something I virtually never use and for good reason. Every edit you make to the spectrum has a local and a global effect because of the way we hear. If you zoom in you can see the local but you miss the global so it is actually harder to make what I consider an appropriate edit while zoomed in. Hence, I virtually never do it.

If zooming presents as a big usability problem to you as you made out then I guess you must be using it a lot, which I would question. That being said, I take your point of adding extra keyboard shortcuts to immediately access zooming though I don't have any inclination to go down the "scroll bar" route, which I feel is totally inappropriate for this context.

cheers,


Paavo.
Jyri T.
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:46 am
Location: Lapland, Finland
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by Jyri T. »

HarBal wrote:
Jyri T. wrote:You missed my point, which was having to press the mouse button WHILE you type ctrl-S. The holding down the mouse button part just feels unnecessary.


Ah well, here I beg to differ. The point of having to hold down the mouse button at the same time is one of accuracy. The most accurate way to find the appropriate split point is while playing the track and mouse button down on the point you think is a good split point then letting go and listening for the location encompassing all that you need it to. If it doesn't sound right you move your location left or right and try again. When you've found it then you press ctrl+S to fix the split.


I still don't see the need for the double-action if you could choose to do it both "my way" (without button pressed) and "your way" (with button pressed). The idea that there is only one "right" way of using this program still strikes me somewhat odd. But it's your baby and you raise it as you wish.

Nonethesame, as I said earlier, I like what it does and I'm only commenting on the GUI and workflow part of the program.

HarBal wrote:If zooming presents as a big usability problem to you as you made out then I guess you must be using it a lot, which I would question. That being said, I take your point of adding extra keyboard shortcuts to immediately access zooming though I don't have any inclination to go down the "scroll bar" route, which I feel is totally inappropriate for this context.


To point out my point (!) here: I often use a steep HP-like cut at about 40 Hz, which goes way down. When I try to look at the Frequency Response display, it gets reset after each edit and I end up getting just a hockey stick -shaped curve that shows all but none of details above 40 Hz.

Jyri

PS. I refound the changing of the focus trick: press Tab while having the mouse button down... I hope I will remember it by heart the next time I need it. I just wish it was something that I think 'intuitive', like plain Tab or double-clicking on the focus indicator. Especially as I can't find a reference to this on the Keyboard Shortcuts list or any other tutorial material or manual.
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

Well yes, I can see your points and I'll consider it. I certainly will look at fixing the auto-scaling issues that I agree can be annoying.

What I won't be doing is making major UI changes at this stage because of my increasing feeling of burnout.

An easy way to remember how to change the focus on the editing tools is to remember how to change input focus on windows controls in dialog boxes. TAB key was chosen deliberately because of that association with "standard" windows GUI behaviour.

cheers,


Paavo.
Jyri T.
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:46 am
Location: Lapland, Finland
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by Jyri T. »

I just want to add that I feel for you Paavo since I know personally that a burn out is no doddle.

I promise I'll stop haunting you now... :wink:

Best,
Jyri
ByronSanto
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:21 am
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by ByronSanto »

My version of HB3 is no longer registered. I select the lic, close HB3 and on reopen it states that it is an unregistered copy.
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

That's supposed to happen. Beta licenses are only temporary. Send me an email and I'll send you another one.

cheers,


Paavo.
ByronSanto
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:21 am
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Contact:

HB3.0962 error

Post by ByronSanto »

After I installed HB3.0962 I'm getting the following error on close

5:52:59 PM: can't open file 'C:\Program Files\Har-Bal 3.0\HarBal.ini' (error 5: access is denied.)
5:52:59 PM: Error saving user configuration data.
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

Yeah, that would be my fault. On Windows 7 files under Program Files are restricted access for non-administrator accounts by default. I should have and will move the ini file to ProgramData folder instead, though that won't help you right now.

You should be able to work around this by logging in as administrator and making the HarBal.ini file writable by right clicking on it and then changing the file permissions.

cheers,


Paavo.
DuncJF
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:26 am

Re: Let's Talk

Post by DuncJF »

Probably not posted in the right place.

How far away are you from an official release I can pay for ?
I've just tried to install Harbal 3 on my shiny new 64 bit Win 7 PC and the Beta license has run out (expected that anyway really).


Love this new Harbal, I don't think I could work without it...


:D
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk

Post by HarBal »

I want to have the Mac version sorted before I release officially release the PC version just so that I don't get caught out by any omissions.

The Mac port is in progress and going reasonably well despite being perplexed by some debugging issues that I'm currently experiencing. I hope to have it sorted in about a months time.

After that I have to sort out the licensing back end on our web server before I can make an official release. I guess that will take around another month to get a handle on.

So, I know it's late and getting later but an official release is probably 3 months away.

Glad to hear that you like version 3. If you want to continue using the Beta just email me and I'll send you another key.

cheers,


Paavo.
Post Reply