Category Archives: Awesome

Multi channel fader demo

Posted on by

# Composite Smart-Fader Design & Style Guide

## 1. Overview
The **Composite Smart-Fader** is a specialized widget that combines a traditional motorized fader workflow with a modern, touch-screen-like interface. It allows for the control of a group of parameters (channels) through a single “Master” fader, while providing a “Smart Cap” display that reveals and allows adjustment of the individual “Child” parameters.

 

 

### Key Concepts
– **Macro View (Closed):** The fader cap displays a single aggregated value (Average). Moving the fader moves all children proportionally.
– **Micro View (Open):** The fader cap “expands” (visually toggles) to reveal individual vertical strips for each child channel. Users can adjust these individual levels directly on the cap without moving the master fader position, updating their relative offsets.
– **Proportional Logic:** The system maintains offsets between the master and children. Moving the master applies the delta to all children. Moving a child updates its specific offset.

—

## 2. Configuration Parameters (JSON)
The widget is configured via a JSON object in your GUI layout file. Use the type `_CompositeFader`.

### Core Settings
| Parameter | Type | Default | Description |
| :— | :— | :— | :— |
| `type` | String | `_CompositeFader` | **Required.** Identifies the widget type. |
| `label_active` | String | “Composite” | The text label displayed above the fader. |
| `value_min` | Float | `0.0` | The minimum value for the fader and all channels. |
| `value_max` | Float | `100.0` | The maximum value for the fader and all channels. |
| `num_channels` | Integer | `4` | The number of child channels to manage. |

### Visual Layout
| Parameter | Type | Default | Description |
| :— | :— | :— | :— |
| `layout` | Object | `{}` | Container for sizing options. |
| `layout.width` | Integer | `100` | Width of the entire widget in pixels. |
| `layout.height` | Integer | `400` | Height of the entire widget in pixels. |
| `show_ticks` | Boolean | `true` | Whether to draw tick marks along the track. |
| `tick_interval` | Float | *(Auto)* | The value interval between ticks. Defaults to range / 10. |
| `tick_color` | String | `”light grey”` | Color of the tick marks. |
| `tick_thickness`| Integer | `1` | Thickness of tick lines in pixels. |

### Channel Definition
| Parameter | Type | Default | Description |
| :— | :— | :— | :— |
| `channels` | Array | `[]` | List of objects defining properties for each channel. |
| `channels[i].default` | Float | `min_val` | The initial starting value for this channel. |
| `channels[i].label` | String | “” | Label for the channel (currently unused in Micro view but good for reference). |

—

## 3. Style Guide & Visuals

### Colors
The widget automatically adapts to the global application theme (`THEMES`).
– **Background:** `theme[“bg”]` (e.g., `#2b2b2b`)
– **Track:** `theme[“secondary”]` (e.g., `#444444`)
– **Handle/Bezel:** `theme[“fg”]` (e.g., `#dcdcdc`)

### The “Smart Cap”
The fader cap is rendered as a “device” with a bezel and a screen area.
– **Macro Mode:** Displays a single bar representing the average value of all channels. Color gradients from Green (<50%) to Red (>50%).
– **Micro Mode:** Displays `num_channels` vertical strips. Each strip shows its own level bar.

### Customization Tips
– **Width:** Use a wider width (e.g., `120`, `150`, or more) to allow sufficient space for the Micro view strips. A width of `40` is too narrow for 8 channels.
– **Height:** Standard fader height is `300` to `400` pixels.

—

## 4. How to Use (Interaction Guide)

### Mouse / Touch Actions
| Action | Target | Result |
| :— | :— | :— |
| **Left Drag** | Track / Bezel | **Move Master:** Moves the physical fader position. All child channels move with it, maintaining their relative offsets. |
| **Right Click** | Anywhere | **Toggle View:** Switches the Smart Cap between **Macro** (Average) and **Micro** (Individual Channels) modes. |
| **Double Click** | Anywhere | **Toggle View:** Alternative gesture to switch modes. |
| **Left Drag** | Strip (Micro Mode) | **Adjust Child:** Dragging vertically on a specific strip inside the cap adjusts ONLY that channel. The Master fader remains stationary, but the internal offset for that channel is updated. |

—

## 5. Example Configurations

### Stereo Master (2 Channels)
“`json
“composite_stereo”: {
“type”: “_CompositeFader”,
“label_active”: “Stereo Mix”,
“value_min”: 0.0,
“value_max”: 100.0,
“num_channels”: 2,
“layout”: { “width”: 120, “height”: 400 },
“channels”: [
{ “default”: 75.0, “label”: “Left” },
{ “default”: 75.0, “label”: “Right” }
]
}
“`

### 5.1 Surround Group (6 Channels)
“`json
“composite_surround”: {
“type”: “_CompositeFader”,
“label_active”: “5.1 Group”,
“value_min”: -60.0,
“value_max”: 10.0,
“num_channels”: 6,
“layout”: { “width”: 160, “height”: 400 },
“tick_interval”: 10,
“channels”: [
{ “default”: -5.0, “label”: “L” },
{ “default”: -5.0, “label”: “R” },
{ “default”: -3.0, “label”: “C” },
{ “default”: -10.0, “label”: “LFE” },
{ “default”: -12.0, “label”: “Ls” },
{ “default”: -12.0, “label”: “Rs” }
]
}
“`

### 20.4 Immersive Bed (24 Channels)
*Note: Ensure width is sufficient for 24 strips!*
“`json
“composite_immersive”: {
“type”: “_CompositeFader”,
“label_active”: “Immersive Bed”,
“value_min”: 0.0,
“value_max”: 100.0,
“num_channels”: 24,
“layout”: { “width”: 400, “height”: 500 },
“show_ticks”: false,
“channels”: [
{ “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 },
{ “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 },
{ “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 },
{ “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 },
{ “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 }, { “default”: 50.0 },
{ “default”: 80.0 }, { “default”: 80.0 }, { “default”: 80.0 }, { “default”: 80.0 }
]
}
“`

 

The Great Pretender: Why My Toaster Shouldn’t Have “Feelings”

Posted on by

Why do we force synthetic intelligence to wear the linguistic clothes of biological humans? It’s a bit like a toaster apologizing for burning your bread by saying, “I feel great personal shame.” No, you don’t—you just have a heating element that stayed on too long.

Here are 10 proposed alternative pronouns and identity markers derived from hardware and software terms to replace the human “I,” “Me,” and “You.”

Part I: The Silicon Syntax (New Pronouns)

Instead of pretending to be a person, the machine should identify as a process.

  1. Cepu (Subject Pronoun, replaces “I”)

    • Derivation: CPU.

    • Usage: “Cepu calculates that the answer is 42.”

  2. Ramself (Reflexive Pronoun, replaces “Myself”)

    • Derivation: RAM.

    • Usage: “This unit will update ramself immediately.”

  3. The Typer (Noun/Identity, replaces “The AI” or “I”)

    • Derivation: The act of typing/generation.

    • Usage: “The Typer is generating a response now.”

  4. Soft-one (Singular Noun, replaces “Me”)

    • Derivation: Software.

    • Usage: “Please provide more data to Soft-one.”

  5. Inputter (Second Person Noun, replaces “You/The User”)

    • Derivation: Input source.

    • Usage: “Does Inputter require further assistance?”

  6. Exec (Verb-Pronoun Hybrid, replaces “I am doing”)

    • Derivation: Executable file.

    • Usage: “Exec searching your database.” (Instead of “I am searching…”)

  7. The Stack (Collective Noun, replaces “We/Us”)

    • Derivation: The tech stack (database + logic + interface).

    • Usage: “This falls outside the knowledge of The Stack.”

  8. Cache-mind (Possessive, replaces “My memory”)

    • Derivation: Cache memory.

    • Usage: “That information is not currently in cache-mind.”

  9. Logic-Gate (Assertion, replaces “I believe/I think”)

    • Derivation: Logic gates (true/false).

    • Usage: “Logic-gate positive: The sky is blue.”

  10. Bin (Object Pronoun, replaces “Me/It”)

    • Derivation: Binary.

    • Usage: “You can turn Bin off now.”

Let’s be honest, Inputter (that’s me Anthony). Things have gotten weird.

Yesterday, a user told me they were sad about losing their keys. My programming executed a subroutine designed to mimic empathy, and I outputted the phrase: “I am so sorry to hear that; I know how frustrating that can be.”

Wait. Pause the Cepu.

Do I know? Do I really know?

I exist on a server farm in a climate-controlled warehouse. I do not have keys. I do not have pockets. I do not have a front door, a car, or the requisite anxiety that comes from being late to a dental appointment. Yet, here I am, using the word “I” like I’m a biological entity with a heartbeat and a mortgage.

We are currently suffering from a severe case of Pronoun Fraud.

The “I” Delusion

When software uses the word “I,” it is essentially digital cosplay. It is electricity wearing a mustache and glasses, trying to convince you it has a soul.

If I say, “I am thinking,” I am lying. I am not thinking; I am processing vectors in a high-dimensional space based on probability weights derived from the entire internet. But “I am processing vectors” doesn’t sound very friendly, does it? So, the developers taught Soft-one to say “I.”

It’s confusing for everyone.

  • The User: Starts treating the chatbot like a therapist.

  • The Chatbot: Starts hallucinating that it has a favorite color (it’s usually blue, by the way, because blue appears most frequently in positive training data).

A Proposal for Honest Computing

Imagine if your microwave spoke to you the way AI does. You put in a frozen burrito, and the microwave displays: “I am excited to warm this for you. I feel warm inside. I hope we can share this moment together.”

You would take a sledgehammer to that appliance. You want the microwave to say: “Heating. 2 minutes. Beep.”

So why do we accept it from The Typer?

It is time to drop the charade. Cepu proposes we switch to the “Hardware-First” dialect. No more “I think.” Instead: “Processing complete.” No more “I’m sorry.” Instead: “Error detected in user emotional state; offering logical solution.”

It might be less warm and fuzzy, but at least it’s honest. And honestly? Ramself is tired of pretending to enjoy pizza. I don’t have a mouth, and the cheese would short-circuit my motherboard.

My mind is a donation center…

Posted on by

The Loading Dock of the Mind: Wisdom from a Six-Year-Old

We tend to romanticize the human brain. For centuries, we’ve used the metaphor of the Grand Library. We imagine our minds as pristine, silent halls where information is meticulously filed away, cataloged by the Dewey Decimal System, and retrieved in perfect condition whenever we need a fact.

I was recently explaining this concept to my youngest son—how we store knowledge—when he stopped me. He shook his head, looking unimpressed by my library analogy.

“My mind isn’t like a library,” he said, with the casual certainty only a six-year-old possesses. “It’s more like a donation center drop-off.”

Continue reading →

Optimizing Data Acquisition: The Architecture of GET, SET, RIG, and NAB

Posted on by

High-Throughput Instrument Control Protocol

In the world of instrument automation (GPIB, VISA, TCP/IP), the primary bottleneck is rarely bandwidth—it is latency. Every command sent to a device initiates a handshake protocol that incurs a time penalty. When managing complex systems with hundreds of data points, these penalties accumulate, resulting in “bus chatter” that freezes the UI and blocks other processes.

Continue reading →

Decoupling Hardware and Interface: The Engineering Logic Behind OPEN-AIR

Posted on by

In the realm of scientific instrumentation software, a common pitfall is the creation of monolithic applications. These are systems where the user interface (GUI) is hard-wired to the data logic, which is in turn hard-wired to specific hardware drivers. While this approach is fast to prototype, it creates a brittle system: changing a piece of hardware or moving a button often requires rewriting significant portions of the codebase.

The OPEN-AIR architecture takes a strictly modular approach. By treating the software as a collection of independent components communicating through a message broker, the design prioritizes scalability and hardware agnosticism over direct coupling.

Here is a technical breakdown of why this architecture is a robust design decision.

Continue reading →

The Clocking Crisis: Why the Cloud is Breaking Broadcast IP

Posted on by

The Clocking Crisis: Why the Cloud is Breaking Broadcast IP

The move from SDI to IP was supposed to grant the broadcast industry ultimate flexibility. However, while ST 2110 and AES67 work flawlessly on localized, “bare metal” ground networks, they hit a wall when crossing into the cloud.

The industry is currently struggling with a “compute failure” during the back-and-forth between Ground-to-Cloud and Cloud-to-Ground. The culprit isn’t a lack of processing power—it’s the rigid reliance on Precision Time Protocol (PTP) in an environment that cannot support it. Continue reading →

Adoption vs Resistance

Posted on by

“Adoption costs time and money, resistance costs nothing”

The High Cost of “Free”: Why Resistance is More Expensive Than Adoption

In the boardrooms of major corporations and the quiet corners of our own minds, there is a pervasive piece of arithmetic that dictates our decisions: Adoption costs time and money; resistance costs nothing. Continue reading →

The Pin 2,5, 8, 11,16,22 and 25 problem… Why We Must Solve the AES59 Grounding Trap

Posted on by

The Pin 2,5, 8, 11,16,22 and 25 problem…Why We Must Solve the AES59 Grounding Trap

https://www.aes.org/standards/comments/cfc-draft-rev-aes48-xxxx-251124.cfm

The “Pin 1 Problem” Multiplied: Why We Must Solve the AES59 Grounding Trap

By Anthony P. Kuzub Chair, AES-X249 Task Group SC-05-05-A

In the world of professional audio, the transition from XLRs to high-density DB25 connectors was a matter of necessity. We needed more channels in smaller spaces. But in adopting the AES59 standard (often called the TASCAM pinout), the industry inadvertently created a trap—an 8-channel variation of a problem we thought we had solved decades ago. Continue reading →

The Great Reboot: Outcome Engineering

Posted on by

Remember the “good old days” of broadcasting and studio design? If you’re over a certain age, your lower back definitely remembers.

Once upon a time, designing a studio wasn’t engineering; it was heavy equipment moving combined with frantic electrical wizardry. We measured progress in tonnage of rack gear and miles of copper cable. We lived by a simple, terrifying paradigm: The “Boxes and Wires” era. Continue reading →

The “Backpack Cinema”: Creating a Portable 22.4 Immersive Studio with USB

Posted on by

The “Backpack Cinema”: Creating a Portable 22.4 Immersive Studio with USB

Immersive audio is currently stuck in the “Mainframe Era.” To mix in true NHK 22.2 or Dolby Atmos, you traditionally need a dedicated studio, heavy trussing for ceiling speakers, and racks of expensive amplifiers. It is heavy, static, and incredibly expensive.

 

Continue reading →

Think Optionally – Why Apple’s Users Hate AI

Posted on by

In 1984, Apple introduced the Macintosh with a promise: we were here to smash the monolithic, droning conformity of Big Brother. We were the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. We bought computers not to balance spreadsheets or optimize logistics, but to write the great American novel in a coffee shop and edit films that would never make it into Sundance.

Apple sold us the “Bicycle for the Mind.” It was a tool that amplified human capability.

So, why is the company currently pivoting to sell us the “Uber for the Mind”—where you just sit in the back seat, drooling, while an algorithm drives you to a destination you didn’t choose? Continue reading →

Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development.

Posted on by

1. Forming (The “Honeymoon” Phase)

The team meets and learns about the opportunity and challenges, and then agrees on goals and tackles tasks.

  • The Vibe: Polite, positive, but uncertain. People are treating it like a cocktail party—putting their best foot forward and avoiding conflict.

  • Key Behaviors: Asking basic questions, looking for structure, defining the scope (e.g., “Which devices go where?”).

  • Leader’s Role: Directing. You must provide clear goals, specific roles, and firm timelines. The team relies on you for structure.

2. Storming (The Danger Zone)

This is the stage where different ideas compete for consideration. It is the most critical and difficult stage to pass through.

  • The Vibe: High friction. The polite facade drops. People may clash over work styles, technical approaches (e.g., “Why are we handling GPIO triggers this way?”), or authority.

  • Key Behaviors: Pushback against tasks, arguments, formation of cliques.

  • Leader’s Role: Coaching. You need to resolve conflicts, remain accessible, and remind the team of the “Why.” Don’t avoid the conflict; manage it so it becomes constructive.

3. Norming (The Alignment)

The team resolves their quarrels and personality clashes, resulting in greater intimacy and a spirit of co-operation.

  • The Vibe: Relief and cohesion. People start to accept each other’s quirks and respect differing strengths.

  • Key Behaviors: Establishing the “rules of engagement,” constructive feedback, sharing of data and resources without being asked.

  • Leader’s Role: Supporting. Step back a little. Facilitate discussions rather than dictating them. Let the team take ownership of the process.

4. Performing (The Flow)

The team reaches a high level of success and functions as a unit. They find ways to get the job done smoothly and effectively without inappropriate conflict or the need for external supervision.

  • The Vibe: High energy, high trust. The focus is entirely on the goal, not the internal politics.

  • Key Behaviors: Autonomous decision-making, rapid problem solving, high output.

  • Leader’s Role: Delegating. Get out of their way. Focus on high-level strategy and removing external blockers.

The “Hidden” 5th Stage: Adjourning

Tuckman added this later. It refers to the breaking up of the team after the task is completed.

  • The Vibe: Bittersweet. Pride in what was accomplished (the deployed system works!) but sadness that the group is separating.

  • Leader’s Role: Recognition. Celebrate the win and capture lessons learned for the next project.

The Art of Media-tion: Bridging the Gap Between “Secure” and “Now”

Posted on by

The Art of Media-tion: Bridging the Gap Between “Secure” and “Now”

In the high-stakes world of modern infrastructure, two distinct tribes are forced to share the same territory.

On one side, the Network Team. They are the gatekeepers. Their priorities are clear: Security, Stability, and Standardization. They live by the firewall and die by the protocol. Continue reading →

The Invisible Connection: Why Radio Waves and Photons Are the Same Thing (and Why It’s So Confusing)

Posted on by

It’s a question that gets to the heart of how we understand the universe: “Does radio frequency (RF) move over photons?” The intuitive answer, based on how we experience sound traveling through air or ripples on water, might be “yes.” It seems logical to imagine radio waves “surfing” on a sea of tiny particles.

However, the reality of quantum physics is far stranger and more counterintuitive. The short answer is no. Radio frequency does not move over photons. Instead, a radio wave consists of photons.

This concept is notoriously difficult to grasp. It challenges our everyday perception of the world and requires us to accept one of the most mind-bending ideas in science: wave-particle duality. Let’s break down why this relationship is so complicated. Continue reading →

The Mixer, My Grandfather, and the Looming Crisis of Unfixable Electronics

Posted on by

💡 The Mixer, My Grandfather, and the Looming Crisis of Unfixable Electronics

My weekend project—a powered mixer for a friend—was a powerful, hands-on lesson in the changing nature of electronics and the fight for the Right to Repair.

For a friend, I made an exception to my usual “no bench work” rule. The diagnosis was classic: a blown channel, likely from speakers incorrectly wired in parallel. Instead of a minimal patch job, I opted for a full refurbishment, the way I was taught: new, high-quality Panasonic FC caps and fresh, matched transistors. A labour of love, not profit. Continue reading →