Importance of Ergonomics and Usability

The Lounge General Discussion
#1

Hello!

Over the years my desk accommodated a variety of different synths and something I observed was that the controls of new, especially “beginner” devices and the units themselves got tinier and fiddlier in favor of transportability. I guess manufactures want to contain more and more features inside of tiny boxes and at the same time try to keep a somewhat one-knob-per-function usability.

As I am studying Industrial Design and my final thesis is near I would like to address this topic by designing a concept synth with usability and ergonomics in mind.

I guess this would be the place with the greatest collective knowledge concerning the usability of existing synths, so I would really appreciate it, if you could share good (and bad) experience you had so far and also suggestions if there are any. :slight_smile:

Have a great day and thank you very much!

6 Likes
#2

You might want to look to these topics:

2 Likes
#3

Hi! Have you seen UDO synthesizers? I heard in one of the interviews that they were created with usability and ergonomics at highest priority.

As from personal experience - Korg MS20. It was just the comfiest layout for me, despite lacking the sliders and expressive features.

2 Likes
#4

I think you might need to distinguish between sound design, sequencing/programming, and performance aspects, and maybe also consider the ergonomics of interfacing with other devices.

#5

If you want to take a stab at breaking the mould of the contemporary synth UX patterns, you might consider what a “synth with enhanced accessibility” could be like. What are the win-wins for disabled users and non- alike; what are the compromises; why do most businesses assume access is “too expensive” when most people experience access issues at some point in their life.

6 Likes
#6

i’d love to know more about the machinedrums design stage ergonomic considerations and agreed limits and conditions by the team.
eg things like:
right handed priority for encoders
no more than one button/parameter combos with FUNC
jog wheel (was it regretted later in development?)
size of unit and distance between key functions etc.

the double click access for +drive was may have been an extreme exception to this as the mk2 hardware/software developed.

the md is such a sweet spot of access, number of buttons/encoders, finite inputs that allow swift and efficient programming quickly (in comparison to some other synths/drums), just becomes muscle memory really quickly.
golden ratio design imo.

whatever was initially agreed seemed to factor in future fw updates, or maybe the fw updates adhered to the design principles etc.

seems to have influenced everything since, and having only tried a digi once or twice it did feel a bit squashed having two hands so much closer together coming from md.
be interested how much that impacts the psychology/usability/enjoyment of performance or if the brain just adapts.

1 Like
#7

Ergonomics is in essence the physical science of analyzing and implementing designs that are optimized and comfortable for humans to interface with. A city planner won’t design a city purely around the concept of aesthetics or purely around the logic of function (ie there will be no 4 foot curb heights between the street and sidewalk, despite potential improvements in drainage and flood prevention. The reason is because a 4 foot drop is not optimized for humans to interact with).

additional thoughts at length

With this in mind, one must differentiate the reasons synthesizers are considered desirable when they have knob per function or full size keys, vs what would be logical and reasonable outside the scope of human interaction. The balance is, at best, tenuous.

First, we like to see and have quick access to reminders of what we’re doing - even a small knob which visually reflects where we’ve set it tends to be preferable to a parameter we have to remember until we pull it back up from a menu. Second, our field of vision - one might think that it’s optimal to have a giant eurorack type set up embodying every aspect of knob per function but once functions start to exist outside of our periphery it becomes a different version of the same impact as menu diving. So from this, one would need to look at the balance between available space to fit into an existing set up, available space which a person can reasonably and comfortably observe, and which functions can be considered essential because there will always be another balance between the available space and the limits to what can be in that space before it becomes all micro-knobs and too much crammed into one area.

Another issue that then arises, is the paradox of printing books with less pages but smaller print, the smaller and more condensed the focus (ie the closer together the options) the easier it becomes for these things to start to blur together, and that can be just as much of a disadvantage as having them too far apart. The balance between the muscle memory of knowing where something is and reaching for it, vs the functions available within arm’s reach, while not inciting option paralysis by having too much available and not feeling limited by too few physical controls. Then on top of that knowing which and how many secondary functions and how or where to put them/access them while not causing a person to lose focus. All while maintaining something which is aesthetically appealing. This sounds like a very tiresome errand to me, and I understand why there is so little consensus on what the ideal synth design is, or how one could improve and optimize synth design when accounting for ergonomics.

This is barely the tip of the iceberg, as octagonist noted, there are more factors to consider such as that not all humans have the same criteria for ergonomics and when a product is meant for a broader audience than just the core few fully able users, I can’t even imagine how frustrating the task of trying to work portability into the equation would be. That’s probably why there are a lot of “misses” rather than hits when it comes to modern synth design. I really like elektron devices for the balance they strike but if you ask me do I want more dedicated knobs? Sure, I want more dedicated knobs. But if you ask me am I willing to carry around a device that’s 4x the size of a digitakt in order to obtain them my answer will probably come a little slower.

2 Likes
#8

This is indeed very interesting and helpful. Thank you for your response!

1 Like
#9

It is an important issue for me and part of what transforms a device into an instrument. I tend to value things like “knob per function,” minimizing menu diving, and minimizing mistakes.

I think a synth like the Moog Subsequent 37 is pretty good at this. In the Elektron world, the Model:Cycles is pretty good.

1 Like
#10

I think most designers can come up with ergonomic interfaces… there are some great ones around.

but as you say, often users are after cheaper/more functional/smaller boxes, and are willing to sacrifice ergonomics. though there are some great exceptions e.g. Korg Minilogue.

its tough, you can design what you want on paper… but by the time it hits the market, it has to face real engineering/economic reality… and the marketing department :slight_smile:

personally, I think the way to more ergonomic synths, is simply to have them more focused…
less functions, more character defined by the instrument designer.

also as a software developer (for some hardware) Ive started to consider splitting ‘performance interface’ from the sound design - as these are two very different activities (and sometimes user bases)

I really like the Expressive E Osmose for this…
it has a definite character, and also the sound design is done via an editor on a computer.

what I love about this instrument is it splits the role of playing and sound design.
when I turn it on, I just play… for hours, without distraction, just tweaking things a little.
but other days, I’ll want to do some sound design, and I’ll fire up the computer, and play with the Eagan Matrix.

so yeah, I get why others don’t like it… but for me, it works…
again you cannot please everyone :slight_smile:

4 Likes
#11

Sure…

image

1 Like
#12

Two things come immediately to mind.

The first one is the debut “Tips and Tricks” video Roland released for the SP404, where the #1 tip to get the most from your sampler was… (spoilers!)…

Summary

"Put the 404 on a book or something so you don’t strain your neck."

The other thought is this handbook I just picked up at the Small Press Expo, Draw Stronger: Self-Care for Cartoonists and Other Visual Artists.

It’s an ergonomics guidebook for illustrators, but I think the advice is useful for anyone who spends a lot of time crouched over their workspace.

Protect Ya Neck!