<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23543">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>HI Rusty?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>That name sounds very familiar to me
'grin'.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I agree, I like the knobs on my mackie onyx 1640i
mixer, with the faders I kind of have to feel the notches on the sides of the
sliders and see how they line up with the lights or put a finger down and see
how far up I am, but with knobs, which have a raised demarkation,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I can tell how they're rotated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Also, knobs don't have a big empty slot just
waiting to collect dust.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>But I do think the faders especially long ones are
good for continuous </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>movement,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>when doing long fades and such because it easier to
do a linear movement, and your not limited to the amount of movement you can get
from a knob without wrapping.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I also like the fact that knobs have ot can have a
set point which you can feel.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rustys.lists@gmail.com href="mailto:rustys.lists@gmail.com">Rusty
Perez</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=rwp@reaaccess.com
href="mailto:rwp@reaaccess.com">rwp@reaaccess.com</A> ; <A
title=ddots-l@freelists.org
href="mailto:ddots-l@freelists.org">ddots-l@freelists.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 08, 2014 11:58
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [RWP] practical differences
between faders and rotary pots forblind users</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Hi folks,<BR>this just occurred to me.<BR>First off, I'm a
blind user. I have used hardware mixers and equipment<BR>for many years and I
like the feel of a fader or three under my<BR>fingers.<BR>but, it just
occurred to me while shopping for a very small format<BR>mixer, that maybe
there are some advantages of using rotary pots for<BR>blind folks. to
get an idea of the settings more quickly on a mixer<BR>with rotary pots, AS
LONG AS THEY ARE marked with a tactile arrow.<BR>The only way, as i see
it, to judge the level of individual faders is<BR>by using the slot
underneeth the fader, but pots can be judged right<BR>on top by the
familiar clock face method.<BR>by contrasst the faders can give us an overall
"graphical"<BR>representation of settings relative to one another, more
quickly.<BR><BR>any thoughts on these theoretical musings?<BR><BR>I'll still
likely decide on a small format mixer with rotary pots for<BR>my live looping
setup.<BR><BR><BR>rusty<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>RWP
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:RWP@reaaccess.com">RWP@reaaccess.com</A><BR><A
href="http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com">http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com</A></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>