Knob behaviour during changing effects

[Kshitij Gupta]

I discovered a few bugs while playing with the effects in Mixxx

- When any effect is changed, The knob keeps pointing in the same direction, while the effect is actually in its default value. The knob should also point to the default value.

You can reproduce it by applying any effect like "Echo" and setting the meta knob to zero. Change the effect to "Balance". It will still be set to zero according to the meta knob, while actually it will be set to its default value (Balanced pan: 50%) when applied on a deck.

The meta knob should change it's direction to the default value of the particular effect when changed.

- Right clicking on the meta knob sets its value to zero, while it should change it back to its default value (Also mentioned in meta knob's tooltip) which depends on the selected effect. For example, 50% is the default value of the "Balance" effect.

- When using the "Metronome" effect, It keeps ticking even after pausing the track. This happens only when we pause it just on the beat.

[Be (be.ing)]

https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/pull/1148

[Kshitij Gupta (kshitij98)]

Thank you for the link!

It seems that the third point has not been discussed before. Although it is not that big an issue, I think we can work for a consistent behaviour of the Metronome effect.
Also, I forgot to mention, It seems that the metaknob for metronome does nothing. Is it the case? If yes, Should we link it to the volume of the metronome?

[Daniel Schürmann (daschuer)]

Related:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1335355
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1404741

Can we keep this bug as a reminder for the open issue of unexpected meta knob behaviour, and use a new bug for the metronome issue?

@kshitij98 could you file a new bug for it?
Thank you.

[Kshitij Gupta (kshitij98)]

Sure. I have filed a new bug for the metronome issue.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1750783

[Be (be.ing)]

We still need a solution for this issue. I think we should revert PR #1148 for 2.1 and work on a robust "default metaknob position" solution for 2.2.

[Daniel Schürmann (daschuer)]

Reverting #1148 without an alternative solution is no option for me.

[Be (be.ing)]

Will you implement a robust default metaknob option for 2.1 then? The current behavior makes no sense for any case.

[Daniel Schürmann (daschuer)]

No, we have already passed feature freeze. The current behaviour is no regression so we have to deal with it in 2.1.

[Be (be.ing)]

That is why I proposed implementing your proposed feature for 2.2. The current behavior is a regression from how it was during development which worked as intended. I have been needing to revert PR #1148 in my personal builds for a year now every time I start a new branch from an upstream branch. I am still really frustrated that you merged that PR against review. If you want this metaknob default position feature, that's fine, but knowingly breaking what is working for others then not following up with a fix is not okay.

[Daniel Schürmann (daschuer)]

It does not make sense to blame each others here. The issue is that this has slipped thought, when integrating your meta knob PRs and it slipped thought a second time when announcing feature freeze.

A good solution is not in sight for 2.1. during feature freeze and given that we still working on crashes.
Currently we are back on 2.0 behaviour, which Gives us the time to head for a good fix in 2.2.

[Be (be.ing)]

The issue is that PR #1148 was merged despite review comments saying it was not ready and was a regression from 2.0. To me this feels like an abuse of write access to bypass our review process. We came up with a solution after the premature merge, but this was not implemented. I have not and will not implement that because it is not my responsibility to implement a novel feature that I am not interested in using.

[Be (be.ing)]

https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/pull/1574

[Swiftb0y (swiftb0y)]

Mixxx now uses GitHub for bug tracking. This bug has been migrated to:
https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/issues/9142