Mute controls do not function as expected

[Skeezixes]

If I understand correctly, the LEDs to the left side of the Jamulus client window reflect the levels going from my client UP to the server. The levels to the right side reflect the levels coming back from the server, and I can mix these, using the sliders. [Labels to this effect would be helpful!] So, if I am UNMUTED (check box on the right side, under my slider), we have levels on both UP and DOWN sides, and sound in the headphones.

However, if I MUTE MYSELF and I'm the only one connected to the server, then the levels going UP to the server should be zero, right? I'm muted. But they aren't. They're as high as before, only there isn't anything registered on the LEDs on the right side. AND I have sound in my headphones. This is super confusing because I believe that what I'm supposed to be hearing through the headphones is the output of the server.

If I click MUTE under my slider on the right side, then I expect that were there others connected to the server that they would be able to hear me fine, but I wouldn't be able to hear me in the mix coming down from the server. Yes. This works. BUT the levels on my slider look just like they did. It doesn't look like I'm muted. So this is confusing, too. They need to be lighter or something to cue me what's going on. Dim the container for the slider, maybe?

There seems to be another issue involving MUTE MYSELF causing an increase in delay times, but I will submit a separate ticket for it.

[pljones]

The "LEDs" on the right reflect levels arriving from each client at the server, not the level the server is mixing to and sending to you to hear. So using the mixer doesn't affect those levels (they're "pre-fader" levels -- and very approximate).

"Mute myself" might be better called "monitor only" (i.e. don't send, just listen to myself playing along). It bypasses the server - so, rather than hearing the mixed signal, with everyone's audio together, you hear yours immediately, then everyone else's coming back from the server when it arrives. There will clearly be perceptual differences.

[gilgongo]

The mute controls are I think designed to handle the following main use cases:

1. Want to stop hearing that terrible loud noise coming from that person who has just joined? Mute them (their levels will continue to show you that they are making a terrible loud noise). You won't hear them any more (but others might want to).

2. Want to test your setup/sounds etc. without bothering other people (or mute your terrible loud noise)? Use "Mute Myself" (your levels will continue to show you how loud you would be were you to unmute). Nobody else will be able to hear you, apart from you.

The behaviour of the level "LEDs" and the mute buttons would seem to be correct in those cases, but it's hard to know what people's exact expectations are.

[Skeezixes]

I am trying to respond to the confusion that I and my fellow players and some posts on the forum have shared. What do the different Mute buttons actually do when they are functioning correctly? I understand now, but I couldn't tell from the UI.

Here are some ideas: Label the two sections of the UI "TO the server" and "FROM the server" (or whatever language comes out of the scrum to decide)

Leave the level meters (right term?) the same for now.

If Mute Myself is checked, darken the background of the "TO the server" level meter container a little (10%? 20%) Note that if the whole thing is darkened, it will appear that the whole thing is disabled, which isn't what we want, because then the user will expect he can't use the Mute Myself checkbox. [I'd argue for putting the Chat and Settings controls somewhere else but let's deal with that elsewhere.]

If Mute under a slider on the "FROM the server" side is checked, darken the background of its container a little (10%? 20%)

On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 4:53 AM Jonathan notifications@github.com wrote:

The mute controls are I think designed to handle the following main use cases:

1.

Want to stop hearing that terrible loud noise coming from that person who has just joined? Mute them (their levels will continue to show you that they are making a terrible loud noise). You won't hear them any more (but others might want to). 2.

Want to test your setup/sounds etc. without bothering other people (or mute your terrible loud noise)? Use "Mute Myself" (your levels will continue to show you how loud you would be were you to unmute). Nobody else will be able to hear you, apart from you.

The behaviour of the level "LEDs" and the mute buttons would seem to be correct in those cases, but it's hard to know what people's exact expectations are.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/187#issuecomment-626164320, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APPMA2QDQCFYFBJ7RW4ZNCDRQU74FANCNFSM4M4N7YEQ .

[pljones]

That doesn't make sense to me: if you use the "Mute myself" button, the level meter still shows your input level, it's not going to the server, though. So labelling it "TO the server" would be misleading, wouldn't it?

Also, the meters on the right are for the levels going to the server, so labelling that section "FROM the server" would also be misleading...

[gilgongo]

@Skeezixes I think your suggestions make sense if you change "server" to "musician". For example when you say:

Label the two sections of the UI "TO the server" and "FROM the server"

If that was "To other players" and "From other players" then would that help? Would the issue of the active LEDs in the muted states make more sense?

BTW regarding the issue of the LEDs, when you hit mute on a channel on a real-world mixing desk, do the LEDs go to zero on that channel? In which case the current Jamulus behaviour would be hard to understand, seeing as it presents itself as a mixing desk. I've not got a big enough desk at home to test that though (I notice they do on Reaper though).

Also, can you describe what reason(s) you have for muting (both types)? It might make it a bit easier to understand your point of view on this.

[pljones]

@gilgongo There are two ways of viewing levels: pre-fader and post-fader. The Reaper mixer defaults (may only, not checked) to showing post-fader levels, because that's what you're interested in seeing.

The levels in the Server view were added explicitly to meet the need of seeing what other musicians' levels were pre-fader. That is, whether any audio was reaching the server. So that's why they show what they show. They're not for use with the faders, they're just associated with the musician in that channel.

[gilgongo]

@pljones

The Reaper mixer defaults ... to showing post-fader levels, because that's what you're interested in seeing

Yes, which is why I wondered about that in the context of what @Skeezixes is saying.

seeing what other musicians' levels were pre-fader. That is, whether any audio was reaching the server.

Which is also why I asked @Skeezixes what reason they have for muting. I can imagine that if the expectation is post-fader mute, then the issues of whether sound from a player is reaching the server would not be important. But if there's an advantage to knowing that a signal is there, then showing the levels pre-fader would be useful.

Without knowing why people want to mute, it's hard to know what the system's behaviour should really be though.

[pljones]

The mute button state shows whether the signal is muted. The meter isn't relevant.

[gilgongo]

Well it seems to be relevant @Skeezixes :-) I was merely trying to see his point of view.

[corrados]

Post-fader level meters were already requested here: https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/86 I don't think it is necessary. The idea behind the fader meters is to see if a musician is active or not or if he is making a lot of noise (which we want to mute). But this pljones already wrote.

[Hk1020]

Is setting MUTE on the right hand panel the same as moving the corresponding slider all the way down? If yes I'd suggest the slider moves too. Similar with SOLO

I think the main point to understand is that anything in the right hand panel does not affect what other people hear.

[Skeezixes]

From @gilgongo

@Skeezixes I think your suggestions make sense if you change "server" to "musician". . . . If that was "To other players" and "From other players" then would that help? Would the issue of the active LEDs in the muted states make more sense?

Yes! definitely!

Also, can you describe what reason(s) you have for muting (both types)? It might make it a bit easier to understand your point of view on this.

I started out trying to understand what each of the Mute buttons did, because maybe they did the same thing, that one was redundant. I was all tangled up. Labels as @gilgongo suggests may be enough.

[gilgongo]

Basically, if you mute somebody in your "post fader" model, you would not know whether they are making any sound at their end after that, so do not know if you should unmute them. There is a supposed utility in knowing that (they might be talking to you, for example).

Interestingly, Jamulus does not show to the other players whether they have muted themselves explicitly. It only shows they are making no sound. Perhaps that would be nice to know in the same way as the current "pre-fader" model.

[corrados]

Right now I show the server name as a title for the mixer board:

"From other players" then would that help? [...] Yes! definitely!

Ok, so how would that look like then? Shoud we show in the mixer title:

From other players connected to Central Server

But that would technically not be correct since you see your own fader there as well. So it is not purely "other players". Maybe it would better to just add the "From", so it would look like this:

From Central Server

What do you think?

[pljones]

My issue is the level meters are the level to the server, not from. The Fader isn't "from", it's an instruction to the server on how to do the mix. What you hear is from...

But then, I talk to machines... (In programming languages, when I'm being nice.)

[corrados]

Good points. Hmm, anyway it is a good idea to add some text to the header of the mixer board to make things clearer. So what would your proposal then?

[pljones]

"Your mix at <server>" with some hover-text on the meters explaining they're pre-fader? (Maybe your original idea of "on / off" for the meters would have reduced confusion.)

[gilgongo]

My suspicion (supported by the answer to my question to the OP about "from players") is that because Jamulus looks like a mixing desk, and that mute buttons on mixing desks are (usually) post fader, then we can't use the word "mute" without causing confusion. So perhaps "on" and "off" are better because they don't have the pre/post fader problem?

There might be more of an issue of "mode error" if we use on/off though as people can confuse the two states. But that depends a bit on the execution. I think you might have to have it so that the light was on in the On state and off in the Off state for it not to be confusing.

I wonder if "Mute myself" might then become clearer to people if the other musicians' LEDs had On/Off?

[Skeezixes]

I wonder if "Mute myself" might then become clearer to people if the other musicians' LEDs had On/Off? Yes, I think. With the lights. Default of course is On. Yeah, having two "mutes" is confusing. [I can mute myself twice? Huh?]

[pljones]

Mute on a DAW mixing desk mutes the channel, regardless of the fader.

Mute in Jamulus in the mixing desk mutes the channel, regardless of the fader.

"Mute myself" (which I never liked) is causing confusion, as it's not related to the mixing desk at all. It's "Monitor" or "Bypass" - i.e. don't send, just listen, bypassing the mixing desk entirely.

[corrados]

The original Issue was this: https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/75 Simon is a native speaker. In the title he wrote: "Mute button for own audio" So he has used the "Mute" word ;-)

And here is another one from Sourceforge: https://sourceforge.net/p/llcon/feature-requests/61 Title: "Mute yourself" :-)

I never thought that such a button would result in so much confusion and so many opinions...

[Hk1020]

My issue is the level meters are the level to the server, not from. The Fader isn't "from", it's an instruction to the server on how to do the mix. What you hear is from...

I see the fader as a local volume control - but I am not a band musician. So it isn't an instruction to the server at all but to the client. Right? Though I don't have anything constructive to add I am afraid I see the main confusion is due to that the LEDs show something different than the fader. They seem to be the same thing but aren't. I like the on/off idea.

[gilgongo]

Mute on a DAW mixing desk mutes the channel, regardless of the fader. Mute in Jamulus in the mixing desk mutes the channel, regardless of the fader.

I don't think anyone's confused about the faders though as far as I know?

"Mute myself" (which I never liked) is causing confusion

Agreed, but that seems like a slightly different issue, because...

the main confusion is due to that the LEDs show something different than the fader

When you mute a channel on a DAW or a physical desk, the LEDs do not continue to show a signal (at least that's not my experience) because they are post-fader mutes. Jamulus is a pre-fader mute, and so is seen as unusual or confusing. I think that's right?

Simon is a native speaker. In the title he wrote: "Mute button for own audio"

Yes, but my point is that "mute" isn't the wrong (English) word, but it may have an interpretation brought about by its presence in systems that behave differently. So it might apply to any language in fact. At least, if people are expressing confusion, that might be the reason why.

Incidentally, along with possibly clarifying "Mute Myself", the on/off label also means there is a way of indicating that somebody else has muted themselves, by using the word "Muted" in that case. Right now you don't know if somebody is making any sound or not. Obviously, that might be technically impossible to do, could cause added confusion, etc. :-)

[pljones]

When you mute a channel on a DAW or a physical desk, the LEDs do not continue to show a signal (at least that's not my experience) because they are post-fader mutes. Jamulus is a pre-fader mute, and so is seen as unusual or confusing. I think that's right?

In a DAW, you can sometimes monitor either "pre-" or "post-" -- if you select "pre-", the level meter should behave the same way as it the LEDs do in Jamulus, reflecting the pre- fader/mute levels, as that's what you've asked to monitor.

That's what was asked for for the Jamulus level meters. The LEDs continue showing the level reaching the server independent of the mixer fader. The LEDs continue showing the level reaching the server independent of the mixer mute button.

The mixer fader and mute button are applied at the same point in the signal flow - excepting that mute says "use minus infinity as the fader level" (ok, so bypassing that channel in the mix).

[gilgongo]

Yes, and that's a very clear explanation. So the question then is:

If the existence of this ticket implies the way Jamulus currently works is confusing (if perfectly explainable) to some people, then:

1. What problem(s) does the current behaviour solve for the user?

2. Is/are those problems more important to solve than the problem(s) of confusion referred to in this ticket?

(For the record, I'm neutral on all this so far. I just want to get to the bottom of the debate if possible.)

[pljones]

I think the key point being stated is:

However, if I MUTE MYSELF and I'm the only one connected to the server, then the levels going UP to the server should be zero, right? I'm muted. But they aren't. They're as high as before, only there isn't anything registered on the LEDs on the right side. AND I have sound in my headphones.

There's some mis-statement here -- the level going up to the server is zero: as stated, the LEDs show it as zero, so there's nothing shown incorrectly.

However, the word "mute" implies "make no sound" and when it's "mute myself" it implies "I shouldn't hear myself". So I can understand that it's confusing that what actually happens is that you still hear yourself, despite the server mix showing you're not sending.

That's why I'm suggesting perhaps "Bypass" alone would be a better label, or to be clearer "Bypass server", for the checkbox.

The mixer panel title could also be more clearly labelled (the best I can offer is "Client levels and server mix: [server name]"... which is a bit long).

[Hk1020]

I think the key point being stated is:

However, if I MUTE MYSELF and I'm the only one connected to the server, then the levels going UP to the server should be zero, right? I'm muted. But they aren't. They're as high as before, only there isn't anything registered on the LEDs on the right side. AND I have sound in my headphones.

There's some mis-statement here -- the level going up to the server is zero: as stated, the LEDs show it as zero, so there's nothing shown incorrectly.

However, the word "mute" implies "make no sound" and when it's "mute myself" it implies "I shouldn't hear myself". So it's confusing that what actually happens is that you still hear yourself, despite the server mix showing you're not sending.

That's why I'm suggesting perhaps "Bypass" would be a better word, or to be clearer "Bypass server" for the checkbox.

Well, the most important part for me is to know when will other people hear me. Especially if I am using a microphone.

[Matzix]

I just came here, as I thought, the "mute myself" button is broken. For me, the right hand side mixer is perfect and works as intended (at least, it works like I had expected).

However, my interpretation of "mute myself" was, that my signal will not be sent to the server and thus, neither all the other nor me will be able to hear my signal. But my signal still was audible and I had thought it was due to a misconfiguration of my audio device, but did not expect, that this direct monitoring came from Jamulus.

For "mute myself", there might be different use cases and this single button is not able to do it all:

• mute: no signal to the server, no direct monitoring, just listen to others (e.g. when unplugging)
• soundcheck: no signal to the server, no signal from the server/have others muted, enable direct monitoring
• tune: no signal to the server, enable direct monitoring, listen to others to have their reference tone

As it is with the current implementation, direct monitoring might be enabled only, if no sound is being sent to server.

[gilgongo]

But my signal still was audible and I had thought it was due to a misconfiguration

If you had seen your LEDs disappear when you hit "mute myself", would you have thought the same?

[Matzix]

If you had seen your LEDs disappear when you hit "mute myself", would you have thought the same?

If it's about the left hand side LEDs: Yes, for me it's a input signal check. After selecting "mute myself", my signal's LEDs in the mixer section were off, so it was clear, that my signal was not sent to the server (as the level was 0 in contrast to the input signal LEDs). But if direct monitoring is active within Jamulus (which I'd like to have switchable), an indicator light would help.

[gilgongo]

@pljones I disagree that the key point is about the "mute myself" label. It appears to me (and from the above comment by @Matzix ) that people who have described a confusion are confused about the pre-fader behaviour of both "mute" and "mute myself".

They expect the action of clicking "mute" and "mute myself" to stop the LEDs and thereby indicate that sound from the musician has been cut in the former "mute" case, and sound is no longer going to the server in the latter "mute myself" case.

We might change "Mute myself" to "Bypass" or "Off" or something, but that would not help if people are puzzled as to why the LEDs are unaffected.

So that gets us back to my question again: why is the pre-fader mute model better than the post-fader one?

[Hk1020]

So that gets us back to my question again: why is the pre-fader mute model better than the post-fader one?

Because that is the only one to stop being heard by the other people? I.e., mute myself?

[Matzix]

why is the pre-fader mute model better than the post-fader one?

Actually, i do prefer pre-fader LEDs both in the mixer/server and the input signal section, as you easily can see, if there is a signal and if it is well-adjusted at the origin. So, from a troubleshooting point of view, the pre-fader LED behavior is fine, but I do understand, that some people prefer to see, what's in the mix (that's, what i use my headphones for ;-) ).

For mute, the indicator LED is sufficient for me, but then I do expect not to hear the corresponding signal any more.

(pljones) That's why I'm suggesting perhaps "Bypass" alone would be a better label, or to be clearer "Bypass server", for the checkbox.

Bypass would imply, that your own signal in the mixers section does not take the route via the server, but the direct way. That's not the case. The direct path is another path independent from fader, solo and mute button state in the mixer section. That's the reason, why I'm suggesting, that this direct path should have its own on/off switch and fader. What confused me is, that "mute myself" enables direct monitoring, which I did not expect.

A solution might be:

• change "mute myself" to "stream to server" with a green indicator light
• a "direct monitoring" button, which is disabled automatically, if "stream to server" is activated and a corresponding fader and solo button (for soundcheck, tuning, ...)

[pljones]

Seems like I'm probably as confused as everyone on this.

My understanding of "mute myself" is that the signal

does not take the route via the server, but the direct way

and that it's

independent from fader, solo and mute button state in the mixer section

However, if it were going to the server, then the LEDs would show it. So it can't both be going to the server and not going to the server at the same time.

[corrados]

does not take the route via the server, but the direct way [...] and that it's

That is what I have implemented, yes.

[pljones]

https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/187#issuecomment-628291214 Matzix commented

Bypass would imply, that your own signal in the mixers section does not take the route via the server, but the direct way

https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/187#issuecomment-628667369 corrados commented

That is what I have implemented, yes.

So it sounds like "Bypass" would do, @Matzix ?

[corrados]

How about "Bypass Server"?

And what about the additional text for the mixer panel. pljones suggestion was: "Your mix at server"

We really have to come to a conclusion here... I would like to do the changes soon, so that we can end this endless discussion.

[Matzix]

Neither "mute myself", nor "bypass server" completely describe, what's going on:

• with "mute myself" the question arises: "Why do I still hear me, although I've pressed mute myself?"
• with "Bypass Server" one might ask: "Ok, my signal is not delayed any more, but will the others still hear me?"
• for both solutions: "why do fader, mute and solo button of my mixer channel not work any more, when that button is pressed?". An average musician won't care about technical details and whether it is mixed on a server or locally, but be puzzled, if it does not behave as he expects.

Now, that I know (or at least think, that I know) how the signal flow diagram looks like, either text does it. But: For newbies it still won't be easy to comprehend, what's going on in every aspect. With web meetings software, a simple "mute" button does it: It's clear, what it is supposed to do and that's exactly, what it does. In Jamulus, it's 2 functions in one button: "Don't distribute my signal to the server (i.e. to other people) any more and play my signal locally at full volume".

Some enhancements to the signal flow diagram with additional switches, which should fit well into the existing structure (but only Volker can tell) might also solve this problem. There are some further ideas, I've not yet written about. Tomorrow, I will try to elaborate more on this.

[Skeezixes]

...endless discussion

This has proven so challenging because the labeling has to be understandable to:

1. Users experienced with (physical) mixing decks, and with software with mixers
2. Users who lack any experience with these and have only a vague idea of what's going on in the software
3. Developers who know exactly what's going on in the software

Let's just "pick something" and keep an eye out for user feedback as to whether the labels helped or confused them further. I myself am inclined to "Bypass Server" and "Your Mix at Server".

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:58 PM Volker Fischer notifications@github.com wrote:

How about "Bypass Server"?

And what about the additional text for the mixer panel. pljones suggestion was: "Your mix at server"

We really have to come to a conclusion here... I would like to do the changes soon, so that we can end this endless discussion.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/187#issuecomment-629453541, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APPMA2SGOICJ34XTTOXX4XDRRWNFHANCNFSM4M4N7YEQ .

[corrados]

play my signal locally at full volume

This is actually a bug and supposed to be so, see: https://github.com/corrados/jamulus/issues/148

Now, that I know (or at least think, that I know) how the signal flow diagram looks like, either text does it. Let's just "pick something" and keep an eye out for user feedback as to whether the labels helped or confused them further.

Ok, if I understand correctly: Let's keep Mute Myself. BTW: Each change of any text has to be modified in each translation file as well. So if we can keep a text, this is always better.

I myself am inclined to "Bypass Server" and "Your Mix at Server".

Ok, so I will implement the "Your Mix at Server" now, this should be easy.

[gilgongo]

I am relieved that we are keeping the labelling the same for now :-)

[fleutot]

Least effort, and most sense made for me, would be to remove direct monitoring while in "Mute myself".

I mean, there isn't any direct monitoring in other cases (right?), and that seems to be confusing some. I use the button exclusively to visually check my input level, that's it.

I've had a case of someone muting oneself in the mix, and expecting we didn't hear them. "Mix from " would help (not a fan of "Your" in GUI, but that's my personal taste). Happened only once though.

[Matzix]

not a fan of "Your" in GUI, but that's my personal taste

what about "personal mix at (server)"? I don't want to start a new discussion, it's just my 2c.

[gilgongo]

I feel a survey coming on

:-)

[corrados]

I just implemented this:

[Hk1020]

This

Least effort, and most sense made for me, would be to remove direct monitoring while in "Mute myself".

I've been wondering the whole time. What's the point of monitoring?

[gilgongo]

What's the point of monitoring?

What do you understand that it does? :-)

[Matzix]

If your soundcard supports direct monitoring, you might not need it in Jamulus. If it doesn't, you might want to have such a feature.

[rdtennent]

I'm a new user of Jamulus and my comment is this: your documentation says do not listen to yourself directly; great, but nowhere does it say HOW! That's why "mute myself" is so confusing; it looks like that's the way to do it. First priority: fix the documentation.

[gilgongo]

Although that's the first time anyone has mentioned such a confusion, we can certainly clarify that (it depends on your hardware setup so we can't give specific instructions though).

But meanwhile, can you comment on the way Mute Myself is documented in the software manual? Its function has caused confusion in the past.