The fader at the bottom is at “infinity”, it means no sound gets through.
What is the reason for your question, as this is quite obvious (if you turn the fader down = no sound).

ramses and ebmmbongo,

Thanks for your replies...much appreciated.

One interesting response that I able to glean was, "Infinity is just a concept of endlessness, and can be used to represent numbers going on forever. Negative infinity is the opposite of (positive) infinity, or just negative numbers going on forever."

I write articles of a technical-nature with a focus on the neophyte - myself included, and the importance of a what I refer to as "non-assumptive learning" is an important factor in these texts. As a result, any content - either of a textual or of a visual nature, must be first introduced and explained beforehand.

I do hope that this makes sense?

Excuse me, I would rather not be offensive in any way, but I can only shake my head or maybe we have a misunderstanding. My personal view on this (I am not from RME):

Like many things, everything has to be in a certain balance. As a manufacturer, you simply have to be able to assume a few things when someone buys such a studio device. This is not a course about Home recording and what is a fader and what is the infinity symbol in the fader down position.

The RME documentation is already high quality, the best I know in this area. The good state should not be diluted with the documentation of trivialities, which you can get nowadays via Google.

Then I really do not understand what problems you have with the Infinity symbol, the meaning is now really intuitive without much thought.

Just have a look at the weak documentation of the competition. So to “criticize” this here almost borders on nitpicking.

Rather than that, we should be happy how well all relevant things are documented and that also technical information and technical data is very accurate.

ramses,

The study of "pedagogy" is indeed a very in depth subject - and therefore, well beyond the scope of this present text.

Reminds of John Gatto's mention of the difference between what he referred to as "the dialectic" and "local thought" and the seeming contrasts and disparities between these premises. I am for that later and not for the former.

ramses - everything is "relative" - what seems simple and logical to you - just may not as simple and logical to someone else. Such distinctions between these - if I may use the term correctly, "mindsets" must be maintained and respected.

This is also why I write technical documentation focused on the neophyte. Again, I could discuss this topic literally for hours - and this posting is certainly not the place for such a lengthy discussion.

So, ramses, please forgive my "pedantic" manner. My posting was not meant to offend.

PS: ebmmbongo...thanks for the reminder of the "10/80/10% rule".