Conquistador.
UncleAgeI didn’t have a probnlem getting the new beta(3) up and running. Assigning new folders were painless.
My issue comes after saving a track as a template. I saved a track template as “Bass”. When I right-click new track and go to the “Track Templates” my newly saved “Bass” is coming up under both “New Track” and “Replace Effect Chain”.
Is this the desired result? I would think that only the items I saved as “Save Effect Chain As Template” would show up in under “Replace Effect Chain”.
Otherwise this part works as expected.
UncleAgeFirst let me say that I never installed the 1.99 update. My last installed version is 1.98.
Now with the beta3 running I’m getting strange behaviour when assigning audio inputs to tracks (sometimes after assigning).
WinXP/SP2/Q6600/EchoAudiofire 8 (8ins/8outs)
Scenario 1:
Track1
Assign Audio In 1
Track2
Assign Audio In 2
Now in the first scenario when I plug in my bass everythings works fine.
Scenario 2:
Track1
Assign Audio In 1
Add EFX (u-he’s MFM2)
(note:I used several different FX including zRev and got the same results)
Track2
Assign Audio In 2
In scenario 2, once I assign the Audio In 2 on Track 2 I am still ok until I try to add or delete an FX on either track. If I add an FX to Track 2 I lose the audio. When I delete the FX from Track 1 I lose the audio. And after losing the audio on Track 1 I can get it back again by adding any FX back to the effect track (on Track 1). However, deleting the effect track from both Track 1 and Track 2 does not give me audio again unless I either delete Track 1 or Track 2 or delete the assignment of the audio in from either track.
Also, turning the audio engine of and on again had no affect on the situation.
Zynewave@UncleAge wrote:
My issue comes after saving a track as a template. I saved a track template as “Bass”. When I right-click new track and go to the “Track Templates” my newly saved “Bass” is coming up under both “New Track” and “Replace Effect Chain”.
Is this the desired result? I would think that only the items I saved as “Save Effect Chain As Template” would show up in under “Replace Effect Chain”.
That is as designed. If you use the “replace effect chain” menus then only the effect tracks will be extracted from the track template. Likewise you can use saved effect chain templates to create new tracks.
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
My issue comes after saving a track as a template. I saved a track template as “Bass”. When I right-click new track and go to the “Track Templates” my newly saved “Bass” is coming up under both “New Track” and “Replace Effect Chain”.
Is this the desired result? I would think that only the items I saved as “Save Effect Chain As Template” would show up in under “Replace Effect Chain”.
That is as designed. If you use the “replace effect chain” menus then only the effect tracks will be extracted from the track template. Likewise you can use saved effect chain templates to create new tracks.
Fair enough. I’ll just give the templates prefixes to keep them organized. I could see that menu getting messy after I have 20 or so track templates and then 20 or more Effect Chain templates and all of them appearing together under “Insert Effect Chain”.
Thanks for explaining your intentions.
Zynewave@UncleAge wrote:
Now with the beta3 running I’m getting strange behaviour when assigning audio inputs to tracks (sometimes after assigning).
Please send me a project file with the track setup that has the unwanted muted audio input.
Zynewave@UncleAge wrote:
I’ll just give the templates prefixes to keep them organized. I could see that menu getting messy after I have 20 or so track templates and then 20 or more Effect Chain templates and all of them appearing together under “Insert Effect Chain”.
Instead of prefixing them, you could put them in separate subfolders.
UncleAgeUncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
I’ll just give the templates prefixes to keep them organized. I could see that menu getting messy after I have 20 or so track templates and then 20 or more Effect Chain templates and all of them appearing together under “Insert Effect Chain”.
Instead of prefixing them, you could put them in separate subfolders.
I like that idea as well, thanks 🙂
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
The 2.00 beta is just a zip with the Podium.exe. You should install 1.99 before running the 2.00 beta. I never had to use the “run as administrator” with the Podium installer on Vista.
I brought it up because unless you are 100% sure it is not potentially casuing problems with Podium in one way or another…hosting plugs, crashing e.t.c then fine. But every other application and I mean every other one AFAICT allows me to install them ‘as an administrator’.
This will allow them to install properly by giving them all the rights they need to modify and change the registry. I have had problems in the past with apps that appear to install and run correctly but start having strange problems later on. I just hope Podium does not fall into this category.
I don’t plan to add more features for 2.00. When I said I welcomed suggestions for improvements this was in relation to the track templates.
Ok thats fair enough. 🙂
It’s more than a month since 1.99, and I would like to go back to a more frequent release schedule, so no more new features for 2.00.
I would certainly take more frequent updates over more features delaying a release for too long. I just assumed it would not take more than an extra week for some of the features suggested but yes lets stick to more frequent updates which I of course was and still am keen to have, based on my previous comments on the matter.
With more frequent updates any new features can arrive within a short time anyway but potential buyers can also see more frequent updates which would be better for the perception of Podium. 8)
Zynewave@UncleAge wrote:
@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
Now with the beta3 running I’m getting strange behaviour when assigning audio inputs to tracks (sometimes after assigning).
Please send me a project file with the track setup that has the unwanted muted audio input.
Disregard my PM. I sent it to the info@ address
Ouch. It turns out that a fix I made in 1.99 regarding the multi-processing had the unfortunate side-effect that only one audio input can be active. I’ll get that fixed.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
francoiswell , i have finished my midi box and can send about 50 CC midi messages , looking forward to use it with Podium
Zynewave@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
Now with the beta3 running I’m getting strange behaviour when assigning audio inputs to tracks (sometimes after assigning).
Please send me a project file with the track setup that has the unwanted muted audio input.
Disregard my PM. I sent it to the info@ address
Ouch. It turns out that a fix I made in 1.99 regarding the multi-processing had the unfortunate side-effect that only one audio input can be active. I’ll get that fixed.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
Beta4 is available.
While searching for a fix for this I had a good look at the entire multi-processing code and managed to optimize some parts of the code. The bug should be fixed, and CPU usage is slightly optimized (both with and without multiprocessing enabled). I would appreciate if you could check that this beta is playing your projects as expected. If all is ok, I’ll probably release 2.00 this week.
UncleAgeI’ll be able to check this out and report back to you tomorrow.
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
Beta4 is available.
While searching for a fix for this I had a good look at the entire multi-processing code and managed to optimize some parts of the code. The bug should be fixed, and CPU usage is slightly optimized (both with and without multiprocessing enabled). I would appreciate if you could check that this beta is playing your projects as expected. If all is ok, I’ll probably release 2.00 this week.
I loaded the Beta4 and the problem is gone, thanks 🙂
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
I had a good look at the entire multi-processing code and managed to optimize some parts of the code.
Hmmmm…I loaded up a project in P2.B4 and I cannot see *any* differrence in CPU time. Am I looking in the wrong place or is there some sort of scenario that would produce even a slight difference in CPU readings?
Merge project is pretty cool. Works as advertised here on V64 so far. I’ll throw a much older project at the new Load device feature and see how it goes.