Topic: Zynewave synth & effects, opinions?

@Zynewave wrote:

We have opposite views on this. I see the C: root folder as the master track. With this view, the current track tree structure is similar to the file list you see in the Podium list window.

I see Podium’s current tree structure as Documents being the root folder and the rest of the path like this:

c:DocumentsSmithandCo./January/Invoices/Business/

Which to me is backwards. ❗

We could start here: Why is it a great idea and better than existing methods?

Great as in more logical for me anyway. Actually seeing the link between tracks is very clever. But it’s not everyone’s cup of tea and clearly is still tripping people up. I like variety and learning new work methods. Podium is radical enough in design to make it a very different and as a result very interesting host to work in.

YMMV

Obviously. But hiding behind the excuse that it is complex and powerful is an excuse, not a reason. The complex and powerful can be made to be understandable if taught properly. As they say this is not rocket science. More like unintentional obfustication.

Unintentional for sure. But not taught properly? There is plenty of material to read about Podium and videos to see. I think regardless of teaching methods used for Podium, for many it may simply be the way it works that people just do not like, rather than the lack of understanding of it because of poor teaching methods 24 months later.

If Podium is so worthwhile (and it may well be) then something needs to be done now to capture the readers attention. No matter how worthwhile and powerful and complex Podium is, if it takes several months just to grasp basic concepts, then it simply is NOT a productive use of a new user’s time. The user will gravitate towards a host/sequencer that actually allows them to make music. (What a concept! 🙂 )

Agreed hence the posts being added to this thread. No doubt Frits is taking notes and of course is taking part here as well.

As much as I would like to support Podium, I also own Cubase SX, Tracktion 2, eXT and Chainer. Users have options and they will go with the software that lets them realize their musical ideas. THAT is the more powerful way in practice. Demonstrate that Podium can do that and I think many potential users will be convinced.

No doubt Frits is cooking some ideas up now.

Why would a Tracktion user switch?

T3 is unlikely to surface until NAMM 2007 possibly. Mackie offer the possibility of a better host while Frits offers the here and now with regular free updates. Mackie also say hardly anything to thier userbase (the complete opposite of Jules in his day) while Frits encourages user interaction and will discuss the development of Podium openly with all users. He has already implemented some of my suggestions in the past so he will listen and actually do something about it pretty quickly.

I think a Tracktion user would swap hosts for something that is as easy to use initially (not the case yet), quicker / better support (IMHO this is the case now), a bug free host, far more regular updates…all this provided of course they have a desire to try something different.This appears to be the problem. It’s seems too radical for many.

Podium is also about £30 – £40 cheaper, with surround features as well. As for bugs…Frits has very carefully balanced the development of Podium’s feature set with rock solid stability. Just recently on the Tracktion forum I read that the first note bug is still not fixed in the recent upgrade, PDC issues with racks, e.t.c and that if you are like me with the online upgrade you will have to pay £100+ just to get the new Mackie plugs as they are only on offer to boxed owners for free.

This was not made clear by Mackie when T2 came out, if anything they gave every impression that additional plugs would be available to all. Not just boxed owners. Many would have bypassed even the cheap upgrade price had they known Mackie would demand the full boxed price just to get hold of 5 or six plugs.

No such problems here. At the end of the day no amount of marketing or tweaking will sway certain users, people will use what they want and why not. In Podiums case at least Frits has identified a weak area that no doubt he will somehow try to address.

i’ll tell you what i like about Podium
– overall it feels very polished and professional;
– the GUI – very polished/professional, looks nicer than Tracktion or eXT
– the mixer is damn nice, level meters are great
– midi editing is better than Tracktion and eXT in my opinion… alot better
– easy to put in automation tracks, and the curves are easy to edit
– easy to set up vocoders/side chain compression
– whoa… the support is top notch, new update every couple of weeks!
– once you’ve done your initial set up, you can save a set up project as a template so it’s preloaded with common instruments and effects, and master out etc… then you can get straight into making some music! once the set up is done, it’s very quick to make a tune in Podium because it has a great workflow IMO
– the bounce feature (now includes offline bounce) – great way to bounce down and save CPU!
– the project browser is cool, allows you to set up instruments/effects so presets will automatically appear in the preset window when you use an instrument or effect mapping… saving more time in loading presets
– the fact that the interface is all there in front of you.. if you wanted to, you could always have everything displayed in the Podium interface at once (mixer, arrangement editor, midi editor, track header) and never have to open a new window (i usually edit midi in a new window though)
– you can change the colours of the GUI
…that’s all I can think of for now 😉

Radical does not always equal better. Sometimes it just means different.

True. A radical approach does not always improve on what is currently available. Some radical products succeed while others do not.

At this point, I don’t even know what is so much better about Podium. BTW-I have owned Podium for sevral months, mainly as a gesture of support. Why is it radical? How? If this is a huge benefit, more people would be switching to Podium.

I don’t know how many more ways to say it-re read my previous messages for my position.

It is the classic subjective topic Improv. Good old Sequencers. 8)

It would be impossible for me or probably even Frits to convince anyone that Podium is better than what they have. Better, when talking about sequencers can mean so many things to so many people. Many Sonar users will laugh at the prospect of switching to Cubase as will Cubase users faced with an option to switch to Sonar.

Why? Because out of the hundreds of features they have (even though many are very similar) each person simply prefers the way their product features are presented, supported, advertised e.t.c So many things can tip the scale in one direction or another. It is simply down to what works for you.

The benefits of using Podium are made clear for all to see on this thread, all over the Zynewave site, vids and of course the demo. But…that is for those who like to work that way.YMMV.

Just about any sequencer will do the job. Whatever it is called and whoever develops it. It’s how it does it that seems to be the key factor when it comes to buying a sequencer.

The how part is very personal, and individual. We all have used Podium, and after all this time must surely know if it suits our workflow or not. I cannot convince you otherwise, neither do I wish to. You surely have enough information at your fingertips to make that decision. 8)

Here are some interesting threads that may answer some of your questions as to why Podium may (or not) be better for you, note, not just better, but for you. Only you know the answer to that.

Both of the threads below are from March and August last year and clearly much has been added to Podium since then, but if you have not seen these threads already they may help you.

Here is an interesting Swazak thread you may have not seen
Title: Very interested in Podium
http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396

Fess started this thread…
Title: Reason to buy this software
http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=211

I think you should feel 100% comfortable with any product you buy. If that is not currently happening then it may never happen. I think with Podium though having a look at the road map shows us what will happen so as you bought Podium as a gesture of support(possibly with an eye on the future?) you may very well at some stage be very happy with the way it works or will work in future. But it’s all subjective Improv, the whole sequencer feature thing…very subjective.

I remain unconvinced of Podium’s superiority and or usefulness of it’s ‘radical’ nature. However I am open to being convinced with objective arguements that can demonstrate a better way of doing things

.

We are all so diffferent and while many of us share similar likes and dislikes when it comes to the detailed feature set of sequencers one person can list all the benefits and likes of a product to someone to try and convince them to switch, but at the end of the day they will either like it or not! 🙂

What is superior to one person may be woefully inferior to someone else. Thats life. Everyone is right when it comes to buying something for themselves. It is for themselves at the end of the day not someone else.

It’s possible, that the track count is also putting people off Podium. Even the idea of having to wrap an FX around a track and then wrap that around another track may be too different ( trying to avoid the word radical here, Improv 😆 ) for some.

I was a bit surprised initially that to add say a standard combo of a compressor and an EQ to a synth that you would have to wrap two tracks around the synth. Of course in Tracktion for instance only one track is needed. So for example a 20 or 30 tracks project in Tracktion or Cubase could very well end up having 60 – 90 tracks in Podium. This may actually be a bigger turn off for new users than understanding the hierarchical engine.

This was a problem for me initially, but not anymore.

It’s possible that Podium’s enigne is actually more CPU efficient than other hosts and therefore does not produce a heavier CPU load even with more tracks, don’t know though as I have not really tested this theory.

As a dual core user I certainly appreciate multiprocessor support in Podium. I think it was one of the very first hosts to include it. I think it supports up to 32 processors! Not bad. 8)

Either way the future development of Podium does look very promising 😉

@Zynewave wrote:

The idea I’m working on currently will allow to hide the track lanes for e.g. tracks that are only created to hold effect plugins. The word ‘track’ may be a bit misleading, as a track is basically just a mixing node in the hierarchy. The fact that you can assign timeline events to a track does not affect the mixer CPU efficiency.

Good. So my theory was right then. Podium does have some sort of additional optimisation under the hood, that does not allow higher track counts to add to CPU load. Is this correct Frits?

@Zynewave wrote:

Podium does have some sort of additional optimisation under the hood, that does not allow higher track counts to add to CPU load. Is this correct Frits?

If the track is audio enabled (i.e. it has a meter), then it will use CPU. But inserting effect plugins this way will not use more CPU than if you would add plugins to tracks in most other hosts.

Cheers Frits. Thanks for clearing that one up. 🙂