Zynewave.
Doug B@Zynewave wrote:
So group and folder tracks are perhaps different things in Cubase. The scenario with group tracks I talked about earlier (where you have to select the group track as a destination on the individual channel mixer strips) was how I remembered group tracks from earlier Cubase versions. These group tracks were placed in a separate part of the mixer window, next to the bus channels. However they did not behave like folder tracks.
From the Cubase SX 2.2 Help files:
Folder Tracks:
“Just as the name implies, a folder track is a folder that contains other tracks. Moving tracks into a folder is a way to structure and organize tracks in the Project window. For example, grouping several tracks in a folder track makes it possible for you to “hide” tracks (thus giving you more working space on the screen). You can solo and mute several tracks in a quicker and easier way, and perform editing on several tracks as one entity. Folder tracks can contain any type of track including other folder tracks.
Moving tracks into a folder
You can move any type of track into a folder by using drag and drop:
1. In the Track list, click on a track that you want to move into a folder, and drag it onto a folder track.
A green arrow pointing to a folder appears when you drag the track onto the folder track in the list.
2. Release the mouse button.
The track is now placed in the folder track, and all parts and events on the track will be represented by a corresponding folder part (see Working with folder parts), that is a graphical representation of all parts and events in the folder.
Since you can move any type of track into a folder track, it is possible to create sub-folders by moving one folder track into another. This is called “nesting”. For example, you could have a folder containing all the vocals in a project, and each vocal part could have a nested folder containing all the takes, in a subfolder for easier handling etc.
Muting and soloing folder tracks
One of the main advantages of using folder tracks is that they provide you with a way to mute and solo several tracks as one unit. Muting and soloing a folder track affects all tracks in the folder. You can also solo or mute individual tracks in the folder.
Muting a folder track
You can mute a folder track (and thereby mute all tracks within it) the same way you mute other tracks by clicking in the Mute (“M”) button in the Track list.
Soloing a folder track
You can solo a folder track (and thereby mute all tracks outside the folder) the same way you solo other tracks, by selecting it and clicking the Solo button.
Soloing or muting tracks within a folder
This can be done by showing the tracks in the folder and using the Mute and Solo buttons in the Track list as usual for any tracks inside the folder. “
***********************************************
Group channels
You can route the outputs from multiple audio channels to a group. This enables you to control the channel levels using one fader, apply the same effects and equalization to all of them etc. To create a group channel, proceed as follows:
1. Select Add Track from the Project menu and select “Group Channel” from the submenu that appears.
2. Select the desired channel configuration and click OK.
A group channel track is added to the Track list and a corresponding group channel strip is added to the mixer. By default the first group channel strip is labeled “Group 1”, but you can rename it just like any channel in the mixer.
3. Pull down the Output routing pop-up for a channel you want to route to the group channel, and select the group channel.
The output of the audio channel is now redirected to the selected group.
4. Do the same for the other channels you wish to route to the group.
Settings for group channels
The group channel strips are (almost) identical to audio channel strips in the mixer. The descriptions of the mixer features earlier in this chapter apply to group channels as well. Some things to note:
You can route the output of a group to an output bus or to another group with a higher number.
You cannot route a group to itself. Routing is done with the Output Routing pop-up menu at the top of each channel strip.
There are no input routing pop-ups, monitor buttons or record enable buttons for group channels.
This is because inputs are never connected directly to a group.
Solo functionality is automatically linked for a channel routed to a group and the group channel itself.
This means that if you solo a group channel, all channels routed to the group are automatically soloed as well. Similarly, soloing a channel routed to a group will automatically solo the group channel.
One application of group channels is to use them as “effect racks” – this is described on Using group channels for insert effects. “
******************************************
Hope that helps!
🙂
ConquistadorFrits what about this for another idea regarding a short term fix for the lack of bundled synths and FX for Podium’s demo projects….our good freind acousmod (already featured in SOS mag no less 🙂 ) has a wealth of instruments that can be used, and if I am not mistaken were originally designed for Podium anyway. Why not use these until you have your own synths ready to go?
They already have device / instrument definitions as well I think.
I am sure acousmod will be happy to offer them to you. Frits? Acousmod…what say you? 8)
acousmodOf course there will be no problem for me, but I think that apart of a multichannel use where they are of great value! 😛 , my plugins are far from being efficient and I don’t think that they will be a good additionnal value for Podium…
Frits can of course give the SpatPod or others together with Podium.
But there is a lot of better and more CPU friendly freeware effects and synth, and they match the general usage of people because they are stereophonic.
Don’t add the problem of multiple inputs / outputs to the Podium’s signal flow !
Thanks 😉
darcyb62Watching this thread and thinking about it compared to my experiences Tracktion here are my thoughts.
I initially pruchased version 1 of Tracktion. The included plugins definately helped in getting me going with it. They had some native plugins but they also included a number of mda plugs. As a true newbie, I wouldn’t have known where to go next, if they hadn’t been included and actually used in the demo’s.
When I upgraded to version 2 I went the online route and didn’t get the added plugins but didn’t feel I missed much as I had developed my own suite of go-to plugins, although a number of Mackie specific plugins were included with the plugin (Final Mix was offered in Version 1).
Out of the plugins that were initially included there are a few that I still use on every project and nearly every track. The Tracktion EQ is one. I find it simple, stable, efficient and easily alllows me to dial in the sound I want. While some might feel it is limited by number of bands I can easily drop a second instance in. I’ve also found myself using the native delay plugin quite a bit. With the plugins the Mackie through at the product, I like them, I like them a lot. There is a lot of debate on how good Final Mix but as freebie product I think it’s just fine. I’ve recently looked at Ozone and I think it has an edge on Final Mix but then it comes at a cost.
One thing I liked about the native Tracktion plugins along with the MDA plugins is that they used the Tracktion interface for setup. Sometime’s a slick gui helps but I preferred the look and feel I got with the native sliders. I think Podiums look and feel is great and I would hope that any decision to incorporate plugins would build on the visual impact Podium already has.
With respect to plugin gui’s I really like the approach Betabugs takes. The surface controls are relatively simplistic but if you get below that, there is lot more that can be done. The challange is o achive the right balance, make it easy enough for a beginner to use but you still have the guts available for those who want/need to tinker.
So I’m all in favor of having some plugins specific to Podium, but only if the integrate somewhat seamlessly and are good enough for a persontopw want to keep using over the long term.
Cheers.
Conquistador@acousmod wrote:
Of course there will be no problem for me, but I think that apart of a multichannel use where they are of great value! 😛 , my plugins are far from being efficient and I don’t think that they will be a good additionnal value for Podium…
Frits can of course give the SpatPod or others together with Podium.
But there is a lot of better and more CPU friendly freeware effects and synth, and they match the general usage of people because they are stereophonic.
Don’t add the problem of multiple inputs / outputs to the Podium’s signal flow !Thanks 😉
I suppose it was worth suggesting but as you developed them, you would be the best person to know if it is a good idea or not. I am sure the Zynwave plugs will be worth the wait anyway. 😉
Zynewave@darcyb62 wrote:
Watching this thread and thinking about it compared to my experiences Tracktion here are my thoughts.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. What I have in mind with the first Zynewave effects are simple things, such as EQ, and a combined dither/mono/limiter thing that you can add to the master track. I intend to show the UI for these plugins embedded in the track inspector info panel, between the mixer dials and the event list. You can just navigate the tracks to see the embedded editors for the various plugins, and don’t have to open separate plugin editor windows.
super_crunchy@Improv: no offence intended, but it really sounds like Podium isn’t for you, if you have to keep questioning why it’s so good
you can’t rely on people telling you why it’s so good, you really have to use it yourself extensively, while working on real tracks, just like any other host. I’ve brought many tracks from concept to near-mastering stage within Podium and for me the workflow is absolutely fantastic. But, for you, perhaps other programs have a better feel. No one will be offended if you choose not to continue using Podium, as everyone works differently and so some tools will feel better than others. Good luck 🙂
super_crunchyoh, and Podium’s alot cheaper than Cubase SX and the other big sequencers 😆 , but still very powerful … which is why I use it
Doug B@super_crunchy wrote:
@Improv: no offence intended, but it really sounds like Podium isn’t for you, if you have to keep questioning why it’s so good
you can’t rely on people telling you why it’s so good, you really have to use it yourself extensively, while working on real tracks, just like any other host. I’ve brought many tracks from concept to near-mastering stage within Podium and for me the workflow is absolutely fantastic. But, for you, perhaps other programs have a better feel. No one will be offended if you choose not to continue using Podium, as everyone works differently and so some tools will feel better than others. Good luck 🙂
Wrong, the questions are because I want to see why some like the program. It’s all research. Questioning provides insight! I’ll be the one to make the decision, the opinions are just input-food for thought. Or I might stay with Cubase SX, or Tracktion 2 or exT-all of which I own. Or maybe something else entirely.
No offence you say? Why in the world would I take offence at something as trivial as any difference of opinion. This is a forum, there is always differences of opinion-so what?
8)
ConquistadorThanks for sharing your thoughts. What I have in mind with the first Zynewave effects are simple things, such as EQ, and a combined dither/mono/limiter thing that you can add to the master track. I intend to show the UI for these plugins embedded in the track inspector info panel, between the mixer dials and the event list. You can just navigate the tracks to see the embedded editors for the various plugins, and don’t have to open separate plugin editor windows.
Some questions for you Frits…
1. I already own a plug in that has it’s own built in dithering algo – Ozone. Would I be able to use this instead of your dithering algo on the master out?
2. I may use your dithering algo instead but have no idea what that would be…Pow-r, UV22 e.t.c what do have in mind?
3. Also you mentioned Eq and a limiter but no compressor. Tracktion for instance ships with a basic compressor and EQ (amongst other plugs), I think a new user would expect a compressor as well.
I certainly would be interested in the EQ and compressor as these are the key elements of any track. Of course a limiter is essential as well. Will a compressor (however simple) make the initial Zynewave effects development cycle? Or will the limiter also function as a fully functional compressor?
4.Podium produces 32bit and 64 bit files (that can be used for dithering). Will your dithering algo dither 64bit files as well? I am curious as there are no 64bit dithering algo’s currently available (that I know of).
You can just navigate the tracks to see the embedded editors for the various plugins, and don’t have to open separate plugin editor windows.
5. So efffectively they would provide a per track EQ, and Limiter?
I think avoiding the need for multiple plug in editor windows is a very good idea. Integrating these plugs into the existing interface means their inclusion into Podium will be very smooth indeed. Live 5 and Tracktion have similar designs but your idea seems like a more tighter integration of the plugs and the existing UI. Judging by your description it seems very promising indeed.
However…
6. What plans are there for dealing with existing floating windows of third party plug ins? Any plans to dock these views somehow?
Zynewave1. I already own a plug in that has it’s own built in dithering algo – Ozone. Would I be able to use this instead of your dithering algo on the master out?
You can just assign the Ozone plugin instead of the master track plugin I mentioned.
2. I may use your dithering algo instead but have no idea what that would be…Pow-r, UV22 e.t.c what do have in mind?
These all require licenses, so it will be a while before I can offer them in Podium. Initially it will just be simple dithering.
3. Also you mentioned Eq and a limiter but no compressor.
One step at the time. Eventually I will probably create a channel strip plugin, combining EQ and comp, so you don’t have to set up two tracks in serial.
4.Podium produces 32bit and 64 bit files (that can be used for dithering). Will your dithering algo dither 64bit files as well?
This will be possible with the recently announced VST 2.4 which supports 64-bit floating-point processing. But you won’t hear much improvement when applying 16-bit dither noise to 64-bit 😉
5. So efffectively they would provide a per track EQ, and Limiter?
Yes.
6. What plans are there for dealing with existing floating windows of third party plug ins? Any plans to dock these views somehow?
Native plugin editors will not be dockable, since they most often are not resizable. Only Zynewave plugins and plugins using the Podium generic editor will be embedded in the track inspector.
ConquistadorYou can just assign the Ozone plugin instead of the master track plugin I mentioned.
Very good and a long awaited feature. Thanks! 🙂
These all require licenses, so it will be a while before I can offer them in Podium. Initially it will just be simple dithering.
Thats fine. I have a very good option I can use anyway.
One step at the time. Eventually I will probably create a channel strip plugin, combining EQ and comp, so you don’t have to set up two tracks in serial.
I’m certainly in no rush and I admire your current development strategy of developing features you can fully manage. Your current development strategy is probably the best aspect of Podium IMHO as it affects every element within Podium positively, so I certainly do not want you to add things to Podium that are beyond your ability to manage (implement wthout bugs). Take your time on the compressor 🙂
This will be possible with the recently announced VST 2.4 which supports 64-bit floating-point processing. But you won’t hear much improvement when applying 16-bit dither noise to 64-bit 😉
Yes. Good point. 64 bit file usage is not very practical at the moment for the reason you just raised and for the incredible file sizes! 😮
5. So efffectively they would provide a per track EQ, and Limiter?
Yes.
Very nice.
Native plugin editors will not be dockable, since they most often are not resizable. Only Zynewave plugins and plugins using the Podium generic editor will be embedded in the track inspector.
Thats fine. A minor issue anyway. Looking forward to the Zynewave plugs. Cheers Frits!
super_crunchy@Improv wrote:
No offence you say? Why in the world would I take offence at something as trivial as any difference of opinion. This is a forum, there is always differences of opinion-so what?
i was just trying to be polite 😉
Doug B@super_crunchy wrote:
@Improv wrote:
No offence you say? Why in the world would I take offence at something as trivial as any difference of opinion. This is a forum, there is always differences of opinion-so what?
i was just trying to be polite 😉
My apologies then, I originally thought that it was a snide comment. That’s what happens when you spend too much time at kvraudio and cubase.net-they tend to make you a bit trigger happy.
duncanparsons@Improv wrote:
My apologies then, I originally thought that it was a snide comment. That’s what happens when you spend too much time at kvraudio and cubase.net-they tend to make you a bit trigger happy.
Yeah but we’ve got hearts of gold 😉
DSP