acousmodDon’t complain, the “New multichannel insert mapping” command has not always been here ! 😉
And I suppose that even if Podium is by far the best DAW for multichannel editing, most of users don’t bother about this…
But yes, it is paradoxal that it is the only one that needs to do something special before to use this kind of plugs.
acousmodFor all plugins that have more than 2 inputs / outputs, you have to manually convert them to multichannel :
– right click
– select New multichannel insert mapping
– delete the mapping with #1
I hope that Podium will do it automatically some day or at least ask the question when importing…
acousmodShocked Is that Podium that crashes for you, or plugins?
No, I have told you about this last year : with long arrangements (30 or 40 minutes), Podium becomes more and more slow after some time. For example it can take up to 20 or 30 seconds do save the project (the project only, not the sounds) or to stop the engine.
Some times if I don’t wait enough before clicking somewhere, the screen becomes white and Podium doesn’t respond anymore.
It doesn’t happend with short arrangements (5 minutes) or if I don’t work a long time.
Perhaps is this due to undos or temporary files, I don’t know.
Last year it was with a P4 3,2 GHz and Gb Ram, this year with a 2 GHz Core2Duo and 2 Gb of Ram, but it is exactly the same and is not related on the use of the CPU or the plugins.
In general I quit and restart Podium every hour to prevent this, but some times I forgot…
If you bounce the master, is the zipping noise present in the bounced recording?
No, it is only a problem with the driver. I hear it in Podium but if I open the file in another one the sound is good.
The zipping noise occurs both when using expanded and compact modes?
Yes.
Is the Podium CPU indicator behaving differently between 1.94 and 1.95 beta?
Yes, it is very low.
With the simple sine test it is about 2 %.
acousmodand save to backups often.
Oh, I have crashes rather often so I am used to !
BUT, I have just tried with the 1.95 and strangely the sound is completely distorted.
I have switched several times between 1.94 and 1.95, restarted Windows : it is always the same, the sound is perfect with 1.94 and distorted with 1.95 (same project and same settings of course).
With a sine test signal, the sound is clean when there is no amplitude change but there is a noise (like a zipping noise) as soon as it changes.
So with a normal sound there is always the noise.
I suppose that it is related to the ASIO4All driver and the sound cards on this computer, but there must be some difference between 1.95 and all previous version since I haven’t had this yet.
Any idea ?
acousmodFrits, do you think that it is safe to use the beta for working on my current project ?
I like a lot the new track header and how the automation works, but I don’t want to loose something is there are changes that makes my project not compatible with a further version.
acousmodOh, I thought it was on purpose.
I hope that we will see all of this soon in siruation by ourselves !
Anyway, thanks for your work.
acousmod@Zynewave wrote:
First attempt at embedding group panels (or rather track chain panels) in the track lane headers:
Any comments are appreciated, even if it’s just Yay or Nay. I’m curious whether people think this is a good development.
Yes for me. I like to have all the informations visible in the track header and the “boxes” that surrounds the track chains makes it clear.
The good thing for me is that it seems that I will not be forced to use the Inspector… 😉
It is good if all can be done in the same place, and the track header is definetly where I whish.
But I don’t understand why there is a space between the main Drums track and the level automation track below. It make it appear as if it is a part of the child group.
It seems visually more logical to have it just below, and the space between the Level and the Drum Bridge group ?
acousmodSo in expanded mode you need to use the increase/decrease group level commands.
hmmmm… we will see at use.
acousmod@Zynewave wrote:
@swindus wrote:
After changing this bit of a track to true the group panel doesn’t shows the new state of the track. Only after clicking a button like ‘X’ or using the Ctrl + PageUp/PageDown shortcut the group panels updates to the new state.
I can’t reproduce this. Can you provide more details? What do you mean with the “new state”?
Do you mean that the Group track is detached from the child tracks with a space between them ?
If yes, for me too the status of the track doesn’t change when I select or unselect “Use as Group track”. It needs to do something on the track, for example CtrlH.
acousmodI want the “compact” mode to be as simple as possible, and one important simplification was to remove the horizontal placement when dragging tracks. This ensures that you don’t accidentally mess up the hierarchy.
I understand, but in this case moving a track results precisely in messing up the hierarchy. It will be perhaps a little disturbing for beginners (like for me !) to see that a same action (moving a track) results in different results depending on if you drag up or down.
So I’m not fond of adding a modifier key to allow placement of a dragged track on a different hierarchy level
I agree. But if I have well understood the goal of the Compact mode, to place a track on a different hierarchy level must be rather made with the sub menus in the Inspector, and simple ordering, without the risk to change the hierarchy position in the track view.
It seems to me to be more coherent…
Perhaps you will see what other users think about it ?
By the way, if the Compact mode becomes as useful as I guess, I think that it would be a shame not to allow people to move a track in the hierarchy in the track view by simply move it horizontally with a modifier key. It costs nothing and doesn’t clutter the interface.
You know that I am not fond at all of modifier keys (!), but in this case, since it is something that we don’t do very often, it can be usefull.
If people prefer to do it with the submenus in the Inspector they can always.
Also, do you intend to restore the Group Hierarchy Level option in the Track Properties ? It has disapeared too in the Expanded Mode.
It was usefull to be able to choose it when we created a new track with a double-click.
acousmodNote that if you move a track below a group track, the track will be moved into the group.
Yes, it is that.
But If I want to change the order of my tracks, I don’t want that a track becomes a child track of a group.
Example :
If I want to put Track A below Track B by dragging it, the result is :
If I move track B above the result is OK :
I think that the result might be the same in both cases.
Perhaps that if I move it with a modifier key I can force it to be a child of a group ? Otherwise the hierarchical order is conserved ?
I’m going to improve this when I add the miniature group panel to the track headers.
OK 😉
acousmodThis is now fixed
OK, no more problem now.
Some suggestions :
– when I select an effect track in the Inspector it would be good to see the relative track in the arrangement selected too, or someting that shows that its relative effect track is selected
– with a certain amount of tracks, group tracks and effect tracks, it become very difficult to understand the structure in the Inspector because there is no more idea of “which goes into which”, we loose all visual information of routing and more confusing, it is very hard to see what track in the Inspector corresponds to what track in the arrangement because of the previous point
I also whish that we will have an option to NOT HIDE new created tracks, or a command like “unhide all”.
Problem : if I move a track which has a hierarchical position 2 below a track group which has several effect tracks with the top beeing at position 2 and the bottom at position 4 for example, the moved track doesn’t keep its position (2) but is then at position 4.
The names : the word “Modular” opposed to “Compact” looks strange because I cant really see what is “modular” in its presentation if I compare it to real modular views like in EnergyXT, the racks in Tracktion or even the Matrix in Reaper. Perhaps it would be more convenient to call it “Expanded” or ‘Detailed” or something like this ?
By the way, a true modular view (with editing) of the arrangement structure will be a dream ! 😉
acousmodaaaahhhh, the Preferences……….
acousmodStrange. Please email your project file.
done.
acousmodPlease explain. I don’t see a problem here when creating new arrangements. Is your project set up properly with audio output mappings etc.?
Of course.
There is yet some working arrangements in the project.
I have used them for my previous test.
I simply select New Arrangement with default 4 track or other value, and there is no track in this new arrangement.
Then If I select New track, no track is created.
It is the same if I choose Compact or Modular.
I’ll get around to this. The same block that is shown for a track chain in the inspector will be shown on the track header. The record buttons will be available in this panel.
Perfect 🙂
hopefully when compact mode is implemented fully it will not be necessary to switch to modular mode to do certain tasks.
OK.
Actually, to be frank, I don’t like very much the Inspector and how to use it.
I prefer a lot to see what I do in the track view.
What I like a lot in the compact mode is :
– the new order of automation tracks and how I can record automation, collapsing the automation tracks without hidding the audio track
– the way how I can move a group of tracks simply without having to collapse it before
– there is no more risk to move accidentaly a track in the hierarchy
Something that is perhaps a bit strange : adding a group track in the track view and adding a Effect track in the Inspector is the same, no ?
Don’t you think that it must be the same word ?
Or is there some subtility ?