acousmod's Forum Page

Hi,

Nice update.

Some suggestions :
– Ctrl + Click on the left vertical bar of a track to hide / show the lane (like Ctrl + H)

– a “Hide upper tracks lane” option, because I often have an audio track and some plugins with their automation tracks above, so it will be nice to be able to hide / show all of them but keeping the lower track visible (the higher level audio track)

– the wiew of the E and X buttons of a track together with the S M R buttons, when we click on the vertical bar of a hidden track. Actually, to show a plugin window or to mute the track I have not found another way than unhide the track lane (and eventually hide it after).

– an automation track that is not “Enable audio mixing” can not be hiden ?

I haven’t decided on what’s next.

Audio fades and handles, of course 😉

Oh, no, the meta event for the synchronization of automations 😆

Considering the use of the colors, in my last project I have set one different color by track type : one color for audio file tracks, one for effects, one for level envelopes, one for automation envelopes and one for bounces (must add : MIDI, send and return tracks).

Do you think that we could for example define the colours for all the track types in the Profile properties ?
Thus a simple option available in the track – or lane – menu will allow to select the type / color plus a custom colour like now ?

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 😉

Since I am far from being able to understand all the subtelties of the english language, it is difficult for me to give an opinion…

But I prefer “Lane” to “Path” because path is an abstract word for me which is good to describe the sound flow but not visual things. The old “tracks” are something where to put objects : sequences, plugins, mappings etc.

“Lane” has for me the benefit of both meanings of track and path, while being more concrete.
It is also used in some video compositing softwares with the same meaning (if I remember well…).

So group and folder tracks are perhaps different things in Cubase.

Yes.
Group tracks allow to send in them the signal from normal tracks, and they appear in the mixer where you can insert effects on them. Since the output of a group track can be sent in another group track, it can be similar to nest tracks, but without any visual connection with the signal path. They are on the same “level” in the track view and in the mixer view.
Like I’ve said in a previous reply, we can certainly do the same kind of things with this technique, but as have said Max, it is far easier to do in Podium – simply move a “track” – and visually coherent.

The folder tracks are only made to organize the tracks on the timeline. They are not visible in the mixer because they can not support effects etc.
They are very useful for grouping events, and the folder sequencies can be split, resize etc.
I hope that something like this will be some day available in Podium…
I even wonder if the proposition that Frits have made to hide the sub tracks doesn’t give a similar result to folder tracks ?

It really makes my work faster and easier. You don’t have a lot of different types of tracks in Podium. The type of the track depends on the device mapped to it. So, every FX track works as folder (group) track, and every folder (group) track may become an FX track, you just need to map the FX device to it. And you can see the real signal flow in Podium – in most of other hosts you need to imagine how the signal flows thru the unuseful virtual clone of hardware mixer. And the last. Imagine that you wrapped audiotrack in the FX track. You can map any FX parameter (VST or MIDI) to this track; in this case FX track will work as: 1. visual representation of signal flow; 2. Group (“folder”) track (you can hide all wrapped channels), 3. automation track for the mapped parameter. Isn’t it great? Hierarchy idea is a killer!

Good description which I totally share.
I must just add, but I know that very few people are concerned, that thanks to this hierarchic engine and the bus that an support up to 32 channels, Podium is the ONLY software to allow to use multichannel audio files and multichannel plugins and instruments in a flexible way. Absolutely no competitor in the world…

What I am pleased with is that it is a very simple, efficient and flexible design. The job that remains is to make it more accessible in the UI.

I could not have said better… 🙂

but how much flexibility do we really need?

It certainly depends on musical styles and personal ways to work.
For me it is essential because composing is not something linear but most like making a puzzle…

In Cubase SX, you just drag and drop track six so that it is now between tracks 1 and 2.

Sorry. Like Frits says, changing the order of tracks in Podium can change the signal path and how sounds are processed with effects, it is not only a visual arrangement.

It would be nice if there was a ‘default ‘ mapping so that Podium knew the default vstplugin folder to look for effects in instead of having to do a plugin search for each project.

It does in the Project Wizard.

That’s an old concept,

Yes, but which has not yet been really materialized outside of research centers…

But right now, I don’t find Podium to be that visually more obvious.

I was speaking about HyperEngine.

As I mentioned before, it seems upside down and backwards sometimes. And that makes me feel distinctly uneasy and uncomfortable.

Me too 😉