Conquistador's Forum Page

Ok…I have had audio dropouts before but now they are back again. When I play the project back it appears to play further each time before the audio stutters and then drops in and out.

The strange thing is the CPU meter does not budge when this happens but the GUI does become unresponsive at times during dropouts.

I pretty much ignored it the first few times I came across it some weeks ago but now it just will not go away.

I really have to get to the bottom of this as there is little I can do with Podium like this. I really hope this is down to user error on my part.

Project file has been sent Frits.

Thanks in advance.

I personally think the new flat look is much better than before. However to keep everyone happy maybe the current look could at least be made optional.

No idea how difficult this would be to implement, but at least it would provide a good halfway house of sorts. 😉

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.

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?

Or he will have to send a bottle of for each customer…
Perhaps is it the way to gain more users ?
( http://www.chartreuse.fr/pa_sommaire_uk.htm )

😆 😆 I was just about to suggest additional fine wines as bundles for new customers should Frits go the “le trou normand” but you beat me to it! 🙂 😆

Frits 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)

I was unhappy with the gfx of the old track header layout, which was a bit heavy on the shadow effects. This new design is more flat, but with a clearer outline of the controls. This has the added bonus of a more CPU efficient UI update.

A flat look does work well. Tracktion and Live 5 have a similar look. As for additional UI CPU effiency, that is good news as well. Not really a weak point as such before anyway, but still it is good to see an improvement in this area.

The thin hierarchy lines from the old design has been replaced with bars, similar to how the headers are drawn in the mixer. This has the benefit that you now can click the bars to select the parent track.

They look very nice. I imagine from the screenshot it is possible to click any track to make it visible or any part of the strip or bar. If that is so, then it is a definite improvement over the previous look and implementation. Nice.

It also makes it possible to add a new ‘hide track lane’ option to the track context menu. Enabling this will hide the horizontal track and just show the vertical bar. Useful for tracks used only for effect plugin inserts.

So hiding say 3 horizontal fx tracks will show 3 bars but hide the three tracks from view?

The screenshot above is just a remake of the existing tree layout. I intend to add another option to the tracks region properties, to switch between ‘tree view’ and ‘routing view’.

Tree view as in old hierarchy view and routing view as in new left to right view?

Selecting routing view will show the track headers aligned to the left edge instead of the right, and the vertical hierarchy bars mirrored over on the other side of the track headers, so that the master track bar is furthest to the right. This way the signal routing can be viewed as going from left to right. The routing view will furthermore have much wider vertical hierarchy bars, so that the meters and various selectable controls (e.g. gain/pan/send dials) will be shown on the vertical bars as part of the signal routing.

I think it sounds similar to your description in the Zynewave synth thread. I think I will have to see it to really be able to visualise it properly. Your screenshot certainly helped this time around, any chance of a screenshot for the new routing view please?

@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?

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.