Conquistador's Forum Page

@Zynewave wrote:

The zPEQ track under send 2 in your image is inside a track chain panel but it is one of 3 tracks inside that track chain panel that is graphically sharing that waveform to the right, or sharing the same audio track.

I’ve just hidden the bounce track lane as an experiment. You weren’t supposed to pick up on those details :wink:.

😛

@Zynewave wrote:

The bounce sound event is still on the hidden lane. I’m thinking of a method to paint the bounce sound as a background image on the drum lane, once bounce is activated.

Dealing with bounce enabling Effects track from within a track chain.

This might be a good idea… have only one track, bounce enabled within a track chain. That way if a user wants to tap the tree (or bounce a version of his processed track from any point from a chain) that has 4 FX for instance, then he can bounce enable any one of the 4 Effect tracks (but only one) and that output will then be drawn / visible in the track that is shared by all those FX…replacing whatever waveform is already there.

That solves the problem of how to draw multiple waveforms for bounce enabled FX tracks that are within a track chain panel. I don’t think it should be possible or needs to be possible. Especially in compact mode. One bounce enabled Effects track from within a track Chain panel, should be enough. Disabling the bounce enabled track then frees up the single slot for any other Effects track in the chain to be bounce enabled. Thoughts?

I don’t think it is unrealistic to expect a user (especially in the simpler Compact mode) to only want one bounce track enabled within a Track chain panel. One would assume a user wants to work with one bounce track at a time anyway…certainly for a new user.

If any one of the FX tracks are bounce enabled any attempt by a user to bounce enable another FX track, should be met with a simple explanation that “Only one bounce track can be enabled from within a track chain panel”. You might even add that text to the Track Properties option for enabling a bounce track as well / instead of a pop up, so that the first time a user creates a bounce track from an Effects track within a track chain, he will see that text.

Confusing blank track headings?!?!?!?

When adding a new FX track from within track chain panel, a blank track with no name appears. It’s not at all clear what to do next. I think the text “FX track” as a default track identifier should appear on that track.
That text will then be replaced by the name of the plugin that is inserted on that track.

Also there is still no pop up message that tells a user what to do like “Right click here to add an Effects Track. Left click to insert an FX mapping”.

Do not assume anything of a new user, keep it ultra simple. I think the four large buttons that appear in the Project start page for new projects, are a masterclass in simplicityIMO. Lets keep that going.

The addition of so many new features with of this new level of flexibility(compact mode), needs to be matched by a similar level, but of simplicity in presentation that makes it easy to understand so many new changes. That is not happening yet. Just being frank here. Too much is being asked of a user here IMO. Especially new users who I would think are your no.1 target surely.

Making Podium easier for them to access makes it easier for you to get new users. Make it harder by adding features without even a small pop up (that is all that is being suggested here) is complicating the process of allowing new users to “get” the clearly powerful new features. That needs to happen very quickly. Make the most of all your hard work Frits.

Smart Podium
It was nice to left click on an FX / Parent track and see Podium intelligently remove my VSTi folder from my list of FX mappings. Of course when I went back to a new track the VSTi mappings re – appeared for selection, nice. Perhaps I have just noticed an older but useful feature.

Can we now have Mixer snapping please?
http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=977

I am far more inclined to use more tracks in Podium now in Compact mode (so job well done there) but that means a larger number of mixer strips to manage and dragging the mixer across the screen results in a sliding motion that is not the best way to view a high number of track strips. Mixer snapping is a far better and elegant way to scroll across the mixer. Samplitude and Sonar have this really simple but useful feature.

db values on Fader Background

@Zynewave wrote:

I have since moved the line down to the middle of the knob. The reason the slide was at the top of the knob was to allow text to be written on the area where the knob moves, like it’s done in the mixer. I have since decided not to write dB labels on the fader background.

I think you might have to move it back up 😛 I think having the db values on tracks is necessary and is the natural evolution of the development of track level info in Podium. If you personally or even if anyone else finds it a distraction (I cannot imagine why) then please allow it to be hidden for those that do not want it.

At some point surely Podium will need to have these track level features…
http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1041

But at least for now please do not so quickly and easily dismiss the idea of db values behind those new track sliders. I have always admired the way the db values on the glass mixer buttons update and correctly reflect what is underneath them in the mixer.

So they are not a gimmick but an excellent and accurate reference point for mixing that also show a designers touch. But…one should not be forced to use the mixer for that sort of db reference or a 3rd party app like Sonalksis Free G to get simple db Value references at track level.

Without db values the button might have looked odd with the position of the line at the time but AFAICT it was clearly not finished. The db values had not been added. Adding them will ‘complete’ that feature IMO.

@Zynewave wrote:

1. Can I also change a track type in Track Properties as per normal to a bounce track from within the track header?

Yes.

That could be really huge for creative use but…if I converted the zPEQ track (under “Send2”) into a bounce track how would Podium draw that waveform if I wanted to bounce that zPEQ track (tap from that point in the tree) in real time? Would it overwrite the audio file to the same track in your screenshot?

As I already pointed out in an earlier post, if you have selected a track further down the track list, the master and the group lane headers may not be in view, and so the group panel can be used to always have the complete signal chain available.

Fair enough 🙂 I guess that message must be made crystal clear in a video or Wiki tutorial to avoid making it all look too busy. But I do understand the GP + track view necessity better, once I have used Podium with the latest changes it will be even more clearer.

The potential is huge. It is a unique, powerful, different and very flexible way of working that somehow does not fit into the Cubase, Logic, strictly linear approach as such or the Live 6 Session view, P5 Groove Matrix analogy either.

It is just a workflow unique to Podium that is great. With enough info explaining this in much more detail I think you could really hit a niche with Podium which would be incredible in a very competitive host market. It looks like your original idea for Podium (years ago) has matured very nicely indeed. Well done!

2.I think even now in compact mode one can drag tracks vertically. Still Possible within track headers?

Not yet.

I can almost guarantee that this will be requested. I certainly already see parallels with other hosts that show more than one FX per track (as Podium can do now) but…other hosts allow them to be drag re- ordered. Thankfully you said “…yet”. I think this has to be in there. A big FR IMO.

The trip wire here is that in Compact mode a user must access the GP to add an effect track but is that really necessary now with track headers Frits?

You can insert effect tracks using the context menus on the lane headers

Cool. 8)

So…GP (Group Panel) for the whole picture of the tree and management of all parts of the tree (all tracks) while the new “Track chain panels” in track headers are for per track micro management of tracks at track level.

Would that be a suitable summary of all the key changes in 1.95 so far in simple terms? I have to ask for my own clarification and also for those who have read this thread but perhaps have not posted to give feedback because it might simply have been a bit too confusing as the changes are quite widespread this time.

I initially wanted to see a horizontal representation but…I think a vertical representation mirrors the flow of things in the GP so I think your vertical approach is actually much better.

1.If we now have this info in the track header containers / holders are they fully accessible tracks as in Expanded mode or the current Compact mode in Beta 3? Or only for viewing with the GP still needed in Compact mode for some things?

1a If so what are those things that will not be possible in Compact mode, when working within those new track headers?

Added “Set default track height” command to the track header context menu. The arrangement stores a default height for both normal tracks and for parameter tracks. The command sets the default height for new tracks, but also applies the height to all tracks already in the arrangement.

This feature really works well. Sweet. It is simple but with many tracks in a project it is so slick to be able to adjust the height on one track and apply it to all others. Great workflow addition. Thanks!

I noticed the subtle change from “Modular” to “Expanded” 🙂 Nice. That contrasts very well with “Compact” now. Much better.

Showing multiple FX on a single track is what the compact mode eventually will offer. I’ve hinted several times in this topic that I plan to add a miniature group panel to each track lane header. Imagine the block of a track chain in the group panel embedded on each track lane header. Even though it’s still multiple chained tracks internally, the UI will present it as a single track. This is also going to solve the other issues you mentioned with the track focus going away when you select a hidden FX track.

That sounds great. I do recall you mentioning the embedded track header feature but did not ask of it as you did not seem ready to discuss it. That feature sounds like a very important (maybe *the* most important) part of the new Workflow addtions in 1.95.

I can imagine the block but would love a screenshot 🙂 By the way the beta files are super light. I don’t even need to install them, i just click Run!

Select the overtone track in the group panel and use the param panel. As mentioned above, when I’ve implement the embedded group panel on the track lane headers, you will not have to use the track inspector for this.

Ok… a double click places it under the other parameters in the screen shot cheers!.

Something to be aware of Frtis… (Beta 3)

Cry Q (http://www.crysonic.com) does not show the name of the plug in brackets.

I need to play around with some other plugs to see if other plugs might have this problem (perhaps other users can check their plugs as well), the problem is if you have two different plugins and they do not show the plugin name next to identify the parameters then it could be very difficult to identify what parameter track belongs to which plug if they are processing the same child track in Compact mode.

The screenshot in my previous post shows Cry Q’s parameters but with no name indentification for Cry Q.

It could lead to a lot of confusion. It might be just Cry Q but…considering how many other plugs are out there…it could be quite a few others. I will run through my plugs to see what other ones Podium does not autoname, for parameter tracks.

I skipped feedback on shortcuts as I am not a shortcut kinda guy 😉 probably just as well considering the length of this post. 🙂

The arrangement properties dialog has a new‭ “‬track layout mode‭” ‬option which can be set to‭ “‬compact‭” ‬or‭ “‬modular routing‭”‬.‭ ‬The modular routing mode is the same as the layout used in previous Podium versions.‭ ‬The new compact mode presents the tracks in a simpler form.‭

Perhaps‭ “‬Advanced‭” ‬and‭ “‬Beginner‭” ‬modes make more sense.‭ ‬Modular and compact I think are too confusing for a new starter.‭ ‬Even as a user for some time now I don’t like those descriptions.‭

‬I really think “Advanced” and “Simple” modes are much clearer descriptions.‭ ‬They also immediately convey the message you are trying to get across with these two modes…that one is for Advanced users and the other an easier entry level access point for Podium usage.

Really Frits please do consider this.‭ ‬Keep things as simple as possible.

Podium has a lot of power under it’s hood now.‭ ‬A lot.‭ ‬It’s uniqueness can be a weakness if delivered the wrong way.‭ ‬That unique aspect and power‭ (‬with a careful choice of words‭) ‬can be unravelled to a new user in a nice measured way…a wrong choice of words can give the wrong impression.

I used to think only Apps Like Live and P5‭ ‬were quite obviously very different, but Podium’s unique approach somehow‭ (‬especially after trying the beta‭) ‬is now much more visible.‭ ‬Podium really does have yet another unique workflow to offer.‭ ‬Well done.‭ ‬I use P5‭ ‬and Live so the this is real world user feedback here not guess work.
‭

‬In compact track layout mode,‭ ‬all parameter tracks are shown at the bottom of the track chains.‭ ‬Parameter tracks controlling plugins further up the chain is shown with the parameter name followed by the plugin name in parentheses.‭

I like seeing the name of the Parent plug for parameters in brackets but…is that easier than the Modular mode‭? ‬I don’t think so.

In Modular mode one can see the parameter tracks directly under the parent or Plugin that owns those parameters.‭ ‬Easy and logically placed.‭ ‬In compact or simple mode these parameters‭ (‬for different plugins‭) ‬are all placed under the same track.‭

Much harder to distinguish if you ask me.‭ ‬Not easy or logical at all.‭ ‬You could have parameters for‭ ‬3‭ – ‬5‭ ‬plugs in one chain all sitting below the first plug in the chains track.‭ ‬It is far more intuitive and easier IMO to see parameter tracks under their own track.‭ ‬I am not sure there is any need to change this.‭ ‬Why change it at all‭?

The tracks in the group panel are divided into blocks for each effect chain‭ (‬e.g.‭ ‬master chain,‭ ‬group chain and audio/instrument chain‭)‬.‭ ‬Each block has a menu button with shortcuts for selecting and creating new tracks within the parent group.‭ ‬At the bottom of the menu is a‭ “‬move track‭” ‬submenu,‭ ‬which has commands for moving the selected track within the parent group,‭ ‬moving the track to a different group,‭ ‬and moving a range of tracks into a new group.‭

‭ ‬Sub Menu’s can travel across the screen when you want to “Move track” then “Move to new Group” / “Move Group” I really like this idea though. Safer for new users definitely. It should be difficult to mess up the hierarchy in the easier mode with this feature.

‭I think it would be a good idea to have a tutorial done to explain what the gaps are for in the GP, in a bit more detail . I imagine a short Wiki article would do. My understanding is that they are there to provide a visual indication as to what tracks flow to where but also what tracks are on the same level or not. (Correct me if I am wrong) It’s such a radical approach but once you get it, it’s seriously clever and easy to follow. Unique.

The track context menu in the group panel has been redesigned. New commands include “new effect track”, “new bounce track” and a “move track” submenu which allows moving tracks around in the chain.

Provides further focus on the GP for track management. Nice but I suspect many (like I did) might expect those options to appear at track level as well. The GP is unique but having options like these that do not appear at track level at all…don’t know about that. I guess Podium can be different to other hosts and can have a central advanced track manager that leaves track level controls lighter and simpler.

That is an idea that maybe needs to be highlighted in a big way for new users. This is certainly the way I see the GP in Podium. It’s strength is how it brings Podium track level features into a single central focus point for simple and advanced track management. Ahhhh I feel better about it already. LOL! New users need to get that message. It is also how I see the GP going forward.

“Move track” is a great idea, very nice. Now we have another way to ‘see’ what goes where in Podium.

Added “use as group track” option to the track properties dialog. Group tracks will be available in the new group panel menus with commands for managing tracks in groups. Note that normal tracks will appear as group tracks, if you have used modular routing mode to set up more than one child track.

I like this idea. It just makes the impact and management of Group tracks clearer. Am I right in assuming that when you click on this menu the child track being processed is always the track that is selected (has the tick mark next to it) by default however many Parent / Group tracks it has?

It does look this way. Probably not a bad idea. I think I might want to move the key or source track instead of FX tracks around in Podium, but of course I can still do that as well by selecting a different track.

The “hide track lane” track option is now available for all tracks in compact track layout mode. This makes it possible to e.g. hide the track lanes for bus returns, if you prefer to adjust bus returns in the mixer. Setting up busses in the new arrangement dialog now by default hides the bus return track lanes.

Hide track lane really does totally hide it. Great.

“Setting up busses in the new arrangement dialog now by default hides the bus return track lanes”

But it will by default show them in the mixer in Beta 2 which is good to see. Less to see track wise to start, but the info is there in the mixer already.

Specifying a color for a track will apply to parent tracks in a track chain if a color is not specified for the parent tracks.

I do like this. Works as advertised Mr Nielsen.

The buttons in the track headers are tinted with the track color.

Hmmmm I might need to chew on this one a bit longer. One has to be careful to choose a colour that works. I would like an option to not have to use this but graphically it could help differentiate one track from another…a bit more, but not essential. There are far more pressing needs in Podium IMO.

Added “black/white key intensity” setting to the piano roll properties dialog. Setting this to 100% will paint solid black/white keys.

Finally yes! It’s buried a bit (the option) but then it would be a set and forget options anyway for me. Nice thanks.

The project name written in the browser page tab will blink once, as confirmation when saving the project.

Works. But is so quick it could be easily missed. Three flashes would work better. It’s too quick with one flash IMO. We do not need a fire engine siren type of indicator of course 🙂 but I *really* had to look carefully to catch it. It’s supposed to provide a short sharp distraction / notification to a user. One flash does not do it IMO. 3 flashes should be fine.

Changed the track luminance offsets in the color setup dialog to apply to group, bounce and parameter tracks. The luminance offsets are now also applied to the track headers, so that track header and events on the track are coloured identically.

Not a bad idea. More graphical options.

Deleting a track automatically deletes any child parameter tracks.

I like this idea but…in Compact mode *any* parameter tracks are deleted. So if you have a chorus FX processing a Compressor track the parameters for the compressor and the Chorus will disappear. This is another reason why having parameter tracks visible under their parent FX track (in Modular and Compact modes) is a far better idea IMO. A bug?

Deleting a track in compact track layout mode will delete all tracks in the chain.

Below it in the chain? If so AFAICT it does not work in Compact mode this way….only the FX track is deleted in a chain. Everything else is left intact.

The old “delete track” context menu command is divided into specific commands according to the clicked track. New commands are: “delete effect track”, “delete bounce track”, “delete group track”, “delete group and child tracks”.

Nice additions.

Changed the track header context menu to only show relevant options for the track type.

Some things are not available on track types now. Makes sense.

‭Other issues…

‭In Compact mode if you select a track and want to drag a mapping to it you cannot.

OK this may be done to avoid messing up the hierarchy (fair enough) but…if you select a track it remains highlighted, then go to the Map panel and click on a mapping, the track gets de selected (the highlight is gone).

This makes it very confusing in a busy project when many tracks are visible. Surely if one selects a track it should stay selected especially if a user wants to add a mapping to it. No?

I would add this point as well…

…unless adding a simple chainer with support for automation e.t.c would require a total rewrite of Podium I do think in future you should not drop the idea of a chainer completely.

I still think it would be easier to use than the current solution in Beta 2. It’s much easier (GP), unique among hosts, and I would defintely keep it given the choice, but really an FX chainer would still have been all that was needed IMO to simplify things.

Another way to see it…

If anything I see what you are trying to achieve here with the GP and I agree with it.

The GP gives podium something I have not seen in any other host. The Advanced track managment (simple things as well) is slick, fresh and new especially in beta 2… but please consider a chainer in future if only to provide a simpler approach to the current Beta 2 option and provide something more familar for new users to get into as it would mirror other workflow options elsewhere.

The GP as of Beta2 is great, but I really had to think pretty hard to ‘get it’ in beta 2. I love using it but a new user would need a video and plenty of documentation to really enjoy it IMO.

You need this kind of feedback as well Frits. Few potential customers would post thoughts like that here. They would most likely move on to the next demo.

GP + chainer = Low level entry and advanced Track managment.

The GP is a unique Podium feature, logical at first glance, in compact mode (can be mastered with some videos, more docs) but an Fx chainer will give new users an even easier low level ride into Podiums workflow.

So effectively you would provide the best of both worlds. FWIW I would want to see the automapping issue addressed before a chainer arrives in Podium but…a chainer would be something to think about post 2.2/3 Automapping is post 2.0 🙂

Things are far simpler and accessible in Beta 2, so job done and things of course will I assume get easier still. So there is plenty to look forward to.
Nice work overall. It looks like it was a massive effort. 😉

Hmmmm

Frits if I open a project that was created in a previous version of Podium and then change the mode to compact mode from the arrangement properties option, the visual look and feel of the GP and Track view does not change is that correct?