Conquistador@acousmod wrote:
Hi Frits,
I know that you have postponed the pitch and timestretching features for a later date, but perhaps will you consider this :
http://www.zplane.de/showPage.php?SPRACHE=UK&PAGE=products11This algorithm has a very good reputation, even better than Dirac, and it supports up to 48 audio channels 😉
I don’t know how much it costs, but I suppose that it must not be too much since EnergyXT, Acoustica Mixcraft and now Reaper (all the 3 versions !) have it and they are cheaper than Podium.
But of course, whatever solution you choose to do, I will be happy when it will be available 😛
I too read about Reaper2.0 having all three Elastique algo’s. Impressive. I assume Justin has the financial clout (as a millionaire, to do that, and why not I guess) but Frits cannot compete there.
I too hope your suggestion can be considered in future. I think Frits did say timestretching was something he thought should be implemented (to some degree) by 2.0. Maybe this has now changed.
I did not know EXT had Elastique as well. Interesting. 🙂
Conquistador@Klemperer wrote:
This workaround, by the way, is something a lot of users did since months out of a different reason, whichever host they use – just to keep the vst-folders uncluttered. They load EXT with a different paths for all those new nice things and test them. You can setup more than 2 paths there if you want, calling one “demos” or whatever.
LOL! You know what Klemperer I tried it but some of my VST plugs were just simply not picked up by EXT’s scanner. No idea why.
So I am back to square one. I would like to try EXT2 but it still looks like a beta to me. The confusing message that was sent out (by releasing it in a very unfinished state) makes me very reluctant try that option at this point. But yes EXT was my first idea for a work around as well.
The other was Phrazor but now amazingly that project is dead now. Holger now works for NI apparently so his ideas will likely surface in Kore 3 (Kore is similar to Phrazor anyway) It was the only plug that Sugarbytes did not take from Sonicbytes in the recent takeover. ERA, Gat’r e.t.c all went to Sugarbytes.
ConquistadorFrits if you are still looking for ideas there is an interesting thread over at Cubase.net with some nice links as well…
Conquistador@Klemperer wrote:
That’s a very interesting thread, I just found it. As a beginner many weeks ago I didn’t ask (because I thought I’d find out myself like with many other things) as my laptop has a Edirol-UA25 card and the crappy inbuilt-soundcard, and I ran into the same problems. Although – like many amongst us – I am constantly trying out good freeware and some demos, so all of these things would be VERY important for me too.
Yes this caught me out as well. Sadly it is a major issue for me. The more projects you start, the more work you give yourself if you change your VST folder layouts, plugins or Audio hardware. It is IMO clearly an unforseen problem for Frits and I would not classify it as a bug (not saying you or anyone else thinks it is) but it is most certainly a design aspect of Podium that is a BIG problem right now, for me.
It has been particularly frustrating because I love the direction that everything else is going in. Arrrrrrrrggghghghghh 😕 😡
Post 2.0 is the timeframe Frtis gave which is potentially months away but I understand he has his hands full with other things and must try and finish those things first. It just means between now and the appearance of a modification to this area of Podium, it is not feasible for me to start new projects in Podium.
I must have automapping of missing VST’s and new hardware in place first. There is no point in me hassling Frits for the feature because of my own deadlines (that would be silly) but…I must see automapping (standard eveywhere else) in Podium before returning to a large number of Podium projects.
By that time it will be a few clicks probably or less to adress those issues. I can wait until post 2.0. To be fair to Frits IMO he would have already adressed this earlier if he knew how much a problem it would turn out to be. 🙁
ConquistadorAutomatic scrolling of the timeline when dragging beyond the edges, is on the future plan.
Looking forward to that.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
Since I first designed the track inspector years ago as a panel inside the tracks region, the inspector has grown in size with the addition of embedded plugin editors and the group panel. I’m considering moving the inspector out of the tracks region and instead embed it as a panel at the left edge of the browser window, similar to the “List” panel at the right edge. Imagine there is an “Inspector” tab at the top left corner, just before the project tab. This has the advantage that the inspector can be the full height of the window, and showing the mixer will not reduce the height.
What do you think?
I think that is a good idea but maybe putting it after the arrangement tab is better? I would think it is safe to assume a user would access the Inspector much more often than the Project or Arrangement tabs so placing it after the Arrangment tab makes more sense to me ( right next to it).
One thing to possibly consider is the fact that when I look at the new arrangement, I can’t tell that the Drums track (purple) goes through zMaster unless the track (or child) is selected. On the old arrangement, I can glance to see it goes through something.
Perhaps a visual clue might help, for example on the tracks with have ‘hidden effects’ as parents, maybe the arrow pointing to the parent could be a double arrow. So when you glance at an arrangement, I can see which tracks have these hidden effects/tracks.
That is an excellent observation. I totally agree. It would be very confusing to have the Inspector tab hidden or closed and then have to guess which FX is processing what track.
Ok the mixer will show that info by just double clicking the Mixer header to “auto slide” up the mixer but…with so much critical info going into the GP, it must be made obvious in Compact mode (at track level) what exactly is happening track wise, with some sort of visual icon.
I think negativeg’s idea is a good one. A small double arrow would work…maybe placed before the track name (to avoid problems with long track names) and with a number next to it that changes with tracks added above it or Group / parent tracks added above it.
So a track with NI’s Massive on it being processed by 3 tracks in compact mode would looke like this…
^^3 Massive
Instead of just “Massive” which would give no visual clue as to how many parent racks it has in Compact mode…that seems simple enough a solution IMO.
I’m thinking about adding a miniature group panel to the track headers. This will show the mappings that are on the hidden tracks in the chain. Thus the zMaster plugin will appear on the master track header.
I do like the sound of this suggestion but I would have to see a mock up to really get the idea. How much “mini” it would be is something I would really like to see..it sounds like it might work though…the other double arrow suggestion with numbers is also good IMO.
ConquistadorConquistador@Igr0 wrote:
Thnx Conquistador. So, if i’m usining only softsynth what bit depth i should use(i understood from your link,that there is no reason to use 64 bit) 24 bit or 32 bit floating point?
If your settings page looks like this…
..you should be fine. 😉
ConquistadorHi,
🙂
Podiums engine sounds as good as any IMO. This subject has been discussed on many forums as you likely already know…and I don’t think anyone has proved there is any real measurable difference between hosts.
Have a look at this if you want to see how much Frits (the developer) knows on this matter… I would not worry if I were you.
http://www.zynewave.com/wiki/doku.php?id=guide:preferences#technical_note_on_64-bit_mixing 😉
ConquistadorI have not spent too much time with K- Metering…but I know Voxengos free Span has support for this built in…
…of course building support for K-Metering into Podium would be interesting and definitely useful having read Bob Katz “Mastering Audio” book some time ago.
I think if you integrate K-system, you will be far ahead of the game (at least, I don’t think any other DAW has done that)…
JP
I don’t know of any host that has K- Metering bulit in either. Even if there are hosts that have it, there are probably very few.
Conquistador@jpleong wrote:
The 2nd edition of his Mastering Book comes out in October (I own the first edition) so I’m curious to see what further thoughts he has towards the metering issues.
Thanks for the heads up, I had no idea a second edition was on the way. I have the first edition as well. I will now look out for the second edition. Should be a very good read.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
Are you running a 30 inch screen or something?
It’s a Dell 2007FP (20.1″). I bought it mainly for my development needs. They are getting pretty cheap recently. Especially 1680×1050 widescreen seems to take over as the most popular resolution, judging by the range of new display models that are put on the market.
Yes widescreens are definitely very popular. I think Widescreen TFT’s double up nicely for viewing DVD movies which is probably the main reason for their popularity I would think. 😉
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
1280 x1024
And yours?
1600×1200, but I think the majority of users have 1280×1024 resolution displays.
Gulp! 😯
That is pretty high. Are you running a 30 inch screen or something? My current 19 inch TFT’s native resolution is 1280 by 1024 so yes I agree, I think most users would be likely operating at 1280 x 1024 or similar. 🙂
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
I don’t think adding a slider to the group panel is the optimal solution. If you have so little screen space that you need a slider to scroll the group panel, then hiding the group panel seems a better solution to me.
But I need to have it (GP) visible all the time and will likely continue to need to especially considering the amount of features already present in the GP, With even more features clearly on their way.
You could set up two arrangement editor profiles, one with the group panel hidden, and then switch between the two profiles using the F8/Shift+F8 shortcuts.
You could then also arrange the mixer as you like in one of the profiles.
As I have stated elsewhere I prefer to avoid using keyboard shortcuts unless they are beneficial or quicker to my workflow.
A slider that appears once a certain length is reached in the GP (like the mixer already has) will save me having to even think about KB shortcuts or editor profiles. No need for that IMO. The slider is a much simpler solution IMO.
Of course you are trying to help here, but your suggestion adds additional steps to solve the same problem that the slider solves easily. The slider solution does away with *any* need for user interaction or adding of needless (IMO) steps with shortcuts or editor profiles, which are just not required to solve this problem.
A user would not need to set anything or keep switching between two profiles, if the slider is there.
I’m curious: What screen resolution are you using?
1280 x1024
And yours?
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
IIRC you said in compact mode one will not be able to drag re order tracks.
” The new compact mode offers an option to reduce this space. What you loose is e.g. the ability to freely drag effect tracks horizontally to a specific group level. You’ll need to use the group panel for these kinds of edit actions.”
You can still reorder tracks by dragging vertically. What I wrote was that dragging HORIZONTALLY will not set the group level.
Ok sorry! I read that wrong. What about the GP slider?