koolkeys's Forum Page
Forum Replies Created
-
December 2, 2008 at 01:39 in reply to: Preview 2.08: Composite tracks (aka. multitake, comping) #13501
koolkeysParticipant@Zynewave wrote:
@koolkeys wrote:
So will bouncing the composite track get rid of the take tracks? If you have a long song and four or five takes, after bouncing the composite track, will the RAM be freed that all the takes are using?
Bouncing will not get rid of the take tracks. If you are sure you don’t need to do further edits to the takes, you can simply delete the take tracks. You can also move the bounced sound to a new track, and delete the entire composite track group.
Well yes, but I’m LAZY!!! 😉 😆
December 1, 2008 at 03:55 in reply to: Preview 2.08: Composite tracks (aka. multitake, comping) #13488koolkeysParticipantCool. So will bouncing the composite track get rid of the take tracks? If you have a long song and four or five takes, after bouncing the composite track, will the RAM be freed that all the takes are using?
Brent
December 1, 2008 at 00:23 in reply to: Preview 2.08: Composite tracks (aka. multitake, comping) #13486koolkeysParticipantI think this is a great addition. A question and a feature request.
First, it sounds like there won’t be any direct access to the take clips, but you have to select them and splice them using the comp track only? Can you expand a bit on how you would select parts of each take to composite?
Next, I think it would be great to have a seperate button or option to bounce your composite track to a single “normal” track. In other words, a way to quickly compile the composites you’ve done into one tidy track. Or will bouncing the composite track automatically do this?
Does any of this make sense? I’ve been sick all day and may not be thinking straight.
Brent
koolkeysParticipantI, for one, REALLY like this idea. Although it may cause confusion, if there was a good WIKI section added for it or something it would be fine. I do like the old method as well. So we can use both methods still?
Now, where is that beta!
Brent
October 3, 2008 at 21:03 in reply to: Restricted to Podium license ownerskoolkeysParticipantThis content is restricted to Podium license owners.September 1, 2008 at 06:32 in reply to: Preview 2.05: Track header and inspector improvements #13127koolkeysParticipantI prefer number 2. I actually like the small balls on the sends, but if you want consistency, then I pick number 2. I do NOT like number 3 because I don’t like my level meters on a separate plane than the actual level meters area.
Brent
koolkeysParticipantThat’s great news Fritz! I don’t use Rewire much, but this is quite a big milestone to get out of the way.
Thanks!
Brent
May 9, 2008 at 06:43 in reply to: New developer tool. Implications for future Podium versions. #12358koolkeysParticipantI think it’s time to move on. The pros seriously outweigh the cons. Personally, I’m on both XP and Vista now and both are pretty stable(except ASIO4ALL on Vista, grrrrrr). But there just comes a time when you’ve got to let go of the old systems. If it means better workflow, better performance, and more time spent coding needed features and fixes(as opposed to supporting too many systems), I’m all for it.
Brent
February 29, 2008 at 09:46 in reply to: Restricted to Podium license ownerskoolkeysParticipantThis content is restricted to Podium license owners.koolkeysParticipant@anzoid wrote:
Had to write…
After reading Koolkeys’ recent post over at KVR I downloaded the Podium 1.98 Demo just to have a look.Podium is just what I’ve been looking for! The way it works – the hierarchical structure clicked first time. Beautiful.
A read through of the manual and a go through Podianer’s excellent tutorial videos and I’m up and running.At last a host that brings a smile to the face and is a pleasure to use.
As someone else wrote in the forum “the cheque’s in the post”.
Very happy to be a paid up member of the Podium community and very impressed by what I see here – particularly the support by the developer and other members of the forum.Glad to have you! And also glad to have helped!
Brent
February 23, 2008 at 23:24 in reply to: Shouldn’t the default when you open a project have the #11817koolkeysParticipantWhich programs are those?
Brent
February 23, 2008 at 22:45 in reply to: Shouldn’t the default when you open a project have the #11814koolkeysParticipantI don’t know of any software that starts with the engine off. I would say that keeping your monitors down when turning it on would be the better option. It would be more annoying to most people to have to turn it on every time.
Brent
February 23, 2008 at 19:40 in reply to: Restricted to Podium license ownerskoolkeysParticipantThis content is restricted to Podium license owners.February 23, 2008 at 19:09 in reply to: Restricted to Podium license ownerskoolkeysParticipantThis content is restricted to Podium license owners.February 23, 2008 at 18:53 in reply to: Restricted to Podium license ownerskoolkeysParticipantThis content is restricted to Podium license owners.