Max@duncanparsons wrote:
I think it is a good improvement on the beta pic shown earlier in the thread – it seems more Podiumesque (Podietry? Podestrian?)
Podiumish 🙂
I like slight shadows too, waiting for release!
Max@Conquistador wrote:
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. 😉
No-no-no, it’s not so serious problem (at least for me). No need to waste time on implementing 2d/3d look options I think. As I said before, I like new GUI on Frits’ screenshot. And I like it much better than previous GUI. But now track headers looking flat, and the rest of interface is not – that’s looking strange for me. And I asked if there’s a way to add some pseudo-3d effects to make it look more “traditional” in Podium’s way. But Frits said that he already tried to make track headers in 3d and they did not look good. Well, if Frits can’t do that – nobody can’t!
Finally, as Jaegerteam said:
But I swear I will use Podium also if Frits should change the whole GUI, that everything would be flat…
Me too!!! 😉
MaxAs one man on kvr said: “GUI, UI and workflow is different but very complicated things”. You can create a good sound with bad GUI, but good GUI will make your work faster and easier. The changes in GUI are great even if it looks a little “flat”. Many thanks to Frits for his great ideas.
MaxWell, more great ideas form Frits…
I like new GUI very much. But I must say, that –
@Zynewave wrote:
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.
– maybe tracks now looking too flat… Of course, usability going first, and in this case nothing can beat new tracks GUI. But don’t forget that almost all Podium’s GUI made in pseudo-3D, and tracks on the screenshot now look like they taken from the other program… Is it possible to make new track inspector a little more pseudo-3D’ish, without eating CPU power and loosing that great ideas that came with new GUI? I think that this will make it looks much better.
MaxHeirarchy idea was one of the main reasons for me to buy Podium. 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!
My english is not very good, but I hope that my post will be clear for you.
Max@Zynewave wrote:
We have opposite views on this. I see the C: root folder as the master track. With this view, the current track tree structure is similar to the file list you see in the Podium list window.
I agree here with Frits. Current tracks hierarchy seems to be the most logical to me.
And if you ask me why Zynewave’s user base growing not very fast, I’ll tell you that there’s a lot of people that didn’t even heard about Podium (yet).
MaxGreat, thanks.
Max@Zynewave wrote:
Implementing assignment of multiple mappings on one track (as was on the plan) would disturb the principles of the hierarchic track structure. This chained group feature keeps the hierarchic approach intact.
I agree with you here. But what about “layering” synths, I mean sending midi data to multiple devices? Multiple mappings was a solution, because current “copy track” workaround eats track region space also. I vote for midi busses. What do you think?
@Zynewave wrote:
but I wonder if having it selected by default is not a risk to confuse people a little more with the real signal flow ?
Maybe. Anyone else care to comment on this?
Yes. Me too. Actually I think that “classic” mixer view is more logical. It’s not a problem, ’cause I can choose between two mixer views, but I think that will be better to disable ‘compact chained audio tracks’ option by default to help new users in understanding the real signal flow.
MaxWell… It’s hard to say what will be the best selling solution for Podium. We don’t know the future, right? So I can tell you only my own opinion regarding Zynewave fx & synth. I may be wrong, because I’m not a studio sound engineer, I’m just a DJ and musician, but I play my music in clubs often here in my city, and I’m trying to make real money with this soft.
@Zynewave wrote:
…I don’t want people to associate Podium with the quality of the effects processing.
Even if fx and synth will be released separately from Podium, they will be associated with it. Actually, if you started up the product line with so good and original product like Podium, people will wait for something like this from fx and synth too.
I also don’t like the idea to add thirdparty plugins to Podium installer. I’ve tried Making Waves and N-Track before buying Podium. Both of this apps comes with thirdparty plugs – for me it looks absolutely terrible and not professional. (Just my opinion)
There’s a lot of plugins around, and people don’t need “yet another delay” or “yet another FM synths”. But some things like EQ and dithering usually built in hosts, and it’s a good idea to make them purchased separately. Something like “Zynewave mixing and mastering pack”? Sounds good for me. But pesonally I think that such plugs must be the highest quality to make people buy Zynewave… And not Waves 😯 😉
@Zynewave wrote:
Would people be prepared to pay something like 50? for an effects/synth add-on license to Podium?
Yes. Well, at least me.
@suges wrote:
More important I think is “Podium in action” type demo movies on the site, showing a song playing, all the different windows opening and showing the song while it’s playing, etc. And a list of pros using Podium.
I agree with suges. Don’t know why, but info about pros using some app realy makes people to buy it. I know the guy from Russia who spend about 7000$ (or so) buying Mac & some software for it, because “Tiesto using Mac” 😯
MaxVery clear and useful in my opinion. Maybe some referring to demo projects should be added.
MaxMaxA lot of VST plugins works with a little delay. And if you connect the external hardware to your computer, of course it will work with a delay also. Podium can automatically compensate it. The ‘latency’ shows you total delay for the channel, compensated by Podium (in samples).
If you don’t need this info, just press “latency” button in the left side of the mixer to hide it.
MaxCount in options for metronome is on the list.
Don’t forget to visit this post: http://www.zynewave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12
😉
Max1. Hit “power” button (shift+space) right after loading your project. This will load all your instruments in memory.
2. You must create new preset for Jamstix before saving your project. Press “new” button in the presets window (in the left part of track inspector) to do that. After preset creating your Jamstix arrangement will be loading with Podium project.
MaxIt takes time to code new features, but not to put them on the list 😉
Personally I like your idea, but it can wait.