The best way to record trumpets or other brass is using a dynamic mic (sm57) close to the end of the instrument.
😯 – I’m doing exactly the opposite for the trumpets and trombones; large-diaphragm condenser, and put it cca 1m in front of the instrument. There is usually no need for additional reverb mixed in later, and the sound is pretty and natural; however, good sounding room is a must in this case 😉
when recording the band, I usually do it like this; record drums (real version on as many tracks as needed) + rest of the band playing together in another room with just 1 microphone; the rest of the band track is just for orientation; then record instruments one-by-one, based on the drum track. However, this requires to have 2 rooms (so that orientation track does not bleed into basic drums track) and some equipment to be able to setup proper monitoring in both rooms – drummer needs to hear the rest of the band in his earphones, rest of the band needs to hear drums, but rest of the band must not bleed into real drum track). Unfortunately, the band has not made any of the resulting tracks public, so I can’t show you what is the result… 🙁
2. Sometimes, there are segments that just don’t get rendered. The bigger the delay a plug-in adds, the more often it seems to happen. This is most prominent at bar 1, but I’ve since also had it happen elsewhere, especially with short audio events.
Wow, I was experiencing this problem from time to time to, but never got to distilling the simple scenario like that, so I did not bother reporting without any details. Thanks thcilnnahoj!
Well, this is because I so far haven’t done enough testing 😳
No need to be embarassed, this is beta, so it has to have bugs and not enough testing, otherwise it would not be beta 😉
As I see it, there are two ways I can fix this issue:
1/ Enable playback of a record enabled track, if there is no input assigned or if the input is bypassed.
2/ Add a new “Automation Record” track option. This will be placed below the “Record” option in the track menu. I would like to avoid having to add another button for this, so perhaps Ctrl+R key shortcut or Ctrl+clicking the R button could toggle this track option. This solution adds the complexity of having another track option with a somewhat hidden access, but on the other hand it will allow automation recording without having to bypass or remove any audio inputs assigned on the track.
Which solution do people prefer?
Both solutions would work for me, but I guess number 1) is a bit easier.
On a 2nd thought – would it be useful (or even possible) to have both? 😯 I.e. recording when input is muted or unassigned does not record audio and plays existing lane, and the same can be accomplished by Ctrl+clicking on record-arm track button. But it is probably needlessly complicated, solution 1) would work fine for me.
Automation recording bug(?); have track with some recorded audio, add some effect and try to record automation like this:
– unassign track input
– arm track for recording
– press ‘record’ and then ‘play’ button on the toolbar.
If you fiddle with any effect control on the armed track, automation lanes are properly created and recorded, but there is no sound coming out of the track at all. Or is it my misunderstanding how automation should work now?
Tested is on beta14.
1. Current inspector fx’s thing. I still think that slot system with d&d support would be best solution. By d&d fx’s it would be fast & easy and you can call it modern feature too.
I don’t like static slots, they take too much space and are not as flexible as current ‘dynamic slots’ or how to call it.
(ye we live in 2009)
Yes, we all know. You wrote it many times. So what?
2. Current mixer and how it handle plugins. Fx disorder. However, Frits has told he remake mixer after current update. Nice! At least i want to get rid of thos mixer up and down scroll cases.
For me, the current state of the mixer is absolutely wonderful. It shows all routings, effects on groups and individual tracks etc. all at once, still not waisting too much space. And, if you put too much effects on the track, then how would you want to get rid of those scrollbars?
3. Help us get our ideas fast out in podium and allow note strech on selection tool. PLEASE! One of the smalest request what is ever made. This little thing would make many your customers happy.
I support this one.
4. Swing. Man, every musician needs swings. I dont want to make music which sound 100% made on computer. Ableton or Studio one has good swing system. Take some inspiration there.
Swing would be useful, I think Frits already said that he will work on it after current UI update batches. No need to say it again and again.
5. I would call another modern feature here. Easy sidechain. Sidechain which take maxium 10 seconds to set up. Ableton has most easiest / fastest sidechain. Take inspiration there.
Well, this one. You keep asking for ‘easy sidechain’, no matter how many times this was answered to you. I’m able to set up sidechain in less than 10 seconds (not counting initial device setup, which has to be done only once per project). This means that Podium already has this feature. Many people already answered you with detailed answers, links to tutorials etc. Did you actually read those answers, those tutorials, links etc. ?
6. Totally new graphics. More modern. Softer edges. Not so blocky, you know. Studio one and ableton have good graphics.
I’m absolutely fine with current graphics. rounded graphics take more valuable space. This is DAW, not graphics gallery. If you love so much graphics of other program and depend on it, why not use that other program?
7. Relize that you can’t do all the things alone. You will need help. Find some one to make inbuild fx’s for podium. Or ask if you can add some freebies with Podium. Like Gol did with FL Studio. If i remember right those first fx’s are made by smartelectronix(?)
I don’t have any problems downloading free effects separately. What advantage would be bundling 3rd party effects with podium?
8. Remember you run business here. If your customers want something, you do it. Well, of course not everything but when preponderance wants same thing..
Remember that there are many customers. Every customer wants a lot of things. It is simply not feasible to fulfill every wish of every customer.
9. Forget what you like and what you don’t like it. Between betas we can read something like this “i change my mind, i do it this and this”. “i change my mind again blaa blaa”..
What about users opinions? They use your product. You just develop it. Does it matter if you don’t like “fx slots thing”, when your customers do like it and they are happy? You know what happy customers means.
I disagree very strongly on this one. IMO Frits does wonderful job evaluating all requests/wishes and choosing proper way to implement it. This means that in most cases, the feature is implemented a bit differently than originally requested, but this make podium very *consistent*. Just filling in every wish would make it a huge pile of inconsistent and overlapping features, complex in interaction between crossing features, thus very hard to maintain and quickly becoming buggy.
10. Take this criticism in positive way. We all want to help you. Thats why we keep supporting you.
Still haven’t seen any other developer taking criticism in more positive way. Even your often rude, shouting and repeating remarks are always answered (at least if they contain something to answer).
ps. sry for my bad english 😳
The problem is not your english, the problem is your attitude, as others already mentioned.
Absolutely awesome. The new bouncing scheme is perfect, and IMHO solves nicely and very elegantly all bounce-related issues raised here in forums. =D>
My vote goes for yes. Mixer is podium biggest weakness. Especially how it handle plugins. Actually it has done rly stupid way..
Sorry, but you keep saying things like this without any clarifications. Why is mixer podium’s biggest weakness? What exactly you don’t like on mixer’s plugin handling? Please avoid answer ‘make it as in Live, it is nice’. Thanks.
The hierarchic engine from the very beginning is very good and powerful, I think that no other host has this concept implemented. And that is also the problem – people used to other hosts have to understand some different concept here, unfortunately, many of them are not ready to get this, many of them just want cheaper/nicer live/cubendo/whatever. I don’t think that it is possible to solve this, either you align podium with mainstream hosts by removing hierarchical engine concepts, or you will learn to live with the difference and advantages/disadvantages it brings. I personally love mixer/tracks/hierarchy as it is, IMHO no need to do any changes.
LP’s post pretty much explains it namunger.
I understand your point but we definitely want to avoid the floating window and still have a different zoom value for the embedded editor at the same time. This does not seem possible currently. 🙂
I, on the other hand, completely agree with namunger; having embedded editor time/zoom-locked with arrangement is a BIG usability plus, and sacrificing it only because of cosmetic issue (floating window ‘ugliness’) is very bad idea IMO. Moreover, floating it does not seem to be ugly to me at all, I don’t have anything against them.
As I’ve learned in the past (sigh), a person should not rely on how something is going to be in the future. Rather, they should accept what something is now, work with that if it suits them, and hope for future improvements but never expect them (unless it is promised or close to that). Otherwise, they will continue to be disappointed.
Sounds like copypaste from some yoga textbook, maybe except that ‘hope’ part. 😉
Seriously, I agree completely, nicely put together, druid.
Previous Podium releases were built using the 10 year old (pre-Vista) VS6 compiler. As Podium is now built using the latest Microsoft compiler and libraries, I’m suspecting that something in the Podium process has now become “Vista-aware” and thus enforces the User Access privileges. Probably both Synth1 and Guru are trying to write files in e.g. the Program Files directory, which is not allowed for non-admin user accounts.
I’ve checked, and I believe that the difference is in the embedded manifest. 2.18 contains
Voted ‘No’, because i’m absolutely satisfied with current sidechaining functionality – to be honest, I still don’t understand what is your problem with current sidechaining implementation. Sure , it could be made even better (as everything in the world :-), but I absolutely agree with LiquidProject that there are much more important things missing.
For me it is mainly MIDI Fx and MIDI routing, i.e. support for MIDI in busses/sends, support for mixed audio/midi in VSTs (like vocoders, midi-controlled audio tuners etc).
Very nice! I was a bit ‘afraid’ reading about 17-tone scale – till now, almost everything using non-12-tone scales sounded very ‘academic’ to me, but this one sounds very natural. Thanks.
Some of the features I have worked on the last months have pushed this a bit back. Would you say support for MIDI plugins is more important than time-stretching?
Yes, at least for me 🙂 . Also making ‘composite track’ feature fully supported on MIDI tracks would be highly appreciated. Thanks.