@The Telenator wrote:
Wasn’t what I’d call a “minor little micropoint.” Maybe you should have taken typing at the university or trade school, ’cause it only took about an hour to look that stuff up, paste it and reply.
Being patronizing must be part of your character. It just slips, doesn’t it?
I guess, you don’t have many friends.
Please feel free to waste hours on end to proof your points in that forum, I won’t read you anymore. Got better things to do 😉
Telenator – Any interesting developments on the going bonkers front, recently?
Putting so much effort into quoting stuff to proof a very minor little micropoint looks a bit …. well peculiar at least. Nothing else to do, hugh?
The problem is that it is not implemented. Only the timing clock is transmitted, which can be used to sync e.g. external delay units to the Podium tempo. Start/stop messages are not transmitted. With my current todo list, it’s going to be a long time before I have time to add support for this.
Are Start/stop messages difficult to implement? It seems such a basic thing. I would have thought it was just overlooked at the time, but not that it was hard to do.
What title would you give the competition topic then?
My intent with such a competition would be to find out what missing features are holding people back from purchasing a license.
You could call it seal-the-deal-feature or deal maker (like an opposite to a deal breaker).
Calling it a deal breaker would be misleading, because it does not mean what you have in mind for that feature deal thingy.
A “deal breaker” is that which breaks (terminates, cancels) the deal.
Example: “If the warranty period for that computer is only 6 month, it would be a deal breaker for me.” (I would not buy that computer)
List your deal-breakers. List the features that when implemented would make you purchase a commercial license.
Why would you call it deal-breaker? The term deal breaker is commonly used for something that ends (breaks) a deal and does not start (make) one.
Or is that meant to be an intentional play with words?
The system as it is might produce long names, but at least it is consistent.
What if I have some original basslines called bass line 1, bass line 2, bass line 3? When I change bass line 1 and it becomes bass line 1 2, it is clear what derives from what. with your proposed system the name bass line 2 would be taken already and if it just takes the next number available, everything would get more confusing.
The new shortcuts are using keys not used previously, and they are not changing the existing behaviour.
Is the problem that you’d like to use key shortcuts for the functions listed, but the shortcuts I’ve chosen are difficult?
Or is it a problem that the shortcuts exist even if you don’t intend to use them? Perhaps you have concerns that you accidentally activate the shortcuts.
I use podium mostly on my tablet, where keyboard shortcuts just fail to deliver what they are intended for.
And even on a desktop, I would just prefer a shortcut-editor for assigning them freely in a way I’m used to from previous apps. Otherwise I just get it all mixed and don’t know what is what anymore.
is the palette thingy idea still on the table?
Apart from your response in that other topic, I did not detect a lot of enthusiasm about my suggestion, so I’ll probably only start experimenting with it once I get a touch-screen PC.
Sorry my response to it came a bit late. I’m currently trying to improve the all around quality of my life by staying away from all media including the internet.
A tablet-friendly ui in a daw presently really is a gap in the market. Your palette idea is so good, I would not wonder to see something like it on the ipad soon, with “a patented by Apple”-label on it. And even for non-tablet use it would make a great intuitive self explanatory user interface for users who don’t want to learn a long list of shortcuts before unlocking the whole potential of an app.
ugggh! that shortcut madness is giving me headaches again. quite a long walk to learn them all… is the palette thingy idea still on the table?
… So basically you right-click, and then left-click+drag a handle on the circular panel, instead of left-click+dragging a handle on the event. The panel will pop up so that the last used handle will appear under the mouse, so if you’re doing a series of gain-adjustments on sound events, it’s a quick right/left click to start dragging the gain value. This panel would solve the problem of having more drag actions than can be activated with key shortcuts. It would also offer easily accessible drag handles, in case you have zoomed out so far that it would be difficult to hit the normal smaller handles on the event. It would also work well with touchscreen interfaces. 😉
I LIKE IT!!
…and thanx for the hint that I indeed must have posted something here. For a mo I worried I got peculiar and were walking around with corrupted memory banks. 😉
always liked the pattern based concepts better.
that’s why my atari is still the centerpiece of my homestudio, the pc’s being just its slaves.
Maybe the jitter has something to do with with the multi-core-support?
EnergyXT only runs on the first cpu and many timing related issues with midi/audio apps just don’t occur when programming only for one cpu.
I suppose there are many different ways to take advantage of multiple cpu cores (which tasks go on what core, how they are put together again and stay synched and so on..)???
+1 to those feature requests.
I find it more than odd, that todays DAW’s are lacking so many midi editing features, most ATARI midi sequencers already had 20 years ago.
I think Mikes first post gives the best idea of what he means.
I understand the whole idea more like a splitter or routing-clamb, not like a normal track and not like a reversal of the signal flow. Much more like a new element in podium that would allow some of the routing capabilities known from modular hosts, but implemented in a way that suits podium.
Maybe dragging up and down moves the plugin in the hierarchy, left and right adjusts send levels?
+1. That would be it for me.
The problem with that option is that you would kill the ability of move/copy the fx to another mixer strip. …
u could, u would only need to start with a vertical motion first and then move it sideways, I guess.