UncleAge@H-man wrote:
BTW, You are talking about unhiding the bounce track and creating multiple blank events that can be rendered in one pass right?
Yes.
UncleAge@H-man wrote:
Hey UA,
The punch-in markers are located on the transport bar and the range is indicated by the red marquee on the time line.
Once you activate the punch-in markers, a new option appears in the new bounce menu (when offline mode is selected – the default) “Render within punch range” (or someting like that).
This can all be done with the bounce track hidden. As mentioned, rendering different ranges along the track preserves any previous renders on that track, even if effects are added and the bounce is moved to the new effect.
😀
Thanks,I appreciate the help and I got this to work. However, when creating a bounce clip this feature creates a clip that is as long as the arrangement. I’m not sure when I would want this type of result.
If I just wanted a small clip of a section of the song I think adding a blank clip is a bit tidier for me. Its really 6-of-one or half-dozen-of-another really because its just as easy to trim the clip as it is to create a blank one. However, there is one advantage to adding the clip(s) ahead of time (instead of punching in) if you want more than one clip created. And that is, you can make several blank clips and render them all at once if you so desired.
With that said I am still trying to think of a practical application for this functionality outside of some stuff I’m trying out on background vocals. Either way, thanks for the help H-man 🙂
UncleAgeNice catch. I was able to reproduce this problem. I don’t usually use the “link edit cursor to play cursor” feature but you are correct in your findings, and I don’t think it’s supposed to work this way.
UncleAge@H-man wrote:
Again, I like the new changes.
I did notice that when using the Punch markers to set the bounce range (offline mode …and real-time I think), the bounce process is non-destructive.
That is, you can bounce bars 4 to 8, change the preset of whatever vsti is loaded on that track and then bounce, say, bars 12-14 with the new sound and you end up with the old sound from the previous render and the new sound.
Extending this and again using the Punch Markers, it is possible to add a couple of ef-ex to the track, move the bounce to the end of the chain and render another section with effects with out impacting the previously bounced sections.
I’m not entirely sure but I think that might be brilliant 😯 Maybe this was possible previously but if so, it has transferred seamlessly.
Now all that remains (to rule them all) is a “Bounce audio and copy event to new track” option 😉
H-man, I haven’t been able to wrap my head around the punch markers approach you’re talking about here. I’m still messin’ with it even though I may be making things harder than they need be. When I have tested the real-time bounce I, un-hid the efx, doube-clicked to add a clip, ctrl-b, hit record on the transport and recorded a clip. Any info on how to use the punch markers would be appreciated though.
In addition, I do think its pretty cool that I can add several clips in different parts and have them as separate renders all from the same pass. And again, I can change the efx around and generate different clips. I think this could pan out to be a real handy feature.
UncleAge@Technophobia wrote:
@ Frits
I have just tried using Beta 3 ( I know I am one behind ) and it still wants to connect to the Internet but does not crash if I stop access.
When an arrangement was opened up it had finished loading the arrangement it then asks to connect to the Internet.It is not a big problem as long as it does not start to crash on every opening. I’m guessing it is still some plugin or other causing it somehow ?
Hey Tech, just as a side note on this problem you’re having…
Podium hasn’t done this on my rig. I have had vst’s try to access the internet during a scan or initialization in various daw’s but never Podium itself. Please keep us posted. I am curious about the end results.
Thanks
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
Hmm, where do you see the “blank title”? When I show the lane for the blank effect track named “Bounce”, the word Bounce is shown correctly in the track lane header.
Beta2
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
I wanted to make the default appearance of bounce enabled tracks appear as a simple freeze track. That means hiding the separate lane with the bounce events, and letting Podium handle the bounce event. I think that simple “freeze” functionality is what the majority of users want. Unhiding the bounce track with the option in the bounce menu I think will result in the appearance that you request.
So far, so good. Now, if I could make one more suggestion, it might not be a bad idea to give the bounce track a name, when there isn’t one. When a user bounces an effect track the freeze/bounce is right there, so, no need for a name because a new track/lane was not created. However, when bouncing the source or bottom track there is a new lane created and if it is unhidden it will be present in the track header with a blank title. Clicking the properties for this lane already shows that it has a place holder name of “bounce”. I think this is good and I think it should show up in the track header as well (when that lane is not hidden). Maybe even in italics or right justified to make it stand out a little (not necessary though, just thinking out loud).
I got some more testing to do so I write back later if I find anything else. Otherwise it is shaping up to pretty much what I would expect from this type of functionality. However, I would still like to hear what the other users think.
UncleAge@Conquistador wrote:
@rinxai wrote:
Simple sampler – loads single wav – with rudimentary filter/EG/LFO
While this comment by Klemperer is accurate “It’s just not difficult to find samplers, Paax3CM in the mag, Shortcircuit free, sfz, and so many more, all are pretty good.” I would still be very interested in a Zynewave sampler. Defintely. Something that can load mulitsamples not just one shots. 16,24 or 32 bit wave file support would be great.
A built in sampler would be a nice touch. And if implemented well, could really add quite a bit of appeal to an already great app. My thoughts are along the lines of something like Simpler in Ableton’s Live.
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
Once again I may be reading you wrong here but… Are you saying that, by design, we won’t be able to bounce the bottom track?
You will be able to bounce the output of the bottom track, but the bounce track need to be above it in the chain. That’s how the old “insert bounce track” command worked. You should not configure the bottom track to be both the bounce track and the instrument track, because the bounce sound events and the note sequence events would then overlap on the same track lane.
Ok. I think I found out what I was doing wrong and also have a suggestion.
In a one track lane scenario as soon as I click the sub-menu for offline bounce a new lane is added to the track header, just as if I had added an effect track. The difference comes when there are effect tracks already present.
I opened up the project again to play around and figured out what should have been obvious. If I just disabled the effects on the track and did a bounce then I got the bounce I was looking for (which was a bounce of the bottom most track). Once bounced it appeared in the hidden lane of the upmost effect track. And this result is a bit different if all you have is just a bottom track.
So there is a discrepancy in the visual feedback that I get. Now if I were bouncing the effect track the lane would be hidden. And the effects that are above this effect track would still be adjustable. Since this is the case why not create the bounce track above whatever track lane is used and make its default state “visible” instead of “hidden”. This gives instant feedback as to where the track is and doesn’t affect the hierarchy at all (I would think). And in the case where all effects have been bypassed I would want the bounced track to appear immediately above the last trak lane processed (in this case that would be the bottom most track). And the effect of this is to alow the user to offload some cpu intensive VSTi while still allowing them to sculpt the sound after bouncing the VSTi.
Also, I hope you have a great weekend. As a matter of fact I hope you have already turned all of this off and have left the building 🙂
And yes, I know I’m a little too long winded at times 🙂
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
@UncleAge wrote:
**Offline Bounce**
In the bounce sub-menu it lists the name of the track and the effect tracks as the available choices. Except the track name is grayed-out and is not an available option. Which means in this case I can’t record TruePianos (at least not yet).If I go into the track properties and enable the bounce feature, I can then go back to the track and bounce the main VST, TruePianos. At this point, in the bounce sub-menu, the track name is grayed out still but this time it has a check mark.
At this point if I choose one of the effect tracks for bouncing and then return to the sub-menu again to try and check mark the track name again:
1. The option is still grayed and won’t allow me to choose it as an option.
2. The option for bouncing audio is un-checked in the track properties as well.The track is grayed out because it should not be possible to bounce enable the bottom track in the chain. This is because the bounce sound events otherwise would overlap any other sound or note sequence events that is on the track. I’m going to change the track properties dialog so that the bounce options are disabled for the bottom track. I decided to include the grayed out track name in the menu, to keep the same chain structure as is shown in the Fader and Meter menus.
Note that if all tracks are grayed out in the bounce menu, enabling one of the options in the bounce mode submenu will insert a blank “Bounce” effect track above the bottom track.
Once again I may be reading you wrong here but… Are you saying that, by design, we won’t be able to bounce the bottom track?
UncleAgeAfter downloading 2.06 beta1, I only found three issues…
Issue#1
Example:
Master
–Track1
—-Reverb
—-EQ
—-TruePianos
**Offline Bounce**
In the bounce sub-menu it lists the name of the track and the effect tracks as the available choices. Except the track name is grayed-out and is not an available option. Which means in this case I can’t record TruePianos (at least not yet).
If I go into the track properties and enable the bounce feature, I can then go back to the track and bounce the main VST, TruePianos. At this point, in the bounce sub-menu, the track name is grayed out still but this time it has a check mark.
At this point if I choose one of the effect tracks for bouncing and then return to the sub-menu again to try and check mark the track name again:
1. The option is still grayed and won’t allow me to choose it as an option.
2. The option for bouncing audio is un-checked in the track properties as well.
In addition I would like to ask if it is proper to have the options split out into different menus (track properties vs bounce-sub menu). I know this may have been overlooked but I thought this would be a good time to bring it up.
Issue#2
Will “Realtime Bounce” keep the tail end of the audio? I’m not familiar with “Realtime Bounce” and was only using “Offline Bounce” in the above example. Either way the bounce rendered fine except it was the same length of the midi clip which means there wasn’t a trailing reverb at the end. Will “RealTime Bounce” correct this situation?
Issue#3
Let’s say I bounce at the EQ track. Then I change the sub-menu option to the reverb track because I want a rendered bounce at that stage in the tree. As soon as I change the option in the sub-menu the bounced audio in the EQ track is automatically transferred to the reverb track. No harm done really as I can move it or bouncerecord over the top of it. But I’m wondering why it wouldn’t just stay put and let me add another ender at a different stage in the chain.
All that said, I think this is a much needed addition to the app Frits. I like the Ctrl-B shortcut as well 🙂
UncleAgeThanks for the explanation 🙂 I get it now…
UncleAgePlease note, I am not trying to be argumentative in this response, I am trying to give you the most honest feedback I can…
I think that sometimes the flexibilty that is added sometimes creates more confusion. In this context I think what gets lost on a new user is the flexibilty that you are trying to provide. My point is that, in my previous question regarding visual feedback via the “B” button I was also trying to question the implementation of this featre.
If I am new to Podium and have used other DAWs I would wonder why I have to access the record feature through a menu. When I press the “B” button I want it to “Bounce/Freeze”. Once the bouce was created the track and button would stay in that state. Clicking the button again would unload the bounce. I guess I fail to see the need for both the record and playback options. In my mind I see the track going into a “Bounce Playback” state automatically after I record/create the bounce.
As an example:
I push the “B” button and the Bounce track is created: “B” turns red. Once the bounced track is created the button now sits as yellow to indicate that the track is now in a playback state. And if I were to click the button again the bounced track would disappear unloading the bounce. “B” button goes back to original state.
Am I missing something here?