UncleAgeUncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
I think this will be enough for the 2.00 release. I’ll spend a few more days on testing. Please report if you find any problems with the track templates, or if you have suggestions for improvements.
I’m going to jump into this for a few hours and see if any issues come up. I’ll report back.
Also, I’d like to say thanks for tackling this issue.
UncleAge@Slomo wrote:
Thanks for you replies!
I’m on a Q6600 XP SP2 system.
I had difficulties trying to pinpoint what caused these crashes and hang ups.
Ex. I was browsing some presets in Sampletank. Then I went for the tracks pan in Podium and Podium just hang up on me. So I really didn’t know where to start. It all seem so random.So, Fritz, I’ll contact IK and see what’ll come out of this.
R
Thanks for looking into this Slomo. I’m running a Q6600/XP/SP2 as well so I’m interested in your findings and possibly a fix. I think their AmpegSVX is a really nice bass plug so hopefully there is a solution.
UncleAgeAfter having a few go rounds with IK’s plugs I gave up on them. I thought they were really good ideas but they just weren’t stable enough for me. And this happened in more apps than just Podium.
UncleAgeI took a listen and I like it. I’m going to get the new files and try to get mine done this week as well.
Thanks Sam!
UncleAge@Zynewave wrote:
@H-man wrote:
@Zynewave wrote:
As a natural extension of the new merge project feature, I’m now experimenting with creating a new track template system that is file-based. The benefit will be that the track templates can be used across all your projects. Saving a track template will then no longer create a template arrangement in the project, but instead save the track in a .pod file in a new “Track Templates” folder in the library. The paths to the project template and track template folders will be settable in the preferences.
What do you think. Would you mind that the old track template system is removed in favor of a new file-based template system?
This sounds awesome! Couple of questions tho…
Would I be right in assuming that the new Templates function would be available from the right-click menu on the actual track?
Groups, tracks and effect tracks can be turned into templates?
Custom patches (not saved to instument or .fxb) would be retained?
and,
Big YES for still being able to save events/clips as well.
Also great additions for this release (I must have said that many times now 🙂 since 1.77).
Yes to all those questions.
I think this will help me out greatly. I do voice over projects and spoken word recordings from time to time. Having the ability to pull up a track template that I have already profiled for a certain person is a lot better than having to pull up an entire arrangement/project and strip out what I don’t need. This could turn into one of the serious strong points of the app, well, for me at least 🙂
UncleAgeAre you saying that you could give us the ability to save the state of the track (not actual clip content though), plugs and all the plug settings associated with it as a template?
If this is what you’re saying then I say YES-YES!
UncleAge@kingtubby wrote:
The other thing is, are there any potential problems with buying a pc with Vista, then downgrading to XP?
Thanks,
Mart.
I’ll leave the XP vs Vista discussion for others. But there is an issue intalling XP on a machine that originally had Vista. You need to make sure the manufacturer(s) of all of the hardware components made XP drivers. This was a pretty big issue when Vista first rolled out. A Lot of users wanted to jump to XP until things were worked out and a lot of companies had not made XP drivers for those components.
If you can find all the XP drivers I can’t see why a fresh install of XP would not work.
UncleAgeHey Sam, how long did it take you to download the arrangement that Mike posted (450+megs)? It took me over 30 minutes.
Just curious…
UncleAgeOh, and not that it makes a difference now but I think in the future we should really consider exchanging mp3’s or ogg files. At least until we get to where we have finished tracks. These downloads are pretty big.
Come to think of it, that could be a nice feature in a daw, having the ability to compress a project for exchange purposes during the collab/writing stage. I’d give up hi-fi for a smaller (read: quicker) download while putting things together.
UncleAgeHey guys, even though I can’t play along at the moment I am still looking in on this. I look forward to hearing those files Sam. And I downed Mike’s arrangement over the weekend as well.
UncleAge+1
UncleAge@Pigini wrote:
Pigni, one huge advantage to moving up to the NT platforms is the NTFS file system which eliminates the 2GB filesize limit imposed by Fat32.
Yes , I know. But does a single audio file exceed 2GB with what you’re doing?
>2GB, no. But my comp is not a dedicated audio workstation. I use it to edit video as well. And I have many video files that exceed the 2GB limit. Don’t get me wrong Pigini, I still have a 98 box here so that I can play M.A.X. from time to time. I am one of those that did not need most of what the later OS’s offered. However, I am a big fan of multi-core processors and the ability to use much more ram.
Do keep in mind that Zynewave is small operation and the legacy support may not be an option in the future. Who knows, I may find myself in a similiar boat when devs drop “support” for XP. I wish you the best of luck in your pursuits Pigini.
UncleAgeNot to seem insensitive to the folk on an older OS but…
It’s been 10 years. I for one am very cautious moving from OS-to-OS but you have to as some point. It’s just the nature of the beast.
Frits, maybe if it wasn’t too much trouble you could compile on both for a few releases and give some of the faithful time to change (if they want to).
UncleAgeHaven’t picked it up yet but if I do get it to work I will post.