Zynewave's Forum Page

Multiple mappings was a solution, because current “copy track” workaround eats track region space also. I vote for midi busses. What do you think?

I think MIDI over busses is the best solution for this.

Agreed. An option to hide those tracks would be very useful.

Here are some suggestions that may help…

I don’t think it has to be that customizable. I would add a ‘view’ menu button to the track inspector (similar to the view button in the mixer), with a ‘hide collapsed tracks’ option. When enabled, all tracks within collapsed group tracks would be hidden. Not just parameter tracks. The collapsing/unfolding of tracks would then behave just like e.g. browsing objects in the list boxes. You still have the ‘+’ button on the group track to indicate that there are tracks within that are hidden.

maybe it’s time to try reversing the order of the heirarchy… instruments at the top, followed by FX, and eventually all tracks trickle down to the master out

I don’t think this is practical. Collapsing group tracks would fold upwards, meaning the track you clicked to collapse moves upwards (away from your mouse pointer). Parameter tracks would be positioned above instrument tracks. etc.

tracks would no longer appear to be grouped around other tracks. especially if the effect tracks were “hidden” by default (only lines displaying) i think the visual flow of audio could get lost.

You would only be able to hide group tracks that have a single subtrack, i.e. the first tracks in the new chained groups in the mixer, and only if you select a similar ‘compact chained…’ view option for the tracks region. Hiding tracks that have more than one subtrack would otherwise disturb the track hierarchy lines, as you figured out. But I’m still thinking about it.

I also intend to add a view option for hiding tracks in a collapsed group track. That is the tracks that currently are drawn as very thin bars. When you have a lot of automation tracks, even collapsing the group still occupies a lot of space.

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?

Does the Edit and the other buttons for the plugins will be still visible ?

I’m thinking about extending the top area above the panels in the track inspector (where the track name is written). It could show a line for each track in the current hierarchy position, with master at the top, and the lowest focus track at the bottom. You could then click the lines for the effect plugin tracks in the chain, to set focus to this track and edit the properties. That way only the lowest audio/instrument track in the chain would need to be shown as a track lane.

I’ll appreciate any feedback you have on this new method of displaying wrapped tracks.

I’ve been thinking about various methods to reduce the number of hierarchic levels that you get when wrapping audio/instrument tracks in multiple effect plugin tracks. 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.

If users are happy with this feature, I’m planning to implement it in the tracks region as well. This would open up for an option to hide the track lanes for effect plugin tracks. As these tracks are not meant to have any events on them, they are just wasting space in the track timeline.

If by “multieffect” you mean an equalizer or others basic processes, that will use far less CPU and memory than an external one, of course you have my vote

EQ would be one of the first effects, along with dither and channel management (stereo/mono switch on master track).

I’m considering adding a new FX panel to the track inspector. At the top of this panel you would have a grid where you can assign/route effect modules in serial or parallel. Editors for the effect modules in the grid would then be shown in a list below the grid. On the mixer I would add a new FX row. This row would have a button to toggle a popup panel with the effect modules, similar to the FX list in the inspector.

This morning I received news that good old Steinberg have updated the VST spec to version 2.4, with support for 64 bit processing. This should go well with Podiums 64 bit mixing engine. That’s another plus for implementing the effects in a plugin, rather than integrating them in Podium.

But for this kind of effect, perhaps that it will be logical to NOT be an option and increase slightly the price of Podium ?

My intent with an add-on license, was to allow users not wanting the effects to still have Podium at the 90€ price. I may decide that it will be too much trouble to administrate different licenses, considering the low price, so I may end up with increasing the price of Podium instead.