PDA

View Full Version : Note



Yura
05-28-2004, 04:38 AM
Best day to all, friends!
we can all spend much time to pay praisings and anthems to SAW, but sometimes we forget to see the things that make SAW realy far from a market of soundcreation. these things may be not obvious, but they are very
weighty not review on theirs appearing triviality.
Please imagine the high-professional but average sound studio somewhere in the Europe where are a very lot of that kind of studios at this time. I must elaborate. is the SAW conceived to be the instrument to follow its master's
tricks only? or to have characteristic of all way flexible software that signifies
TO WORK IN EVERY STUDIO SETUP, so, I mean SAW would be not only the Master of studio setup but the slave too if conditions (including people with theirs ancient habits and "wisdoms of gray"). Bob, there is an example you can be turned away, but at once miss 1/4 clients of continent (yes, hell with them I say):):
if you will be informed by sound producer or stage manager you must do mastering process only in live mode with essential that he will move all faders
with his fingers only - what to do? it has a place yet! - you start to prepare
the SAW' control mix setup. yes, there are many of midi contr. devices. BUT!
SAW arranged so way there are only TWO (or THREE) that work with SS' EQs, not only with faders and mutes and when everything is ready to go.
I have to own the Macie Control to make the project to move from the dead point. of course, in the others projects where I can dictate my conditions - everything is fine. but does it signify that SAW is flexible smart chap?
The smartest face - the beautiest one.
I get Makie, connect it with SAW and famous sound manager says: I dont like
those faders of Makie... they are not suitable enouth.
Dont laugh, folks! its a reality of life. i exaggerate: I can own my splendid production studio, on my own fantastic genius projects using gears that is perfectly continuation of my body parts, and achive genius results...
but if you start to work with PEOPLE - your stuff can work sometimes fine but sometimes even as scaring away threads betwen all actors.
by the way, that bored here Nuendo has a flexiblty to connect with every
of MIDI control hardware due to its princip of assignin "everything-to-everything", and all it works perfectly. is there envy excessive??
in the real situation described above I must do the one of two: 1)say good-by to man who is owner of his project, so miss the work. or 2) set up SAW to be multitrak player-recorder like old studio tape and let the man to bring his faforite analog mixer for using of live mastering via it. hello again, old times!!! as i did realy!!! as i did!!! But I ask after: what is at all all MIDI-control implements in SAW for? if i must do foolish setup instead? yes I think it's foolish when now is 2004.
another question. very interesting, how many users can vote for SAW to be
monster of sound industry?

Bob L
05-28-2004, 10:19 AM
Yura,

I would never in a million years try to be everything to everybody... I'd say that's a foolish goal.

The programs you mention... perhaps they work every midi controller in the world.. but to what outcome... do they work them good... what does the program sacrifice to acheive those goals... how does the program's final output sound... digital?? or smooth silky analog??

And are midi controllers the way to go for the future?

Do I want to allow myself to be dragged into the mud by every person's deisres of what they feel is important or what everyone else's software is doing?

I have to design for me first... I am an audio engineer... I design things the way I would like them to be... and then I continually try to eveolve those original designs as I learn more, experiment more, and as the hardware and software industries advance.

For me, I gave in to give a handful of useful midi controllers a chance to work the SAWStudio environment... they work extremely well... you say you don't like the Mackie faders... well the next guy says he loves them... and I say... I have no need for a physical fader ever again in the world opened up for me by SAWStudio.

We all have our opinions and desires... I have decided to express MY opinions and desires in the code I create... not everyone elses.

SAWStudio is not for everybody... at least not now... all at once... it is for those that resonate with my concepts... and as time goes on, many others may start to see what it's all about and decide to come on over...

I am excited about the buzz out there in the industry now... things are starting to heat up... did I think it would take this long... NOOOOO... but it is what it is...

SAWStudio is unique... I think most of us would agree on that... even those that dislike my work... oh well...

More and more people are starting to realize that UNIQUE is perhaps a good thing... a rare thing in todays disposable, standardized society.

Try using NO FADERS for a while and perhaps you won't ever care again about any control surface and the maintenance involved to keep it running. :D

Bob L

AudioAstronomer
05-28-2004, 10:42 AM
Will the new tascam controllers not work with SAW? That new 24 fader one would be very handy with saw I think. Simply giving hands on fader and pan, nothing more. Letting saw's glory be saw's glory with a "second mouse" as it were.

matt
05-28-2004, 01:38 PM
I am of the opinion that aside from the inevitable quirks that occur when any program has to deal with windows, SAW is perfect as it is. Companies like Steinberg, Cakewalk, Emagic... all cater to user's whims, but at the cost of sound quality and performance. I prefer a smart standard that is consistent in operation and predictable in it's advancements. Above all is sound quality. SAW could be a low resolution graphics application and I would still be using it. I thought about getting a controller at one point but realized that would be going backwards. I love not carting around a console. Physical faders get dirty and malfunction. A mouse costs about $20, a decent controller is about $1000. Works for me! ;)

Yura
05-28-2004, 02:33 PM
Yura,
I would never in a million years try to be everything to everybody... I'd say that's a foolish goal.
Bob L

nobody tryed to be everything to everybody. in analogy of mathematics
there is the "unirary matrix" that allows user to assign any learning controller to any of virtual fader or knob. Only the matrix. in analogy with your implemented commands of Control tracks. but just more unitary. Are the codes of SAW' Control track any affect to output quality of digital sound of SAW?

ghowardjr
05-28-2004, 03:48 PM
Not sure about the sound quality, but I would guess arbitrary MIDI control assignments for the (10,000+) controls in SawStudio WOULD alter performance overall. If such a functionality was implemented, I would want the ability to completely bypass such overhead from the Multi-track processing in favor of increased processing power for plug-ins, etc.

I do like how some programs allow the MIDI controller mapping. Even if it weren't embedded within SS, a simple mapping utility where one could create their own controller templates could be nice.

I question whether asking for such functionality would be unduly burdening Bob because I believe the primary provider of such templates could then be the user community and not BOB once the mapping program was built. This could be a concept similar to Cakewalk Studioware where users have contributed hundreds of useful midi controller templates that can be shared with the community at large.

Interesting discussion, regardless,
Gary

Yura
05-28-2004, 04:11 PM
Yura,
More and more people are starting to realize that UNIQUE is perhaps a good thing... a rare thing in todays disposable, standardized society.
Bob L

If we mean by word "UNIQUE" the work of art - this is certainly good thing.
It is quite clear your words say you aren't to adapt to standardized society.
I hate faders too, if nobody there realy cant see yet. I hate music from radio and most of production of world. cause most is cheap and secondary...

but realy you are. to good luck of all who thank you for your enormous brainchild - you are. you use DX & VST, wav. MIDI, and Windows tm. , IBM, and you are not to run (i dont know how it calls on english) special systems
like Sonic Solutions or something. you didnt even iplenent any of crazy unicue modules like Evoluator if you remember one was in Gold Wave. Its the hell far of my deal but in this intimate friendly circle i say - if I track to standarts - the comprehensible way to track them to the earth's rift.
if there were propositions like implement CD burning into SAW, i can ask why for? realy. adding CD burning to SAW is unvalence feature to the SAW's goals. but this thing is clear. why not clear that the tool that is preciest are to do every task of its global field. I had noted about one of the gap of tracking SAW' of those standarts. with the purity of heart wishing to other people to belive me that thank to gap like this you refuse of 1/4 of europians clients. imagine you belive but you simply dont want them. so hell with it. you do not do SS for yourself only. and not for elected. ....more and more people.....

Yura
05-28-2004, 04:26 PM
Not sure about the sound quality, but I would guess arbitrary MIDI control assignments for the (10,000+) controls in SawStudio WOULD alter performance overall.
Gary

upps, yes!thank you Howard for upps!
but such a matrix is not to pursue to make controled all!!!!!!
only a little necessary you need! not about global. only about princip.

Bob L
05-28-2004, 11:20 PM
When complex midi templates are active, like the Mackie Control, it definitely adds cpu overhead and all kinds of extra potential for problems with performance... sound quality is untouched.

There is only limited time to apply to the huge task of making SAWStudio all that it can be... for the sake of sanity, I must make selective decisions about where I wish to apply that precious time in that never ending task... that is not attitude, simply the way it is here on planet earth in this current reality I find myself at this time. :)

Bob L

Yura
05-29-2004, 03:19 AM
Thank you Bob for you enormous patience and for You are here.