Propellerhead Forum

Propellerhead Forum (https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/index.php)
-   Feature Suggestion Forum (https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   To All you RE developers!! this: (https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/showthread.php?t=176352)

standbyghost 2013-02-17 20:32

To All you RE developers!! this:
 
I understand that often it is the case that there are certain features to be added to an RE, or perhaps a bug or two or three to fix... Maybe some latency issue... But, I would also like to see upgrades in the actual coding of the devices from time to time! I'm not talking about like an Antidote 'Part Two' (a separate new RE)... I mean, maybe you could upgrade the actual DSP code of the instruments/device. A couple devices that I've been thinking of in this area (though I suppose we could always hope that ALL developers would heed this call): The ABL2 (could be grittier), The D.CAM EnvShaper (not sure how to say this, but it sounds like some ratios need tweaking), The iZotope Maximizer (could use more gradations for the peak limiting slider... Etc.

I know this might be asking you guys to dig back into things (code) that you could otherwise consider as 'locked', and YES, these devices can still be successfully implemented without further ado, but we DO live in the digital world of updates and so... MAYBE we could see some more in-depth processing code?

Just a thought! Hope you read this!

DjVinnie91 2013-02-17 20:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by standbyghost (Post 1239704)
I understand that often it is the case that there are certain features to be added to an RE, or perhaps a bug or two or three to fix... Maybe some latency issue... But, I would also like to see upgrades in the actual coding of the devices from time to time! I'm not talking about like an Antidote 'Part Two' (a separate new RE)... I mean, maybe you could upgrade the actual DSP code of the instruments/device. A couple devices that I've been thinking of in this area (though I suppose we could always hope that ALL developers would heed this call): The ABL2 (could be grittier), The D.CAM EnvShaper (not sure how to say this, but it sounds like some ratios need tweaking), The iZotope Maximizer (could use more gradations for the peak limiting slider... Etc.

I know this might be asking you guys to dig back into things (code) that you could otherwise consider as 'locked', and YES, these devices can still be successfully implemented without further ado, but we DO live in the digital world of updates and so... MAYBE we could see some more in-depth processing code?

Just a thought! Hope you read this!

That's where Propellerhead stopped thinking when they came up with the Try-Buy system. Making major updates is unfair for people who just "tried" an older version and can't try the newer anymore, but have to just buy it.

colcifer 2013-02-17 23:09

Compatibility?

normen 2013-02-17 23:17

Compatibility, yeah and... sound??!!

Some "classic" devices then-flaws are now-standards.. As well as some of their "limitations". So many people already cheered about the simplicity of the LA-2As two knobs, also professionals. Maybe somebody would be utterly sad because he used some zipper noise or something else that would be considered a "flaw" as a base for his sound :)

selig 2013-02-17 23:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by normen (Post 1239799)
Compatibility, yeah and... sound??!!

Some "classic" devices then-flaws are now-standards.. As well as some of their "limitations". So many people already cheered about the simplicity of the LA-2As two knobs, also professionals. Maybe somebody would be utterly sad because he used some zipper noise or something else that would be considered a "flaw" as a base for his sound :)

I was just listening to an interview with a former Lexicon engineer (Michael Carnes) who said he recently built a test device with all of the "flaws" of the past hardware solutions and it was 4-5 times more CPU intensive! Going 'retro' isn't always the simplest solution. ;-)

Podcast here:
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/...st/id501987225

JohannEmmanuel 2013-02-18 00:09

There is a good interview with Rein Narma and a joke made regarding people "complaining" about the authenticity of such "retro" aspects of the device he would probably change using current modern technology. retro doesnt always mean better, smart people always appreciate the new I suppose.

If the change is for the sound to be better and experienced peoples are saying so it must be worth changing.

Seeing as you mentioned izotope. Some huge latency with there vst plugins, I dont mind using them in a wave editor but tracking they require a powerfull computer.

normen 2013-02-18 00:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohannEmmanuel (Post 1239827)
There is a good interview with Rein Narma and a joke made regarding people "complaining" about the authenticity of such "retro" aspects of the device he would probably change using current modern technology. retro doesnt always mean better, smart people always appreciate the new I suppose.

If the change is for the sound to be better and experienced peoples are saying so it must be worth changing.

Seeing as you mentioned izotope. Some huge latency with there vst plugins, I dont mind using them in a wave editor but tracking they require a powerfull computer.

Yeah, objectively any PC soundcard is better than all of the devices of an 80s studio. Its more about what you expect to get from these devices and how they deliver. There isn't *so* much magic about EQs per se but theres a lot to how you arrange the knobs, ranges and bell shapes :) I totally agree that DSP power is wasted to simulate the specific attenuation of some input cable of some old device though..

Also, I already said that a few times, its all about QC for audio devices and back then it was *expensive* to get out a device so you made sure it was right. Nowadays anyone can just put out some plugin and put some price tag on it. Most people sadly will then hear whatever the description says and the UI displays. There is however some emulations that just deliver: You get the same experience as with the hardware in terms of simple to achieve results that sound like you expect them from the device. And they went through great QC so you don't get an update with "sound quality improvements" a year later.. "So what gives? It sounded bad all the time I used it?" ;)

Edit: Btw, great podcast @selig, thanks!

JohannEmmanuel 2013-02-18 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by normen (Post 1239831)

Also, I already said that a few times, its all about QC for audio devices and back then it was *expensive* to get out a device so you made sure it was right. Nowadays anyone can just put out some plugin and put some price tag on it. Most people sadly will then hear whatever the description says and the UI displays. There is however some emulations that just deliver: You get the same experience as with the hardware in terms of simple to achieve results that sound like you expect them from the device. And they wen through great QC so you don't get an update with "sound quality improvements" a year later.. "So what? It sounded bad all the time I used it?" ;)


Yes!!!

Problem we have is , too much of this

"just a plugin"

When the really good stuff does come along ultimately its engineers calling the shots anyway not the silly people, dare I say "deaf" (not trying to offend deaf people). lol


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:21.