PT 2018.10 is here

[amagras]

Originally Posted by innesireinar

Agree. But don't understand why we need to pay the annual plan for having only bug fixing

Vanilla didn't get even that!

[29CountsNY]

First time I’ve ever had to revert to a clone.
Beach balls every mouse click. Not crashing, just beach balls, wait...click again...beach ball....wait....nope!
Back to 2018.7.

[Sardi]

People are happy paying for bug fixes?

Strange times we live in. Strange indeed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Artis]

Stable and solid software is what earns my money. Not the new and rushed bells and whistles with bugs that break my workflows. I am waiting for new features, but they must be done properly, whatever time it takes.
So, yes, i am ok paying for bug fixes. Running PT 24/7 without glitch pays my rent. :)
Cheers!

[~ufo~]

Now, it's obvious that most people prefer to pay only for new features and not for fixes of features or functionality that they already payed for.

That said, in a situation where the platform is unstable and we're presented with two options:

1. Adding more (potentially bug introducing) features to an unstable platform.
2. Halting new functionality until the previous bugs have been sorted.

It should be pretty obvious that most of us would choose #2, not as a preferred situation, but as the lesser of two evils. Non of this is optimal.
We really shouldn't have been asked to pay subscription for anything but a solid product.

I have been livid at Avid for suggesting I pay for the last few years, since my expensive HD Native system had become damn near unusable.
Now that functionality has somewhat been restored, I will resist less to renewing my subscription.

Personally I really don't need much more from PT than it already does, apart from bug fixes.

Sure, folder tracks would be handy, but the scroll to tracks feature already helps with finding tracks, although I guess it would be nice to be able to hide hidden tracks from view in the track list, or at least make only the active ones appear at the top, but I doubt they'll do that.

Other than that the coolest evolutionary new feature I could think of, is some sort of auto freeze mode, that lets you put certain or all active plugins in a state where they are in a hybrid state between live and frozen. When you're tweaking them they are live and after an idle time (e.g. 5s) they automatically start using idle CPU cycles to freeze. Preferably this would occur not from start to finish, but from the playhead position outwards, but going backwards in time will likely not work. So I guess from slightly before the playback head onward and when that's done it can start from the top to complete the rendered file.
Depending on the load and capability of the processor, this could be in real time (even saving live streams during playback), to sub or super realtime rates.

The advantage of such a system would be that it would free up CPU resources and divide processing much more evenly over time, avoiding spikes as much as possible and allowing for a more stable feeling system, since there's few(er) live processes going on at any given time.
It will create more CPU headroom, for instance allowing you to use a heavy reverb during tracking on playback tracks, because it'll automatically get rendered once you're done tweaking it and the input doesn't change, or even on live input tracks since most of the other processors have been rendered already or are being rendered.

Some one once told me that if you do something (digitally) more than twice, it's worth automating.
Well, a boatload of our processing is happening identically way more than twice in our sessions, which needlessly taxes our capable processors. Especially during low buffer recording/production sessions this can cause issues with some plugins.

An autofreeze function like this, in my opinion would be a very welcome evolution to native DAWs and would further fade the difference between DSP and Native into the past.

I've already posted this idea on Avid link and I'll edit this post with a link to a feature request thread here, if I can find one.

[zion]

Originally Posted by Artis

Stable and solid software is what earns my money. Not the new and rushed bells and whistles with bugs that break my workflows. I am waiting for new features, but they must be done properly, whatever time it takes.
So, yes, i am ok paying for bug fixes. Running PT 24/7 without glitch pays my rent. :)
Cheers!

Why can’t we expect them to do both? After all we are the customer. We need to hold Avid to a higher standard.

[innesireinar]

They should introduce a grace period (suspend the expiring date of the plan) until they will release a stable and bugs free version. Only after this they could ask money again. My plan expires in november and I will not renew it. I'm having lots of problems since upgrading to this unlucky 12 and 2018 family.

[TNM]

Originally Posted by ~ufo~

Now, it's obvious that most people prefer to pay only for new features and not for fixes of features or functionality that they already payed for.

That said, in a situation where the platform is unstable and we're presented with two options:

1. Adding more (potentially bug introducing) features to an unstable platform.
2. Halting new functionality until the previous bugs have been sorted.

It should be pretty obvious that most of us would choose #2, not as a preferred situation, but as the lesser of two evils. Non of this is optimal.
We really shouldn't have been asked to pay subscription for anything but a solid product.

I have been livid at Avid for suggesting I pay for the last few years, since my expensive HD Native system had become damn near unusable.
Now that functionality has somewhat been restored, I will resist less to renewing my subscription.

Personally I really don't need much more from PT than it already does, apart from bug fixes.

Sure, folder tracks would be handy, but the scroll to tracks feature already helps with finding tracks, although I guess it would be nice to be able to hide hidden tracks from view in the track list, or at least make only the active ones appear at the top, but I doubt they'll do that.

Other than that the coolest evolutionary new feature I could think of, is some sort of auto freeze mode, that lets you put certain or all active plugins in a state where they are in a hybrid state between live and frozen. When you're tweaking them they are live and after an idle time (e.g. 5s) they automatically start using idle CPU cycles to freeze. Preferably this would occur not from start to finish, but from the playhead position outwards, but going backwards in time will likely not work. So I guess from slightly before the playback head onward and when that's done it can start from the top to complete the rendered file.
Depending on the load and capability of the processor, this could be in real time (even saving live streams during playback), to sub or super realtime rates.

The advantage of such a system would be that it would free up CPU resources and divide processing much more evenly over time, avoiding spikes as much as possible and allowing for a more stable feeling system, since there's few(er) live processes going on at any given time.
It will create more CPU headroom, for instance allowing you to use a heavy reverb during tracking on playback tracks, because it'll automatically get rendered once you're done tweaking it and the input doesn't change, or even on live input tracks since most of the other processors have been rendered already or are being rendered.

Some one once told me that if you do something (digitally) more than twice, it's worth automating.
Well, a boatload of our processing is happening identically way more than twice in our sessions, which needlessly taxes our capable processors. Especially during low buffer recording/production sessions this can cause issues with some plugins.

An autofreeze function like this, in my opinion would be a very welcome evolution to native DAWs and would further fade the difference between DSP and Native into the past.

I've already posted this idea on Avid link and I'll edit this post with a link to a feature request thread here, if I can find one.

Thing is with folder tracks, they were already promised, literally, for this year.. I just can't see it happening, unless there is some rudimentary attempt of it on 31/12/2018. LOL.

Autofreeze is a great idea. You are talking about pre render in motu, where things are being frozen automatically in background to reduce cpu usage on the fly.. When you grab a clip to copy or move it or edit it, it temporarily reverts back to the live version then adjusts the hidden freeze file once editing completed..

However.. I am going to say I don't care about this, because it's a HUGE undertaking, that's a lot of code we are talking about, and Pro Tools needs a hell of a lot of much more important bug fixes.. and yes, i'd take folder tracks as a feature over that, as well as elastic pitch (or ara2).

If Avid fix the low buffer performance problems, the current freeze is good enough to have a balanced count of frozen and live tracks, so that the cpu load won't be an issue.

See, even with this autofreeze idea, there is still that problem of the performance WHILST recording the parts to begin with. THAT is what avid have to fix. Pronto.

In any case, if for some reason they wanted to do this, I would actually vote for a Studio one implementation, because all the freeze functionality that underpins this function is already in pro tools, and it wouldn't be that complicated to add, and a very good compromise to what you are suggesting.

Are you familiar with track transform in S1?

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by zion

Why can’t we expect them to do both?

We can and we should! But try to understand 64bit PT is still very young

[~ufo~]

it's not unrealistic to assume there will be a 2018.11 or 2018.12, certainly since .10 was pretty much just a minor bug fix update.

Folder tracks could still arrive this year.

Thanks for the heads up on pre render (pre-gen) in DP. I wasn't aware it already existed!
And there some folks on different forums ripping my idea to shreds as stupid, not even possible etc. Ahhh... the interwebs. :)

I'm not familiar with the way track transform works in S1, I haven't used it yet. I have yet to really produce a track in S1 and since I came across the small print that says the Quantum owners upgrade price to S1 pro doesn't count for Q2 owners, I feel ill inclined to give them any more of my money, just at the moment.

we're in full agreement on your other points by the way.