S6 v.2.3 feature wishlist

[smurfyou]

Nice discussion. Proper Flip and custom plugin layouts were a sore omission from day 1. It's a little hard to believe that it hasn't happened. I want to keep the positive tone going so I'll just say from a user perspective I and probably others don't understand why it worked on the old surfaces but not the new. And I am more in-tune than that, I know it's a different protocol. But I bet most of us thought it would be worked out in the first six months.

The impact on our mixing would be huge. More so than names on the monitor sources or editing clip effects for example.

[rcutz]

It seems that I Unleash a beast.
Well from my point of view all ideas should be welcomed.

I disagree with Branko about the unecessary "similarity" behave between plug-ins of same kind. I believe that having a common ground of how EQ and DYN spread over a channel strip (not expand) is something that make the console more universal, for the pros and to newbies. If I`m a developer I would like my console or plug-in to be easy, intuitive and reliable, so make some parameters be in the same place always is a nice think, like always know here the Lowpass filter is, no matter it is Avid Channel Stripl EQ7, DMG Equallity, Waves renascence, etc... I believe it would be something every developer should comply, and it is not a bad thing.

it did not exclude the all benefits of Custom Plug-in maps, proper flip mode, and so on. And I humble agree that it is past overdue - in my mixer opnion, wich may be different of my developer opnion, if am I one.

On my side, disagreeing with Postman, I do believe that a plug-in developer should have something to do with that. I guess it would make S6 a better mixer console if all plug-ins behave the same (plus all user customization allowed), but I do understand that Avid did not have the man power (and or interisting) to make checks in all plug-in that is release.

In my previous post, I was showing a developer complete lack of understanding of S6 and also his lack of curiosity, I need to sent him Jeff start fast videos so he could understand. Or should something being missin in the "API User Guide" ?

Like smurfyou said, let`s keep it positive, bring up ideas and let`s cheer to have all making their way to console.

I`m pretty happy with 3.5. Much happier than with PT HD12.6 ;-)

[Branko]

Originally Posted by rcutz

It seems that I Unleash a beast.
Well from my point of view all ideas should be welcomed.

I disagree with Branko about the unecessary "similarity" behave between plug-ins of same kind. I believe that having a common ground of how EQ and DYN spread over a channel strip (not expand) is something that make the console more universal, for the pros and to newbies. If I`m a developer I would like my console or plug-in to be easy, intuitive and reliable, so make some parameters be in the same place always is a nice think, like always know here the Lowpass filter is, no matter it is Avid Channel Stripl EQ7, DMG Equallity, Waves renascence, etc... I believe it would be something every developer should comply, and it is not a bad thing.

My opinion is driven by the way I work. I rarely (read: never) use different manufacturers' EQ or Dynamics plug ins in my projects, but if I, for some reason, decide to use different EQs for FX and DIALOG, I would like to see the difference between these when I look at the desk.
There are several EQ plug-ins that are highly customisable. They have different sets of features which require different controls. One can choose different filter types, different number of bands and custom tailor the plug-in to his/her needs.
A high-end control surface, which S6 surely is, should be able to reflect these particularities, imo. Imposing any limitation on this possibility is wrong.

[rcutz]

Originally Posted by Branko

I was trying to understand what is the point of the feature (it looks like a bug to me!) described above. EQ and DYN plugins differ in so many ways, there's no point in trying to make them look uniform.
Most of us have some preferred plugins and use them in every project, so there will rarely be a situation where we could benefit from this uniformity. It could be even described as counterproductive, because you'll need an additional effort to distinguish which EQ you're controlling with your knob module at any given moment, if you use several brands of plugins for the same task. So, unlock the user layout mapping, you'll have one less thing to deal with, and we'll get a powerful, creative tool that will largely improve our workflows.

I'm pretty sure that I not sugest limitations in any sense or way. But a high end
Console should offer a common ground on various plug-ins and it would not compromise the possibility of customizations.

I usually request things based in my way of work, but I guess that understanding it from the developer perspective would help, since tehy probably will in invest more time on features that appel to more users.

Maybe if I'm a mixer with several Oscars or grammys....

[Stereo Missile]

Originally Posted by rcutz

It seems that I Unleash a beast.
Well from my point of view all ideas should be welcomed.

I disagree with Branko about the unecessary "similarity" behave between plug-ins of same kind. I believe that having a common ground of how EQ and DYN spread over a channel strip (not expand) is something that make the console more universal, for the pros and to newbies. If I`m a developer I would like my console or plug-in to be easy, intuitive and reliable, so make some parameters be in the same place always is a nice think, like always know here the Lowpass filter is, no matter it is Avid Channel Stripl EQ7, DMG Equallity, Waves renascence, etc... I believe it would be something every developer should comply, and it is not a bad thing.

it did not exclude the all benefits of Custom Plug-in maps, proper flip mode, and so on. And I humble agree that it is past overdue - in my mixer opnion, wich may be different of my developer opnion, if am I one.

On my side, disagreeing with Postman, I do believe that a plug-in developer should have something to do with that. I guess it would make S6 a better mixer console if all plug-ins behave the same (plus all user customization allowed), but I do understand that Avid did not have the man power (and or interisting) to make checks in all plug-in that is release.

In my previous post, I was showing a developer complete lack of understanding of S6 and also his lack of curiosity, I need to sent him Jeff start fast videos so he could understand. Or should something being missin in the "API User Guide" ?

Like smurfyou said, let`s keep it positive, bring up ideas and let`s cheer to have all making their way to console.

I`m pretty happy with 3.5. Much happier than with PT HD12.6 ;-)

I agree about having EQ and Dynamics laid out in a consistent way, it makes it much easier to work quickly with different EQ's or compressors. I actually got Dave from DMG to lay out Equality for the S6, it was just a matter of emailing him and requesting it. It seems that many plugin devs don't really know about S6 parameter layouts, but it doesn't seem to be terribly difficult to implement. So perhaps we should be contacting the plugin devs directly and requesting that they do it.........

[skilletaudio]

Originally Posted by EddieJones

We do have guidelines in the API on how things should map but it would be very hard for us to enforce it.

How do we go about mapping our own to the knob module when we press EQ on the Process module and have them expand properly if a manufacture hasn't mapped their plug-in the way we would like them to?

Originally Posted by Stereo Missile

It seems that many plugin devs don't really know about S6 parameter layouts, but it doesn't seem to be terribly difficult to implement. So perhaps we should be contacting the plugin devs directly and requesting that they do it.........

This is still, of course, a good idea but some plug-ins don't map to what I think should be the standard mapping when they do map it so how do we customize it when we use an EQ or Dyn that we want to be mapped another way?

Originally Posted by Branko

Creating customized layouts is what I'm actually looking for. I would like to choose a set of parameters and build my own layout for any plug-in out there, be it 3rd party or Avid. And I'd like to be able to customize the knob modules so that my channel strips display the controls I use most. For example (bottom to top): HP frequency, Lo-mid Freq, Lo mid Gain, Hf Gain.
If I need more parameters to work with, I can hit the "exp" button.
And I'm missing hitting the "select" button next to any send and flipping it instantly to fader, just like it was possible on Icons... Flipping the whole console to faders is nice, but not always so useful...
Also, when will you make the knob on Master Module assignable? So we can chose a send, for example, and map it there? And then hit the sel button and flip it? So we can work with a channel and send fader at the same time?
You really have a lot of work to do!

I agree, I'm hoping at this point it is there and I am just missing how to do this.