Jump to content

Nogan

Member
  • Posts

    169
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Nogan's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. For this I just took multiple screenshots and stitched them together (either in affinity photo or photoshop) Sorry for late reply lol
  2. I think that would be about 70% of the way there for me, which I would be more than content with. But the last 30% seems still sooo in reach too
  3. It seems much simpler and maybe dare I say better to place all sends in the same area where plugins are inserted. -------------------- More logistics into this proposition: Volume knob for sends stays as is, plugins gain a native wet / dry control at same location. Sends can optionally mirror the colors of the auxes they end at. The total number of inserts / sends becomes 30 rather than separate 15 and 12 maximum respectively. What do I think this solves? - Significantly simplifies complicated routing when trying to send audio between plugin inserts, which is beneficial when a minimal track count is desired but the send should receive different processing from the main track. Example: Electric Guitar with some compression is sent to a reverb for a clean tail, then followed by distortion so the user has a crunchy tone with sparkling smooth tail. This is done by three "inserts": the compressor initially, the desired send, the distortion. Or perhaps maybe you want to compress a drum bus, but you want the reverb to which you're sending it to retain its dynamic range so the decay really "pops!" - Net accessibility gain. Although arguably you may slightly lose some distinction / separation functionally from the sends, you gain some lost vertical space in the channel strip which may benefit users on small screens or with enlarged windows. The distinction may be repaired either by having the sends follow the color (or be assigned color) of the auxes which they represent, or just used at the end of the insert list if that is where the sends are desired. The current color scheming for sends could be replaced with a simple dot or bullet of that scheme just to the left side of the send to relay the function, or alternatively just be overridden in user preference. - Increased total number of inserts or sends (or both). I've seen it suggested many times before where users wished they could insert just a couple more plugins or sends to their chains for various reasons (myself included when doing sound design-oriented projects). Replacing separate maximums of 15 or 12 to a new uniform maximum of 30 reduces the need to remember and adjust a project to either maximum, and provides a convenient solution to increasing the limit for both. For all you bass music artists this is a special bonus for all those patches you want to save with a series of notches, compression, layers of distortion and modulation, you name it. - Lack of native wet / dry processing on a per-plugin basis. Especially for stock logic plugins, I can't think of how many times I wished there was just an easy knob to dial back the amount of a plugin I was using, or even utilize it to creative extent (Ever try combining leslie + dry signal? Or making your own wacky phase distortion plugins. Try it out some time...). The fact that placing a wet dry knob would make uniform the horizontal appearance of sends and inserts offers a massive feature at the cost of making another better. This is something else many people I have spoken to have wanted for ages, and this would be a convenient opportunity. Possible Counterarguments (to which I insist discussion for maturing the idea) Plug-In name readability may be inhibited by the placement of a new wet / dry knob. However, I must say its sort of already not quite very good as I have many plugs which already exceed the current space for names. Not only this, but hovering over the plugin badge displays the full length of that plugin's name and any potentially significant latency. Therefore, this should be mostly a non issue. (to be continued) Please understand that I know this is a feature request forum. I am not looking for a solution to any of these as problems that I have, I know and use workarounds for everything listed. And I am content using Logic as it is. However, I entertain these thoughts because I think that this could potentially have great consequences at the cost of what seems to me a not-so-intrusive design modification. I apologize if this comes off as rude, and I am very welcome to any discussion about things I may have overlooked or additional implications.
  4. An addition to this would be automation of other global tuning parameters, specifically those found in project settings. I didnt feel like this was different enough to warrant a new post, but today using hermode tuning I was wishing to be able to automate the depth of hermode tuning applied. Running a signal into many kinds of distortion, it can be useful to modulate the consonance of the tuning system to change the aggression / character / behavior of distortion used. Lets say I have a sawtooth running into a guitar amp simulator. Sometimes I may want an E major chord to be crunchier than others. Going from equal temperament to one of the JI modes of hermode tuning is a great way to do this, and as far as I can tell there is basically no way to accomplish this currently in logic even including workarounds. Likewise in user tunings and global pitch, it may be useful to have this for dynamically stretching the tuning of stock instruments and sounds, or adjusting the tuning sytem over time with precision. What I am not asking for: dynamically morphing between 2 different kinds of tuning systems like those in the dropdown menu, such as Werckmeister to arabic. While cool that would be much harder to implement well I imagine (Averaging values of each selected system to presumed pitch roles based on slider position -- you would likely have to add another dropdown for blending). I would love this feature too, but it is perhaps not the best place to start.
  5. This doesn't clear it up for me. So okay, I get now that you want a new category of track like there is audio or software instrument, etc. This would be called a "Sidechain Track". It would be controlled by MIDI and presumably affect some parameter by some kind of sidechaining, and you can somehow specify which it affects. This is where I start to get lost. Are you wanting this track to just control volume for something like sidechain ducking? Or is it more like an effects strip (aux / bus)? So then lets say that it IS basically an aux controlled by MIDI on the lane, which is fine. How do you propose to have an envelope control specific parameters? There is already a solution in logic which would be to use MIDI-FX plugins and have them learn the automation parameter, although iirc this must be used on the same track as inserted upon. So maybe a more convenient feature request would be to allow this learn parameter work for automatable parameters on any track. The only thing this doesn't tackle is being able to do all the sidechain routing on that same track. While I could see this as being convenient, I can also see it being very confusing, having to track down a moving parameter somewhere in a mix that has no visual correspondence on the actual track itself. Unless this routing feature would automatically place a send or something and show up on that track. Am I getting this right? Again it's still not super clear to me, and from what I can presently gather it seems like a lot of important little details to leave out on such a large idea to implement. If it were presented well I think I could get a feel for it a little better and it could totally be something that I'd be really interested in, but as of right now I am actually very happy with how easy it is to achieve sidechain-styled effects in Logic.
  6. Hmm, after trying I've managed to be able to get 1 layer nested down of a few summing stacks inside of a folder, but otherwise cannot nest folders inside each other. Perhaps I am doing something incorrect? Thank you for the suggestion, this is definitely closer, but still not quite ideal for me. It was my fault for the wording in the original post, but the reason stacks are less useful of a solution in this regard is that when you visually abstract with this method some of the intuition is lost as far as the timing and role of small specific events at a glance. Once you clamp down the view of each track in a stack to a single lane in the arrange view, things like individual region and track colors are not preserved and the composite "region" does not represent the start and stop of the individual regions within, but rather all of them. The reason why nesting tracks is closer to ideal (but still not) than using stacks in folders all at the same level (Which is currently all I can seem to achieve, let me know if I am foolish) is that the headspace during writing is more focused on the processing that happens in each "stem" or "group". With folders its sort of just volume control, but at least with something like a summing stack I can recover some of the lost visual information with association by "effect" or plugin processing. And again, while nesting track stacks within each other would be awesome, especially as it is a feature within many other DAWs on the market, in this case Zooming out more is closer to ideal.
  7. Hi! I assume (maybe I shouldn't) that the current maximum zoomed out arrangement view in logic is to preserve the text's visibility on each region, so that there is legibility still even when quite small. However, I most often do not find myself needing to see this text, and would prefer to be able to zoom out further as even my 4k display does not show all tracks at once. It is helpful often in mixing and arranging to be able to take a step back and look at the picture as a whole and aside from grouping there is no easy way to zoom all the way out to see every component of a project. And track stacks do not solve this issue, since as of writing you may only have 1 layer of stacks at the most, meaning you cannot have a folder or summing stack with folder or summing stacks nested inside. One could not alleviate this with sending either, since they do not visually indicate what is happening in the region-based display realm, which makes summing stacks so useful as you can view each intended layer of processing as an aggregate of objects. Producing in multiple project files does not help either, as there is an obscene loading time during switching between windows just to check or reference one small part, and then there is also extra effort necessary for export / bouncing the projects and merging them together. Although produced somewhat satirically, one should be able to compress all these tracks to a single window like in this image below, but at a normal aspect ratio. This is not the largest project I would have to compile a composite screenshot for, and I'm sure other people like Jacob Collier would appreciate it.
  8. It's not really clear to me what you're asking for. Do you want a sidechain dialog box on every plugin window (including ones that don't support it)? Or a built-in plugin utility for sidechain ducking (which logic has plenty of, such as Phat-FX or Compressor etc etc)? Or to automatically detect sidechain routing on a bounce and auto-select tracks to include (which is not desirable behavior for everyone to have as default)? I don't mean to be rude but it's very hard to tell what you're asking for...
  9. another +1 on this, sending feedback request to apple.
  10. +1 solid idea, thanks for the pictures
  11. I quite like that idea, its something I would really appreciate. +1
  12. I feel like this is already quite flat, a lot more than this Especially cause the Massive X screenshot you sent still has shadow / gradients (Like in pitch bend / modwheel knob up top), I would give that colorizer a try -- I think it will get you 90% of the way there. That said more light / dark mode schemes in logic to play with are always welcome by me
  13. It would be nice to adjust the length of a region fade as a percentage of that regions total length, as opposed to an explicit set value. This would be nice for doing things such as sampling instruments, whose ascending pitch have logarithmic changes in duration. I could select all of my sliced audio regions and say, fade out to silence for 60% of the duration of the sample, fade in at an explicit duration of 15. This would help eliminate DC offset at the beginning of the sample, while fairly consistently adjusting to an appropriate fade out to silence length across all samples (selected regions).
  14. I know I know, there are alternatives to getting a similar sound... etc etc What I want is to be able to musically control project time and pitch very precisely without the large time commitment or lack of precision that plugins and flex and other things have in trade offs. Why is this musically a useful thing? Tape stop and start sounds on all tracks, not just audio, or even the inverse like a slow down into tempo and pitch kind of thing. Or maybe I want the verse of a song to slowly go from normal to up 50 cents. Or maybe stylistic sample chopping sounds on a whole composed section. I can think of quite a few more things, and others have chimed in before about this idea, although I cannot locate an official post in here. Prove to me that I am silly
  15. I couldn't already find this topic, but that doesn't mean it doesn't already exist so sorry if it does. But to my knowledge if I highlight multiple MIDI regions I can only export them as one multitrack MIDI file. This is a nice concept for de-cluttering, but I wish to export each region as an individual MIDI file to some directory selected, like one may do with audio. Sort of like MIDI stems. So why would I want them individual and not bundled together? Simply because if I am batch exporting for universal groove templates it makes it easier for the user to select just one MIDI file and put it into their DAW, rather than important all of my templates at once and subtract the unwanted ones. If I can select multiple MIDI regions and have each region export as its own MIDI file this would save me a lot of time over exporting one-by-one.
×
×
  • Create New...