des99

See: "macOS Ventura is compatible with these computers" https://support.apple.com/en-gb/102861

So I'd suggest to do a little bit of level juggling - first, put the audio interface gain where you are getting the optimal signal, without clipping. Peaking at under -12dBFS is fine, averaging down in the -20dBFS is OK too. Now, if you are struggling with monitoring, it's likely that your mix in Logic is super loud (ie, up in the 0dBFS peak range.) Turn your tracks down, and when your track is record enabled, turn the level of that fader up (faders have an independent level when in record mode) and see if you can get a monitor balance you're happy with. If not, you can always put a gain plugin, or compressor plugin, on that channel which will also non-destructively add gain. Juggle with these things until you can find a happy balance that works for you, and things will be much better, and yes, turn your monitoring up to compensate bringing the mix down. If you want to run through a mic-pre, then a hardware compressor, then into your audio interface, then go for it, if that works better for you and you can generate a hotter signal without clipping. But I think the main problem is often people are running their mixes a super-loud, and recording quite low, and struggling to achieve a balance. In this case, giving proper mix headroom to bring those elements down will help a lot - you can make up the final gain towards the end of the process after the recording is done. Your problem isn't fixed by printing software compression into the files - it almost never is, which is why I responded as such in the first post. There's almost no reason to do this. 👍

I have no idea what your computer is. You'll need to determine whether your computer can run Ventura first.

Yes, but I'm talking about more analog modelled saturation, tube overdriving, transformers and other stuff - this is a world away from the more simplistic digital distortions which we've had forever, and is much more complicated and processor intensive.

That sounds more like a mic/interface problem. What levels exactly? If you're cranking your preamp and averaging at, say, -18dBFS, you can reduce the gain a bit and your signal is fine. If you turn up the recorded signal afterwards, does it sound OK? Perhaps your audio interface doesn't have much gain? With a hardware unit? This is common, but it doesn't do the same thing as using a plugin for this, which is mostly why it's pointless. A plugin doesn't optimise the gain stage like a hardware unit does, because the plugin comes *after* the gain stage - at which point, you might as well just put it on the channel, rather than burning it into the audio, because it's *not* doing what a hardware compressor before the audio interface does.

No. You need a machine running Ventura 13.5 as a minimum system requirement.

Sure, but that's true of almost every feature in a given DAW or application. If you don't want to use that DAW, you can't use that DAW's featureset either. It's just another plugin, that people who are already using Logic can use (or not, they can still use third-party ones too). A lot of people using Logic aren't using third-party plugins at all, and I would argue that Logic doesn't to date actually have a good solution for saturation, other than overdriving the tape delay plugin, (Edit: As Mike points out, the PhatFX has distortion too - thanks) and as saturation has become an important part of a modern sound, having one in Logic is a good thing, imo. We do this with third-party plugins anyway. I don't really see it that way at all. it's just another tool you have available, for free, that someone can choose to use or not. I don't see any platform freedoms being restricted here, and nor is it anyway different to using, say, the ES2 or Sampler etc in Logic, which are only available in Logic, or any feature or internal plugin in Ableton Live, or anything else... And there's always third-party options which work cross-DAW/platform, so if platform interoperability is important to a user, they will tend to leave the features that don't port alone (or render them into their audio files) and use third-party tools. Either way, the user has the choice. :shrugs:

Yes, an application can retrieve the window title on the system.

The main window contains the name of the project:

Yeah, that's the ultimate goal of Apple Vision Pro. They just need to get the price down, so they can read the minds of people who *don't* have four grand to blow on gadgets... 😉

There is a way to do it, but there's really no reason to do it, it doesn't give you any benefits, versus non-destructive compression post recording. This does come up here from time to time. If your goal is to prevent overloads, then the proper procedure is turn your audio interface's gain down, and make sure you are recording at 24bit. There is enough dynamic range these days that you don't need to drive and record at high levels to "optimise" your signal, recording at a lower level is perfectly fine, won't give you bad audio quality, and will avoid overloads - and won't irreparably process your audio in a way that can't be undone if you mess up the compressor settings. What level (average, and peak) are you currently recording at that you feel the need to "boost"?

You're performance meters in Logic will show you your CPU load, and your Disk load, so whichver of those is exceeding the capabilities of your computer will point towards the problem. Your computer doesn't have infinite resources, and when you exceed them (for example, a plugin chain on a channel that requires more CPU than a core can process), you'll get a system overload. So on checking your performance meters, what are they telling you? Are you overloading a CPU core with plugin processing? BTW: A system overload because you're running out of resources is not the same thing as a crash.

It wasn't an explanation. I don't think you read my post, if that's what you thought I was saying they treated customer feedback. Or I wrote it poorly. That's your guess. More likely (as my guess), they figured the benefits of moving forward that way for all users and third-party plugins outweighed the downsides with that one plugin, at least for now - or it required a cross-development solution across the Logic, macOS and Celemony teams that they are not entirely in control of. Another zoom mention, and I complete my Sascha bingo card this week (I think I can claim a free coffee!) 🙂 Indeed, it's true that if they were developing the exact version of Logic *I* wanted, I would not choose the development path for some features they've taken, and would invest more effort elsewhere, and I'm likely not alone in that thought. At least with some of this stuff, it's easily ignored - if you never want to see all the virtual Drummer stuff, if you don't ever create a Drummer track, you'll never see it - I expect that will be true for the new stuff too, so the people that can benefit from it, and want to take advantage of it can, and others can forget it exists... No one has said this. In fact, David has stated the express opposite of this. The point of this thread is to discuss the new release, and people will all have opinions. No one is stopping anyone posting negative comments, nor is it a policy of this forum or it's moderation...

What do they say about the five stages of software release grief? I think its:- 1) - Shock that something new has finally been released 2) - Amazement at the new shiny features 3) - Realisation of the things that you want that aren't there 4) - Bargaining that the things you want will hopefully be coming shortly in a point-release update 5) - Whining on forums that the developers just don't understand you I think it's something like that... 😉

You guys realise that if you ask 100 different people, they'll all come up with their own unique list of "easy to implement" feature suggestions. Part of the task of managing development is considering what you want to do, what your feedback is asking for, and prioritizing and allocating development time in the way that most makes sense for your product... We all have our pet feature requests, some which are easy to implement, some which aren't technically difficult but don't really easily fit in to the product with some redesign (which has it's own implications) and some which are constrained technically and require much bigger changes (eg, ARA support on Apple silicon). Now, of course, it's *my* feature requests that are the most important to prioritise... fight me! Logic Feature-Request Death Match! 😂