Jump to content

new logic version, 3june WWDC


fisherking

Recommended Posts

That said, I don’t think I recall an issue with Logic while using the Mouse and modifiers to zoom.

 

You clearly haven't used it prior to LPX then.

 

I’ve been using it over 15 years. I paid like $1600 AUD for V6. It still works as I remember. Rubber band around the area you want to zoom on and it zooms in..

 

I’m trying to think of a time when it hasn’t worked like that, there probably is, I just can’t think of it. Zooming in on the Piano Roll is my pain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, I don’t think I recall an issue with Logic while using the Mouse and modifiers to zoom.

 

You clearly haven't used it prior to LPX then.

I don’t have a problem with zooming when using alt+drag in the Tracks area(unless I need to start dragging inside a region where I’ll use the additional modifier). I wonder what might trigger the problems for you guys? Zoom in the piano roll though... don’t start me on that...

 

Blink

 

Edit: made an edit as it’s Sascha who joined 11 years ago...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then i guess it's just another triumph of Apple's incompetence these days.

 

if you say so :mrgreen:

 

i am having an amazing time on both my macs (in mojave); especially in logic X, my main app. am enjoying stability, speed, power. bugs? there are always bugs, it's the nature of software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then i guess it's just another triumph of Apple's incompetence these days.

 

if you say so :mrgreen:

 

i am having an amazing time on both my macs (in mojave); especially in logic X, my main app. am enjoying stability, speed, power. bugs? there are always bugs, it's the nature of software.

 

I'm talking about the fact they have different specs on their sites, and are advertising a version that isn't even released, that is incompetence, unless you think they have done it on purpose and it's all part of a well thought out and executed strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

if you say so :mrgreen:

 

i am having an amazing time on both my macs (in mojave); especially in logic X, my main app. am enjoying stability, speed, power. bugs? there are always bugs, it's the nature of software.

 

I'm talking about the fact they have different specs on their sites, and are advertising a version that isn't even released, that is incompetence, unless you think they have done it on purpose and it's all part of a well thought out and executed strategy.

 

ah... you should spell out what you're saying (your post followed one about zooming issues)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, they probably planned to release it at the same time but for some reason felt it best to delay the release. And while they could have the IT/advertising department revert the information on the page, the fact they haven’t would indicate it will be out soon enough that they don’t deem that necessary.

 

Suppose they could have rushed it out and made a patch later but then everyone would be crying about whatever bugs they have delayed it to fix. Or added a note on the website that new version is ‘soon to be released’, but really who cares? Apparently not enough people to make apple feel it’s a priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it's possible they had planned the release to be in sync with the new Mac Pro announcements at WWDC and then got delayed at the last minute.

To me it would make more sense to just release it with the actual MP release in the fall. Gives them more time to iron it out. Anyway, I doubt that it is so fundamentally different that it would justify a pre-announcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still works as I remember. Rubber band around the area you want to zoom on and it zooms in..

 

The bold letters are still the same. But the fineprint has changed massively. See the detailed descriptions in this very thread. Really, for people who made the zooming part of their daily, essential workflow (for whatever reasons), it's like night and day.

I'm on a short family trip right now and just spent some time with "cab/mic IR cooking" - for which I'm using the zoom function a lot. It's absolutely unbelievable how much better it works under LP9 (on the 2008 MB I took with me).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The longer in between, hopefully means the more they fix and add. I don't use zoom a whole lot, but I've noticed that it doesn't always do what I want. Mostly, in the piano roll where I'll all of a sudden have no notes in sight after de-selecting the limit grid function. I must say, I often wonder just how much testing is done by actual users before release. But I wonder about that with a number of DAWs. ;-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still works as I remember. Rubber band around the area you want to zoom on and it zooms in..

 

The bold letters are still the same. But the fineprint has changed massively. See the detailed descriptions in this very thread. Really, for people who made the zooming part of their daily, essential workflow (for whatever reasons), it's like night and day.

I'm on a short family trip right now and just spent some time with "cab/mic IR cooking" - for which I'm using the zoom function a lot. It's absolutely unbelievable how much better it works under LP9 (on the 2008 MB I took with me).

 

yet, knowing that, am sure no one is going to give up logic X... when there are so many other great things, that do work well. anyway, hopefully apple fixes these things sometime this century.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yet, knowing that, am sure no one is going to give up logic X... when there are so many other great things, that do work well. anyway, hopefully apple fixes these things sometime this century.......

 

In all seriousness, if I could run LP9 on my MP, that means with full multithreading support, full plugin support and whatever might be related to that kinda thing, I'd very likely spend more time in there than in LPX. Sure, even during this short trip (with just the 2008 MB along) I already noticed how much I got used to certain LPX things, but for all my essential editing I'm still a lot faster in LP9, which is largely related to the zoom issues and screen sets (especially those with linked editors, which are as well messed up as good as it gets in LPX).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yet, knowing that, am sure no one is going to give up logic X... when there are so many other great things, that do work well. anyway, hopefully apple fixes these things sometime this century.......

 

In all seriousness, if I could run LP9 on my MP, that means with full multithreading support, full plugin support and whatever might be related to that kinda thing, I'd very likely spend more time in there than in LPX. Sure, even during this short trip (with just the 2008 MB along) I already noticed how much I got used to certain LPX things, but for all my essential editing I'm still a lot faster in LP9, which is largely related to the zoom issues and screen sets (especially those with linked editors, which are as well messed up as good as it gets in LPX).

 

i'd list all the things LX has over L9, but i have to be somewhere by 2021....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd list all the things LX has over L9, but i have to be somewhere by 2021....

 

Rest assured, I am absolutely aware of a whole truckload of these things. But when I look at those few things absolutely essential regarding my personal workflow, LP9 is still just as good for me - or even better in some rather important aspects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm talking about the fact they have different specs on their sites, and are advertising a version that isn't even released, that is incompetence, unless you think they have done it on purpose and it's all part of a well thought out and executed strategy.

 

ah... you should spell out what you're saying (your post followed one about zooming issues)...

 

 

To be fair this thread is titled "new logic version" so that is what I was talking about, but you are right I probably should have been clearer about what I was referring to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, they probably planned to release it at the same time but for some reason felt it best to delay the release. And while they could have the IT/advertising department revert the information on the page, the fact they haven’t would indicate it will be out soon enough that they don’t deem that necessary.

 

Suppose they could have rushed it out and made a patch later but then everyone would be crying about whatever bugs they have delayed it to fix. Or added a note on the website that new version is ‘soon to be released’, but really who cares? Apparently not enough people to make apple feel it’s a priority.

 

If you think that is the way Apple runs it's business then with respect I think your wrong, I have worked with Apple on several occasions, I have setup and run two shows in the UK Apple headquarters, and they have always taken these things very seriously, everything has to be exactly so, they are very very strict, so there is no way they don't care, something has gone wrong, this is not normal behaviour, and it could even lead to someone getting the sack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

ah... you should spell out what you're saying (your post followed one about zooming issues)...

 

 

To be fair this thread is titled "new logic version" so that is what I was talking about, but you are right I probably should have been clearer about what I was referring to.

 

these threads are a dialog, and people respond to the last thing written; just how it always works. if you're going to comment about something said earlier (or, the thread title itself), you want to state that clearly, since we read these things in order... just saying!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd list all the things LX has over L9, but i have to be somewhere by 2021....

 

Rest assured, I am absolutely aware of a whole truckload of these things. But when I look at those few things absolutely essential regarding my personal workflow, LP9 is still just as good for me - or even better in some rather important aspects.

 

am happy for you, really. but i doubt anyone else would go back at this point, and give up all the new tools, options, variables that LX offers over L9... which is now (in tech years), really old...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

am happy for you, really. but i doubt anyone else would go back at this point, and give up all the new tools, options, variables that LX offers over L9... which is now (in tech years), really old...

 

Fwiw, I wouldn't exactly like going back, either. But I think that certain things *need to* (not just "should") be fixed.

In case the zooming issue doesn't cut it for you, what about beatmapping? That one is as well broken as much as it gets. And while you may never need it, in case that very functionality is an essential part of your daily musical life (which it is for some people), the current state of affairs in LPX is truly horrible. So you bought a new(er) Mac and LPX to enjoy whatever power and features, just to find out that what is an essential feature for you all of a sudden is completely demolished. And while the workarounds for the zoom issue (and what not) might seem trivial, this very thing is not. There's no real workarounds. Sure, we have Smart Tempo by now - which might even do a better job in some cases. But as soon as it doesn't, you will have to resort to beatmapping. Only to find out it's broken.

In my world, the zooming issue is almost as important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

To be fair this thread is titled "new logic version" so that is what I was talking about, but you are right I probably should have been clearer about what I was referring to.

 

these threads are a dialog, and people respond to the last thing written; just how it always works. if you're going to comment about something said earlier (or, the thread title itself), you want to state that clearly, since we read these things in order... just saying!

 

I have already said, "but you are right I probably should have been clearer about what I was referring to." so I think by bringing it up again is rather continuing to hammer the nail in the wall once it's already in, do you really think you need to explain to me how a forum thread works? I'm not a child, I'm a fully grown man that has been around a long time, I don't need any instructions from you thanks, you could have just excepted that I had acknowledged what you had said, I showed you respect, so why couldn't you have shown a bit of class and done the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

these threads are a dialog, and people respond to the last thing written; just how it always works. if you're going to comment about something said earlier (or, the thread title itself), you want to state that clearly, since we read these things in order... just saying!

 

I have already said, "but you are right I probably should have been clearer about what I was referring to." so I think by bringing it up again is rather continuing to hammer the nail in the wall once it's already in, do you really think you need to explain to me how a forum thread works? I'm not a child, I'm a fully grown man that has been around a long time, I don't need any instructions from you thanks, you could have just excepted that I had acknowledged what you had said, I showed you respect, so why couldn't you have shown a bit of class and done the same?

 

apologies, thought you had missed the point (that we read each post as a response to what's above it). so it goes; am many things, and (i guess) classy is not one of them. will try to be more thoughtful in the future (i keep promising that....!)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies if my talking about hardware is too off topic.

 

We've been building hackintoshes since Apple stopped providing desktop machines that supported PCIe cards. Yes you could buy a PCIe expansion chassis connected via Thunderbolt, but we never went that route. Prior to that when we bought Apple hardware, we always got the minimum amount of RAM and smallest hard drives, as it was always cheaper to add your own. (Apple charges too much for RAM, SSD's and hard drives). It seemed like the Apple machine we wanted to buy (or did buy) cost around $3K.

 

But apart from the cost of the new Mac Pro, I hope Apple's return to supporting a machine with PCIe slots is good news for those of us who build hackintoshes (with PCIe slots). I hope Mac OS will have native support for more PCIe hardware options going forward.

 

If you don't keep up with AppleInsider then you may find some of the articles there interesting. One is a short article with the Mac Pro's project lead talking about how the engineering lessons from the new Mac Pro hardware architecture will trickle down into the product line. He does not say there will be a less expensive version of the just announced Mac Pro, but I would not put that past Apple in the future.

 

https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/05/mac-pros-lessons-learned-will-trickle-down-to-all-pro-products-says-project-lead

 

Apple still makes Mac OS server, and putting a rack mount on the new MacPro with a 28 core Xeon chip + Mac OS server - makes it a viable server. I suspect companies like Avid and others who need Mac build farms will buy these; even the old Mac server hardware is still in use.

 

I think there are still thermal constraints for MacBook Pros, the MacMinis, and even the iMacs - namely the choice of processors are either low power consumption and/or their performance needs to be throttled in order not to generate too much heat. You will note that Apple specifically said they designed the new MacPro so that the 28 core Xeon chip can run flat out with no thermal constraints. In other words, it's really more of a server class chassis design (and $6K+ for a server is not unusual). I think I saw the street price for a Xeon 28 core chip is around $1700. Add in the cost of that power supply, a motherboard with that connectivity, and I'm not sure we could build a hackintosh server like that for even $3K.

 

Anyway, it seems there might be space in Apple's product line to have a smaller version of the MacPro that would likewise not impose thermal constraints on the choice of processors - but maybe not until they finance it by first selling high end machines. If I needed to buy an Apple machine, I think it would be one of the newer laptops with an i9 chip; that gives you 8 physical and 8 logical cores.

 

Many have said Apple is a hardware company first (and a software company second), i.e., the software is priced as a loss leader to get you to buy the hardware. That is probably why Logic is still $200 USD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I have already said, "but you are right I probably should have been clearer about what I was referring to." so I think by bringing it up again is rather continuing to hammer the nail in the wall once it's already in, do you really think you need to explain to me how a forum thread works? I'm not a child, I'm a fully grown man that has been around a long time, I don't need any instructions from you thanks, you could have just excepted that I had acknowledged what you had said, I showed you respect, so why couldn't you have shown a bit of class and done the same?

 

apologies, thought you had missed the point (that we read each post as a response to what's above it). so it goes; am many things, and (i guess) classy is not one of them. will try to be more thoughtful in the future (i keep promising that....!)...

 

Actually by apologising you have shown you do have lots of class and you also have my respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a horrible demonstrating...So many unneeded tracks in that LPX project. That guy definitely doesn't know how to involve all power of MacPro ))))

Jokes on us, he was bitcoin mining in the background and walked off that stage $0.02 richer! ...apparently he was heard backstage asking how well 'Logic' would run with 10x 28 core machines networked together while he rubbed his hands gleefully. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a horrible demonstrating...So many unneeded tracks in that LPX project. That guy definitely doesn't know how to involve all power of MacPro ))))

Jokes on us, he was bitcoin mining in the background and walked off that stage $0.02 richer! ...apparently he was heard backstage asking how well 'Logic' would run with 10x 28 core machines networked together while he rubbed his hands gleefully. ;)

 

i made $0.05 just watching the demonstration, so.... i win!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, let's be honest, that presentation *was* a sort of joke and the music playing did in no way justify the huge amount of seemingly randomly placed audio snipplets at the bottom of the arrange. It was just made to impress the non-audio-WWDC folks.

 

Yes, it was a simple demo to just show, and send the message of, impressive performance, so picking up apart the technicalities is pointless. Remember, the main audience of WWDC is developers, and press - the general population don't have much of a clue about audio, or what it involves (witness the many comments of non-muso Apple tech people talking about how ridiculous "a thousand tracks" is, because their use case of Logic is a four track podcast recording session, and they have no idea how real world workflows work for some people.) The fact is that many media composers do indeed have templates of thousands of tracks, and we've seen plenty of comments here bemoaning Logic's (current) limit of 256 tracks per object type.

 

But of course, we all know that a "track" could need resources from anything from nothing, up to a huge core-consuming behemoth, so how many tracks doesn't necessarily bear much relation to how much power would be required to play the project.

 

Anyway - apparently in the suites at WWDC after the presentation, they had a couple of rigs running on the new Mac Pro - a huge Pro Tools session, and a huge Logic session, set up by composers (presumably ones on the pro feedback team Apple set up). In both cases, these were projects that previously *required* multiple computers (PC's I think) to run (one for the session, and multiple ones to house the instruments/sample libraries using Vienna, I can't remember offhand how many other machines it was). In both cases, they were running entirely off of the one Mac Pro. (No, I don't know any more details than that, so let's not get all nit-picky...)

 

There's no doubt that these can be specced up to be pretty good (and ridiculously expensive) machines, but they are not really for "us" like the old Mac Pro's were, they are really aimed at pro facilities or people were the costs are fairly irrelevant, for a fast workflow. I've got to say it would be amazing doing video and GFX projects on those things, it would just barely notice fairly complicated and FX heavy 4K video editing projects...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...