Jump to content

new logic version, 3june WWDC


fisherking

Recommended Posts

The problem is that the midiFx plugins all depend on the mixer and the audio buffer processing that takes place there. what is in the environment is not involved with the buffer or latency or anything, its all considered to be highly controlled super fast calculations that are fast enough to not be concerned about latency ever. The mixer, on the other hand, can host plugins that use a relative eternity to do whatever they need to do during a process block.

 

We will not ever see midi plugins in the environment IMHO.

 

The best thing Apple could do is get rid of the environment or make it so entirely superfluous that its use is COMPLETELY optional. not even as a pass through from inputs to sequencer....but rather COMPLETELY optional. Then integrate the arranger/sequencer more with the mixer, as other daws are, so that you can send track output to other tracks and it all goes through the mixer audio buffer processing, etc.. Most other DAW's all work that way. Logic has nice things that can be done with the environment sometimes for some people, but most people do not use it and the fact they are trying to keep it in there is limiting what can be done with the arranger/mixer interaction, compared to other DAWs. IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Same UI IMHO, just the difference in the monitor and lighting in the venue.

 

check the track numbers, the gradients on regions. LXnu.png

 

in comparison, here's logic as it is now...lxold.jpeg

 

You might be right but I'm not sure I can see a gradient, and what can you see different about the numbers?

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 finally fix the broken zoom, I'm sure.

 

How are you doing your zooming? Is it something to do with the zoom tool of the zoom keycommand?

 

(I always just use the keycommands for vertical and horizontal zoom, so i’ve probably worked around the bug)

 

Not doubting that anything is broken! Just asking, since even with zoom, there are so many ways of going about things in Logic. And if it get fixed, your way might be faster than mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are you doing your zooming? Is it something to do with the zoom tool of the zoom keycommand?

 

A mixture of both but mostly the zoom tool (or better: the combination of CTL+ALT, which brings up the tool regardless of the other tools you have selected). One of the most excellent things in Logic since decades. Always worked like a champ ever since 3.0 - until they decided to break it on an IMO inacceptable number of levels in LPX.

I'm using that for any detailed cutting and moving - and yes, I am fully aware of the various zoom options available via KCs and use them often as well (most often: "zoom to fit vertically"), but for many, many things, the zoom tool IMO is far superior as it allows me to always zoom in on a very exact spot (well, it used to allow doing that - but not anymore).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second Sascha's complain. I use Control-Option-dragging for most of my zooming tasks (not sure what the point is of now having Option-dragging as well, which I find dangerous since it works only when you start dragging on the background). And it's been inaccurate or just plain wrong ever since the advent of Logic Pro X 10.0.0. I never fully understood why.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes i think you complain for the sake of it! haha :) :) :)

 

No way. I'm absolutely serious here: If anything, the zoom functionality is the single most relevant thing that has become second nature for me during my years in Logic.

It's now around a year or so that I finally switched from LP9 to LPX and I used it a LOT in that year (one of the reasons I finally updated was that I have more "sequencing work" to do these days). And yet, while I am fully aware of all the unfortunate shortcomings now related to zooming, I'm still constantly running into "zooming errors". Goes to show how much the procedure is pretty much engraved in my brain on an absolutely unconscious level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(not sure what the point is of now having Option-dragging as well, which I find dangerous since it works only when you start dragging on the background).

 

History: In earlier Logic years, there's only been Option-dragging. But as a result of that, once you were zoomed in too much (so no free arrangement space was visible anymore), you couldn't use it anymore to zoom in further, as the combination of option+drag would trigger a region copy. So people complained about that and Emagic (I think it happened back then) introduced the new combination so you can now as well use it when there's just regions displayed. Guess they kept the old combination in for those who had it engraved in their brains as much as myself (I still find myself ocassionally using just the option key).

Edited by Sascha Franck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the explanation Sacha and David. if that ever gets fixed i can easily see that that is much more efficient than what i am doing.

 

It’s funny because i’ve been on logic since version 1,1 but for a long time i just used the mouse on the zoom sliders so when i discovered the power of keycommands that became my workflow. But i do understand your frustration!

It is annoying to have done things in a swift way, only for it to ve broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW here's an example of the zoom tool malfunction in Logic Pro X :

 

zoom-bug.gif

 

Yeah, that's the one driving me nuts the most. And it's getting even less predictable as soon as you have two regions on two adjacent tracks and want to do a zoom to have both of them kinda like centered on your screen. Start zooming just a pixel too high in the upper region and it will only display that. Start a pixel too low and only the lower region will be displayed. For a predictable result you need to start zooming above regions and end below them - which, in return, will not give you the maximum zoom level.

And as if this wasn't bad enough already, when I'm saying "a pixel to high/low" I don't even know myself about "too high/low given what reference?". Middle of the region? No. Start and end of zoom range? No. It's absolutely unpredictable. And it's getting worse when you switch automation on/off anywhere inmidst the process. And it's "game over" once you switch screen sets.

 

Seriously, I used to say that out of the sequencers I tried, Logic felt the most like an instrument (rather than a tool) for me. And it's been two things that were mainly responsible for that to happen: Region handling (the smart snapping/cutting/moving thing was just gorgeous and completely unrivalled back then, by now most others have caught up, at least partially) and zooming.

Sticking with the instrument analogy, the broken zoom is kinda like banging out a good old A-E powerchord on my guitar just to have it sound A-Eb. And A-F on the next attempt (while using the same fingering).

Edited by Sascha Franck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW here's an example of the zoom tool malfunction in Logic Pro X

So to quantify that:

 

- the horizontal zoom is correct, agreed ?

- the vertical zoom height is quantized to whole tracks, you can't zoom in to see 0.5 or 1.7 track heights.

-- If your zoom rectangle is less than 1 track high, you see 1 track.

-- If your zoom rectangle is less than 1 track high and it touches two tracks, you'll always see the lower track.

-- The actual position of the zoom rectangle over both tracks is not accounted for.

-- Only if your zoom rectangle height is closer to 2 tracks than to 1, you will see two tracks, so a zoom rectangle height of 1.6 tracks will show both tracks while a height of 1.4 tracks will show just the lower track.

 

Is that it in a nutshell ?

Edited by fuzzfilth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it's been inaccurate or just plain wrong ever since the advent of Logic Pro X 10.0.0. I never fully understood why.

Perhaps the way it's been interpreted to be used hasn't been communicated correctly? This is why a 'hangouts' session, once a month, once a quarter - whatever, with someone part or close to the Logic team would be great - so people can ask such questions and they get answered in a near 'official' capacity. I think it brings users in too, the Cubase hangouts i was watching way before buying Cubase Pro and where i learnt the most about it.

 

For example, i used to use AutoCAD many years ago and it's zoom would work in different ways depending on whether you drew from top left to bottom right, top right to bottom left etc. we had ran from a local college tuition for many years, but we then had the chance of taking an officially ran Autodesk course (The makers) thanks to local funding - once we sat with the Autodesk guys it was really clear why and how they had implemented stuff, and it's so easy to miss. They even said it was one of their top frustrations as so many people thought the zoom was buggy. This was 14k modem days, so internet wasn't really a thing.

 

Right now, us users are using each others and your valueable knowledge of the product via books and your help here, but what you learn is only from interpretation from the manual, right? You never get the chance to liase with anyone senior to ask questions such as this zoom bug clearly?

 

Not saying this isn't a bug of course, but it's possible there's many hidden features and workflows in Logic that the devs put in which have never been clearly communicated in a two-way conversation before. And if they engage with the community better in -any- regard then at least we know workarounds and that the issue is being looked at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So to quantify that:

 

- the horizontal zoom is correct, agreed ?

 

If you factor in the piano roll as well, no, as you can't zoom in vertically or horizontally only anymore. It always zooms in both ways. And for me that's part of the zoom drama as well.

 

-- If your zoom rectangle is less than 1 track high and it touches two tracks, you'll always see the lower track.

 

No, it can as well be the higher track. But the "preference" is the lower track. As an example: If you start dragging your rectangle just above the middle of the upper track and end just above the middle of the lower track, the lower track will be displayed (which is illogical already, as your rectangle covered more of the upper track). But if you start a "bit" (can't specify about how many pixels we're talking about, it's just too unpredictable) above and end a bit above, the upper track will be displayed.

To make matters worse: All this also seems to be related to the "source" zoom level you start at, the "preference" of which track will finally be displayed changes when zoomed far out compared to being zoomed in a bit more already.

 

-- The actual position of the zoom rectangle over both tracks is not accounted for.

 

Correct - well, at least only as much as described above.

 

-- Only if your zoom rectangle height is closer to 2 tracks than to 1, you will see two tracks, so a zoom rectangle height of 1.6 tracks will show both tracks while a height of 1.4 tracks will show just the lower track.

 

That's an interesting observation that, while I subconsciously seem to have noticed it, I haven't elaborated on too carefully so far, but yes, it seems to be correct.

 

Is that it in a nutshell ?

 

At least kinda. And hm, if everything was correct, it'd even be kind of logical (yet new and in no way even remotely as good as the old way). But as the example of how you can place your rectangle over a mix of upper and lower tracks (yielding different illogical results) illustrates, it's not just new but not right as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps the way it's been interpreted to be used hasn't been communicated correctly?

 

Yes and no. See my reply to fuzzfilths post. There seem to be two things happening:

1) There's a new "zoom behaviour paradigm". As described by fuzzfilth.

2) The new behaviour isn't working properly.

 

But even if it'd just be (1), it'd still be enough of a reason to get wound up about. I mean, it's so much worse on all levels, compared to the old zoom behaviour, that it qualifies for "objectively" worse. For comparison, if there's a zoom functionality in a photo editor, allowing you to drag a rectangle (which there is in most), you'd expect the rectangle area to be focused/centered as a result of that zoom operation, right? Anything else really wouldn't make much sense, as much as you might twist your brain. And that's what the zoom behaviour in LPX has been changed to. From something obviously logical to something even a twisted brain couldn't prefer. And in addition, (2) applies as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m REALLY NOT A FAN of Logic’s multiple tools. I find that setting up the Marquee as the secondary tool and enabling the context aware zones in the Preferences a MUCH BETTER way of working. The problem is the editor doesn’t mirror that. It’s got the zones, but it won’t does the zone thing in the middle as well, which is what I don’t like. It’s why I have Marquee as a secondary tool.

 

That said, I don’t think I recall an issue with Logic while using the Mouse and modifiers to zoom. Unless in the Midi area, it rather annoying zooms around the playhead and not the area you selected.

 

I’m probably late to this, but according to those Logic specs we might be getting another 4 sends. 12, instead of 8!!

 

It sounds like overkill, but really it just means you can have setups with upto 12 sends on tap, and decisively turn on what you need and where. It sounds like a great option for templates, among other things.

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...