Waveform 9 review...

[gesslr]

Every DAW sucks... but some suck less for some people.

I might have to add that to my sig line....

[Steve Bolivar]

From your take on the Envelope Follower Modifier:
"It’d be a lot better if the envelope follower more easily took audio from other tracks."
+++100x.
There's a review of Miccraft 8 where the reviewer describes being able to use the volume envelope of a drum track to control the drive parameter on the amp sim for the bass guitar to make the overdrive on the bass throb with the beat of the drums.

I'm not a black belt in Rack-Fu yet so I would really appreciate a tutorial from Tracktion or the community on how to do this.

Thanks

[Robert Randolph]

From your take on the Envelope Follower Modifier:
"It’d be a lot better if the envelope follower more easily took audio from other tracks."
+++100x.
There's a review of Miccraft 8 where the reviewer describes being able to use the volume envelope of a drum track to control the drive parameter on the amp sim for the bass guitar to make the overdrive on the bass throb with the beat of the drums.

I'm not a black belt in Rack-Fu yet so I would really appreciate a tutorial from Tracktion or the community on how to do this.

Thanks

I'll see if I can make a quick post on it after lunch.

It's not terribly difficult, it's just a lot of extra steps for something that should only be 1 click.

[Robert Randolph]

K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

[urlwolf]

Which daw does this correctly?

Admiral Bumblebee, you seen to have done a lot of research into daw internal architecture. What daw has a solid one? I say this because I need to pick one daw, and this could be a determinant factor. On gearslutz people keep saying that might thinking on daws is horribly bad. And hardware sequencers are better. They may be right after all?

That's really hard to say. I've encountered bugs in every DAW that I've ever used with regards to 'time bugs'. I haven't seen anything major in Waveform 9 yet.

It's a very difficult problem to tackle. Currently in my experience, Reason has the fewest of these class of bugs, but it also has less functionality that may trigger these issues.

Another issue comes in with automation and how automation data is communicated to clients of the data, and that's a totally new can of worms (and very difficult to "fix" due to how certain formats work!). Currently as far as I'm aware, only Logic and Pro Tools handle this "correctly" but Logic has some really weird automation problems.

Every DAW sucks... but some suck less for some people.

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

I noticed you didn't talk much about flstudio on your site. I found renewed love for it because it seems to magically work on linux under wine. That's a huge win for me. Before I invest time on it, I'd love to hear your opinion, even if it's just a sentence You must be the most qualified person on the web to talk about DAWs, and learning one is a serious time investment...

[Robert Randolph]

Which daw does this correctly?

Admiral Bumblebee, you seen to have done a lot of research into daw internal architecture. What daw has a solid one? I say this because I need to pick one daw, and this could be a determinant factor. On gearslutz people keep saying that might thinking on daws is horribly bad. And hardware sequencers are better. They may be right after all?

That's really hard to say. I've encountered bugs in every DAW that I've ever used with regards to 'time bugs'. I haven't seen anything major in Waveform 9 yet.

It's a very difficult problem to tackle. Currently in my experience, Reason has the fewest of these class of bugs, but it also has less functionality that may trigger these issues.

Another issue comes in with automation and how automation data is communicated to clients of the data, and that's a totally new can of worms (and very difficult to "fix" due to how certain formats work!). Currently as far as I'm aware, only Logic and Pro Tools handle this "correctly" but Logic has some really weird automation problems.

Every DAW sucks... but some suck less for some people.

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

I noticed you didn't talk much about flstudio on your site. I found renewed love for it because it seems to magically work on linux under wine. That's a huge win for me. Before I invest time on it, I'd love to hear your opinion, even if it's just a sentence You must be the most qualified person on the web to talk about DAWs, and learning one is a serious time investment...

I've used FL a lot, but I'm waiting for the mac version to be listed as stable until I do any public writing on it. I have a lot of notes on it for when it's ready.

I certainly don't think I'm the most qualified person on the web on the topic, but I'm definitely very interested in it

[gesslr]

K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

Really cool that you put that together. Thanks.

[Steve Bolivar]

K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

That's awesome.
Big thanks.

[PierreG]

Robert Randolph wrote:
K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

I seem to have been able to achieve what you did by simply dragging an EF onto the track I want to be used to control another tracks volume, then dragged the EF from there onto that track's volume plug, selected volume and presto.

I may well be missing something here, so feel free to school me.

[Robert Randolph]

Robert Randolph wrote:
K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

I seem to have been able to achieve what you did by simply dragging an EF onto the track I want to be used to control another tracks volume, then dragged the EF from there onto that track's volume plug, selected volume and presto.

I may well be missing something here, so feel free to school me.

Hold on... I have reasons for this. I'm double checking them.

[Robert Randolph]

Robert Randolph wrote:
K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

I seem to have been able to achieve what you did by simply dragging an EF onto the track I want to be used to control another tracks volume, then dragged the EF from there onto that track's volume plug, selected volume and presto.

I may well be missing something here, so feel free to school me.

Hold on... I have reasons for this. I'm double checking them.

Ok. Double checked... My issue is that this doesn't work unless playback is active, where the rack version is always active

When I tried this a few times I thought that it was buggy or simply incorrect because of this. The rack version is always active regardless of playback status.

That said, I did notice an issue that I don't have a solution for: the envelope follower always takes audio from the end of the track's signal path.

Imagine maybe you have a vocal that you want to envelope follow. Often vocals will have delay, reverb, EQ, compression etc... on them. Usually, at least in my use, I would want to use the original vocal and not the effected version. Current as far as I'm aware there's no way to take audio from a specific point. You instead would have to create a clone of the track and make sure it keeps up with edits and the like.

Anyway, I'll update the tutorial post to indicate this information.

EDIT: Updated and credited. Thank you!

[gesslr]

Robert Randolph wrote:
K, I try to be a man of my word but I lied...

I did it before lunch:

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... eform.html

Hopefully this explains it sufficiently.

I seem to have been able to achieve what you did by simply dragging an EF onto the track I want to be used to control another tracks volume, then dragged the EF from there onto that track's volume plug, selected volume and presto.

I may well be missing something here, so feel free to school me.

Hold on... I have reasons for this. I'm double checking them.

Ok. Double checked... My issue is that this doesn't work unless playback is active, where the rack version is always active

When I tried this a few times I thought that it was buggy or simply incorrect because of this. The rack version is always active regardless of playback status.

That said, I did notice an issue that I don't have a solution for: the envelope follower always takes audio from the end of the track's signal path.

Imagine maybe you have a vocal that you want to envelope follow. Often vocals will have delay, reverb, EQ, compression etc... on them. Usually, at least in my use, I would want to use the original vocal and not the effected version. Current as far as I'm aware there's no way to take audio from a specific point. You instead would have to create a clone of the track and make sure it keeps up with edits and the like.

Anyway, I'll update the tutorial post to indicate this information.

EDIT: Updated and credited. Thank you!

I can't open Waveform at the moment, but couldn't you drag a send filter/plugin to the control audio track before all of the effects and either

1) send that pre-fx audio to another dummy "ghost" audio track (i.e., one with no output to speakers) and apply the modifier to pull the control signal from there? That would solve the problem of having to keep a clone's edits in sync.

2) even cooler, drag a send filter to the control audio track as above then drag a modifier directly on to that filter? (Am unsure about this one.)

If either works, you actually have some additional flexibility since you can tap the audio control signal at any point you choose.

Just a thought. I'll try it later.

[Robert Randolph]

I can't open Waveform at the moment, but couldn't you drag a send filter/plugin to the control audio track before all of the effects and either

1) send that pre-fx audio to another dummy "ghost" audio track (i.e., one with no output to speakers) and apply the modifier to pull the control signal from there? That would solve the problem of having to keep a clone's edits in sync.

2) even cooler, drag a send filter to the control audio track as above then drag a modifier directly on to that filter? (Am unsure about this one.)

If either works, you actually have some additional flexibility since you can tap the audio control signal at any point you choose.

Just a thought. I'll try it later.

The send idea definitely works. That's a good workaround.

I'm not sure how #2 helps?

It'd still be nice if it worked how Bitwig did with. Look at how The 'Audio Sidechain' modulator works in Bitwig:



Being able to select the patch point is rather valuable, and Bitwig makes it very easy. Funny enough, Bitwig's envelope follower does not have this though.

Reaper's method where you send to a buss, and the modulator takes from a buss is nice as well.

[gesslr]

I can't open Waveform at the moment, but couldn't you drag a send filter/plugin to the control audio track before all of the effects and either

1) send that pre-fx audio to another dummy "ghost" audio track (i.e., one with no output to speakers) and apply the modifier to pull the control signal from there? That would solve the problem of having to keep a clone's edits in sync.

2) even cooler, drag a send filter to the control audio track as above then drag a modifier directly on to that filter? (Am unsure about this one.)

If either works, you actually have some additional flexibility since you can tap the audio control signal at any point you choose.

Just a thought. I'll try it later.

The send idea definitely works. That's a good workaround.

I'm not sure how #2 helps?

It'd still be nice if it worked how Bitwig did with. Look at how The 'Audio Sidechain' modulator works in Bitwig:



Being able to select the patch point is rather valuable, and Bitwig makes it very easy. Funny enough, Bitwig's envelope follower does not have this though.

Reaper's method where you send to a buss, and the modulator takes from a buss is nice as well.

My thought is that if you can do #2, you would not need a ghost track.....you could take the signal directly from the filter....?

Yeh. I'm a big fan of BWS's modulation system. I was very glad to see the improvements in W9.

[Robert Randolph]

My thought is that if you can do #2, you would not need a ghost track.....you could take the signal directly from the filter....?

Yeh. I'm a big fan of BWS's modulation system. I was very glad to see the improvements in W9.

Ok. I don't think I understand your #2 idea, or we maybe have different expectations.

I'll wait till you can try it and post more.