Petition: Should all hosts have "render to track" feature?

[Dunc]

Try having a look at Zynewave Podium.

This features the render to track idea for each single track and also the whole lot to a Master Track. Once the master track is rendered, the sub tracks are muted and removed from CPU use. However ALL tracks are easily unmuted and available to edit.

Not sure about the missing out silence bit though (New user of podium, but have ported over from Sonar 4 Pro as it was just to difficult to do anything easily)but Frit's, the podium developer, is very good at taking up customer ideas

Have a look here:http://www.zynewave.com/

Dunc

[brambos]

I think its much simpler to work within your limitations, don't you? Encourages creativity and innovation, don't you think? [Of course you don't.]

It's a rare occasion that I fully agree with Bones, but I fully subscribe to the notion that working within constraints encourages creativity. (Actually back in the days, Moonfish was an exaggerated statement of that belief)

I think most of us know the feeling of staring at an empty track in our all-singing-all-dancing-gazzillion-bells-n-whistles DAW, or getting lost toying around with all the little buttons and features and not getting anywhere productive.

[superddman]

I think its much simpler to work within your limitations, don't you? Encourages creativity and innovation, don't you think? [Of course you don't.]

It's a rare occasion that I fully agree with Bones, but I fully subscribe to the notion that working within constraints encourages creativity. (Actually back in the days, Moonfish was an exaggerated statement of that belief)

I think most of us know the feeling of staring at an empty track in our all-singing-all-dancing-gazzillion-bells-n-whistles DAW, or getting lost toying around with all the little buttons and features and not getting anywhere productive.

That was back in the day, but we should be able to advance. In my oppinion, this is such a basic feature that all hosts should have it available by now.

[jens]

Actually you don't get the real differnce, FREEDOM.

With track freeze once your freeze a track it is completely disabled from use. You can't move the frozen contents, you cannot apply fx onto frozen parts, you cannot change automation envelopes, you cannot delete frozen parts. You are stuck (only sonar and samplitude have somewhat usable freeze but it is more based on my outline)

In other words, I hate freeze.

With something that I have explained you still have a complete freedom of the rendered tracks.

you should have read my edited reply - I didn't get your initial explanation (I think it wasn't thoroughly enough)

[jens]

That's because kvr is full of useless, flippant trolls who live to shoot
down people's ideas.

nope, I think that's because the initial explanation of his request was so bad that it was pretty hard to get what he means. Hence I voted 'no', else I'd have voted 'yes' as I totally agree with that every single host out there should have clip-based freezing.

the ideal solution is if the host recognizes how many different parts a track contains and then to only render each part once and to replace the old clip with the new (frozen) one - that way you can still arrange your track as before - this is the perfect freeze I wish more hosts (including eXT of course) would support...

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 73&start=0

[jens]

I think most of us know the feeling of staring at an empty track in our all-singing-all-dancing-gazzillion-bells-n-whistles DAW, or getting lost toying around with all the little buttons and features and not getting anywhere productive.

I think if you have this problem then you should search within yourself for this reason. What is it that stops you from just using those features you need and ignoring the others? What is it that stops you from just recording your idea?


I could make music just with a flower (in fact I did yesterday) but I love it if my sequencer of choice has many many useful features which help me to put my ideas into actual music.

And good freezing is very important to me because my cpu is nearly always almost maxing out. If you tend to stare at a blank screen then of course you don't know this problem.

[brambos]

I think if you have this problem then you should search within yourself for this reason. What is it that stops you from just using those features you need and ignoring the others? What is it that stops you from just recording your idea?

Exactly, that's why I chose not to go for Fruity (I need linear sequencing) or Cubase (couldn't get used to the workflow) but start working on my own no-nonsense host. That was back in November '04, when I booted up Delphi 5 to start creating Tunafish.

[kritikon]

2 things:

1 praiseworthy: Your idea of freezing different sections and omitting the silence inbetween is potentially a bit of a timesaver. I can see a use for that.

1 not-so-praiseworthy: why are you so stuck with the idea of freeze? All it is, is a slightly quicker way of rendering as a macro. 1 button push instead of 3. If you simply use render and give the clip a name, you will have your perfectly useable audio clip that you can then move about, use Eq and FX on etc. That's all a frozen channel is - a section of rendered audio that is frozen. That's where freeze is actually a hindrance in some hosts. I use Cubase SX2...in that host, when I render audio from a source...it already automatically creates a new audio channel and puts the rendered audio in place. All I then do is mute the VSTi and/or FX plugins used on it (there is a global channel insert bypass, so it is not difficult to do) and mute the midi channel too. In those 3 moves, I have frozen a channel into audio that I can then process in whtever way I choose to, and I save CPU on the plugins used originally.


So overall...it ain't too bad an idea. You can however do all of that in a few simple moves using your host's render. Freeze isn't the only command to convert to audio. It's another one of those features that really just increases bloat coding on any host - to be perfectly honest, I wish they'd take freeze out of Cubase - I don't use it, I don't want to use it, and it just makes for more coding to get in the way of possible smooth running of the host. I could always render in the past, and I can continue to do so without halting my workflow or creativity in the slightest. It's only a couple of extra mouse clicks FFS.

It seems like now there is a freeze button, all of a sudden everyone forgot how to click render. It was never anything but a very minor time saver. Not even useful IMO. More bloat - I want less bloat...maybe more genuine workflow improvements.

[jens]

I think if you have this problem then you should search within yourself for this reason. What is it that stops you from just using those features you need and ignoring the others? What is it that stops you from just recording your idea?

Exactly, that's why I chose not to go for Fruity (I need linear sequencing) or Cubase (couldn't get used to the workflow) but start working on my own no-nonsense host. That was back in November '04, when I booted up Delphi 5 to start creating Tunafish.

and that's a cool thing!

[superddman]

2 things:

1 praiseworthy: Your idea of freezing different sections and omitting the silence inbetween is potentially a bit of a timesaver. I can see a use for that.

1 not-so-praiseworthy: why are you so stuck with the idea of freeze? All it is, is a slightly quicker way of rendering as a macro. 1 button push instead of 3. If you simply use render and give the clip a name, you will have your perfectly useable audio clip that you can then move about, use Eq and FX on etc. That's all a frozen channel is - a section of rendered audio that is frozen. That's where freeze is actually a hindrance in some hosts. I use Cubase SX2...in that host, when I render audio from a source...it already automatically creates a new audio channel and puts the rendered audio in place. All I then do is mute the VSTi and/or FX plugins used on it (there is a global channel insert bypass, so it is not difficult to do) and mute the midi channel too. In those 3 moves, I have frozen a channel into audio that I can then process in whtever way I choose to, and I save CPU on the plugins used originally.


So overall...it ain't too bad an idea. You can however do all of that in a few simple moves using your host's render. Freeze isn't the only command to convert to audio. It's another one of those features that really just increases bloat coding on any host - to be perfectly honest, I wish they'd take freeze out of Cubase - I don't use it, I don't want to use it, and it just makes for more coding to get in the way of possible smooth running of the host. I could always render in the past, and I can continue to do so without halting my workflow or creativity in the slightest. It's only a couple of extra mouse clicks FFS.

It seems like now there is a freeze button, all of a sudden everyone forgot how to click render. It was never anything but a very minor time saver. Not even useful IMO. More bloat - I want less bloat...maybe more genuine workflow improvements.

If you add up those mouse clicks you are wasting alot of time. Why would you not want simple things like this automated?

[superddman]

Try having a look at Zynewave Podium.

This features the render to track idea for each single track and also the whole lot to a Master Track. Once the master track is rendered, the sub tracks are muted and removed from CPU use. However ALL tracks are easily unmuted and available to edit.

Not sure about the missing out silence bit though (New user of podium, but have ported over from Sonar 4 Pro as it was just to difficult to do anything easily)but Frit's, the podium developer, is very good at taking up customer ideas

Have a look here:http://www.zynewave.com/

Dunc

Thanks for the suggestion. I tried it before but to be honest gave up on it pretty quickly. I will have to try it again and spend more time.

[superddman]

I think if you have this problem then you should search within yourself for this reason. What is it that stops you from just using those features you need and ignoring the others? What is it that stops you from just recording your idea?

Exactly, that's why I chose not to go for Fruity (I need linear sequencing) or Cubase (couldn't get used to the workflow) but start working on my own no-nonsense host. That was back in November '04, when I booted up Delphi 5 to start creating Tunafish.

I like where Tunafish is heading. You are keeping everything minimalistic. Good luck with that.

[rounser]

It's a rare occasion that I fully agree with Bones, but I fully subscribe to the notion that working within constraints encourages creativity.

Mostly true, but to paraphrase Freud, sometimes a pain-in-the-ass workaround is just a pain-in-the-ass workaround.

Some things are too much of a hassle to do, and what isn't convenient often doesn't get done. I know that I chose my software purely because it lets me simplify - why futz around with three applications (audio editor, sequencer, sampler) when you can get it all done in one? Why use a hundred different VSTi when you can multisample and use the one friendly interface? (Ironically, the thing which lets me do this is a "render to sample slot" feature - exactly the sort of thing which is being asked for by the original poster).

Other than that, I'm with you all the way on "limitations breed creativity", but I think of that in terms of using 1 synth rather than 100, which is a different kettle of fish to what's being discussed here (a wish for a feature).

[BONES]

That was back in the day, but we should be able to advance.

We have advanced, our PC's are an order of magnitude or more faster than they were. We never had any kind of track freeze back then and no-one seemed to care. Now that we shouldn't need it, it seems that nobody can do without it. Makes no sense at all.

why futz around with three applications (audio editor, sequencer, sampler) when you can get it all done in one?

Horses for courses. I would ask why have one bloated, creaking hulk of an application to do what can more easily be broken into a series of separate tasks. e.g. Grabbing samples from a sample disc or from a DVD movie or whatever is not something I would suddenly want to do in the middle of arranging a new song, its something I sit down and do in bulk. So keeping my audio editing out of my sequencer keeps both applications svelte and easy to work with. There is some slight overalp, i find both equally useful for mastering, but I have never found myself having to have both open at once, except through the link in ORION to invoke Cool Edit 2000 automatically. And because they are linked its kind of like having them built-in to the same application, but not really as they are each set-up to do their own thing effectively.

Why use a hundred different VSTi when you can multisample and use the one friendly interface?

Why f**k about multi-sampling something that can be more easily loaded and tweaked as a VSTi?

Other than that, I'm with you all the way on "limitations breed creativity", but I think of that in terms of using 1 synth rather than 100, which is a different kettle of fish to what's being discussed here (a wish for a feature).

Actually it seems to me, given the power of modern PC's, that people who find themsleves running out of CPU are probably just throwing instruments and effects at a project without thought or planning, simply because they can. Give those same people limitations and it is most likely they will find more elegant solutions to most of their little problems. That is why I like having only two effect inserts - if I can't get something sounding right with two effects on it, I figure I am better off looking for a more appropriate sound rather than trying to kludge it into a mix.

[superddman]

That was back in the day, but we should be able to advance.

We have advanced, our PC's are an order of magnitude or more faster than they were. We never had any kind of track freeze back then and no-one seemed to care. Now that we shouldn't need it, it seems that nobody can do without it. Makes no sense at all.

why futz around with three applications (audio editor, sequencer, sampler) when you can get it all done in one?

Horses for courses. I would ask why have one bloated, creaking hulk of an application to do what can more easily be broken into a series of separate tasks. e.g. Grabbing samples from a sample disc or from a DVD movie or whatever is not something I would suddenly want to do in the middle of arranging a new song, its something I sit down and do in bulk. So keeping my audio editing out of my sequencer keeps both applications svelte and easy to work with. There is some slight overalp, i find both equally useful for mastering, but I have never found myself having to have both open at once, except through the link in ORION to invoke Cool Edit 2000 automatically. And because they are linked its kind of like having them built-in to the same application, but not really as they are each set-up to do their own thing effectively.

Why use a hundred different VSTi when you can multisample and use the one friendly interface?

Why f**k about multi-sampling something that can be more easily loaded and tweaked as a VSTi?

Other than that, I'm with you all the way on "limitations breed creativity", but I think of that in terms of using 1 synth rather than 100, which is a different kettle of fish to what's being discussed here (a wish for a feature).

Actually it seems to me, given the power of modern PC's, that people who find themsleves running out of CPU are probably just throwing instruments and effects at a project without thought or planning, simply because they can. Give those same people limitations and it is most likely they will find more elegant solutions to most of their little problems. That is why I like having only two effect inserts - if I can't get something sounding right with two effects on it, I figure I am better off looking for a more appropriate sound rather than trying to kludge it into a mix.

I am an advocate of automating things which are repetitive. I just don't get why you would prefer to do something in 20 mouse clicks instead of 1 mouse click.