Coming Next

[djsubject]

like multi-processor support are adressed in the "coming next"

we can expect more audio stuff before that comes according to jorgens last post i saw on the subject,

its a big request but i'm sure jorgen wants it in that order for a reason

but i hope its soon

but for now i just want a beta with all of the coming next list in it

Please Jorgen!!


i'll be your friend?

Subz

[kirtap910]

ok some nice additions, but...

I'm still disappointed that none of the core features/needs
like multi-processor support are adressed in the "coming next"

Hmmm, how was it ever possible to produce music on a computer with a single core only? Wasn't that the standard till just about one year ago?

Sure Jorgen should soon implement it and hopefully the code base is suitable for this, but is it really such a ultra high important core feature right now?


Patrik

[rsmus7]

it is at least for me,

my C2D pc is now almost 2 years old,
and this daw is the first I have,
where I don't need to freeze and render tracks

any other host I use has already multicore support,
and it is really a great help for me.
I use mostly vst-plugins, so cpu usage is often an issue.

I've made music before multicores,
but my workflow speeded up much with the multicores.

[D-Fusion]

ok some nice additions, but...

I'm still disappointed that none of the core features/needs
like multi-processor support are adressed in the "coming next"

Hmmm, how was it ever possible to produce music on a computer with a single core only? Wasn't that the standard till just about one year ago?

Sure Jorgen should soon implement it and hopefully the code base is suitable for this, but is it really such a ultra high important core feature right now?


Patrik

It was possible to create music back then also but you had to freeze or render tracks which made the workflow much slower than today

I am also interested in multicore support since i didn't buy a Dual core just to be able to use one core.

[DWb]

ok some nice additions, but...

I'm still disappointed that none of the core features/needs
like multi-processor support are adressed in the "coming next"

Hmmm, how was it ever possible to produce music on a computer with a single core only? Wasn't that the standard till just about one year ago?

Sure Jorgen should soon implement it and hopefully the code base is suitable for this, but is it really such a ultra high important core feature right now?

It was also possible to create music in a host with no built in bitcrusher...

[kirtap910]

ok some nice additions, but...

I'm still disappointed that none of the core features/needs
like multi-processor support are adressed in the "coming next"

Hmmm, how was it ever possible to produce music on a computer with a single core only? Wasn't that the standard till just about one year ago?

Sure Jorgen should soon implement it and hopefully the code base is suitable for this, but is it really such a ultra high important core feature right now?

It was also possible to create music in a host with no built in bitcrusher...

That's damn right!

Never said I would understand Jorgen's priorities.

And be assured:
Multi-core support would be much higher on my feature list than a bitcrusher if I was the developer of XT2!

@rsmus7 and D-Fusion:
I totally understand your points. Workflow is what both of you mentioned and this is what makes me (and I think many of us here) addicted to XT2!
Only thing is I personally first want the bugs to be ironed out - AND -
also the implementation of some features where there is no easy workaraound or no workaround at all would in my opinion be more important. (E.g. some stuff Jorgen currently seems to be working on in the area of audio)

Just my 2 cents,
Patrik

[kirtap910]

Ahh, and this was just added to the 'Coming next':

- Drum track now has support for send levels on each drum

[djsubject]

- Drum track now has support for send levels on each drum

[jens]

Hmmm, how was it ever possible to produce music on a computer with a single core only? Wasn't that the standard till just about one year ago?

How was it ever possible to travel to other countries by foot?

Well, first of all people were used to it and then people had the additional time it took available. Imagine a modern businessman had to travel to China with a sail-boat.

Computer hardware capabilities steadily improve - and so does the software. These improvements often mean a rise in cpu-/memory-consumption though. E.g. nodaways developers can make more use of oversampling. Also a better cpu-performance means having to freeze and to render less and in addition it enables you to make thorough use of things like high quality amp-simulations, where in previous years you were forced to record the already amped signal.

This means: more cpu-power = higher sound-quality + more comfort + more flexibility.

Slowly but surely these advantages then become a standard everyone expects.

Thus it is pretty bad if you buy a new cpu to access them but then can't, because your host of choice doe not support it.


Tbh I'm a bit astounded that this discussion always seems to pop up again, as if technical development was some novel idea, not something humanity has been acustomed to for thousands of years.

Back in the day people didn't even have fire.

[kirtap910]

Wow, Jens!

You surley could write books about the development of the human race...

But I think you got me a little wrong.
In the sentence after the one you cited, I said: ..., but is it really such a ultra high important core feature right now?
Also in my following post I tried to explain my opinion to this topic a litte.

No, I'm not at all against the development and usage of the newest technologies.

Only thing is that I have seen too many people always waiting for the newest technology so that they would be able to finally start with their intended productive work.
Many of them wait forever.
I used to do that too, but I'm working on it...

But that's not the topic here, and my post wasn't intended to be understood in this manner. It was only supposed to challenge the multi-core importance in contrast to other features.

But you're right when you say, that nowadays many VST's make more CPU intensive tasks than just a year ago.
And from at least that point of view it certainly is - as I said - a must to implement multi-core support more sooner than later.

Cheers,
Patrik

[AllenPOPO]

just release XT2 usable darn-it. I agree; bitcrusher? wtf? how about fixing the vst version? giving some updates to the linux customers like proper jack support? there are some great ideas n the coming next list....but If its not gonna show up soon how long can u expect us to wait? Dualcore would be great, if that takes a few updates fine but give us something better than the last build already! dont forget there are probably fresh bugs waiting; the more jorgen waits to release the more bugs we weill be waiting to get squashed.



ugh, I love XT2 but its starting to feel like we've been "in a relationship" too long



basically i want an update. 2.07 isnt cutting it.

[jens]

ugh, I love XT2 but its starting to feel like we've been "in a relationship" too long

that's why I ditched the bitch half a year ago...

[jens]

But that's not the topic here, and my post wasn't intended to be understood in this manner. It was only supposed to challenge the multi-core importance in contrast to other features.

ok., I get your point - personally I think it's very important to implement it real soon though (albeit I don't even have a multicore cpu myself)

But I think you got me a little wrong.

I have to admit you are a little right about that.

[kirtap910]

But I think you got me a little wrong.

I have to admit you are a little right about that.

I thought so a little.

[untitled211]

stills my favorite software!! and its great to see more stuff coming..
understand people wanting their fav features , i have some stuff that i wanna see it coming too - cpu meter, markers-!.