All subscribers will continue to get their products as normal, and we will have a more consistent notification system to inform users when new products are added or updates are applied.ftech wrote:Now back on track, I haven't seen any info on what is happening to people who bought into the subscription deal earlier this year, so.............
That's great to know. Thanks for your reply Steven.DNR Collaborative wrote:All subscribers will continue to get their products as normal, and we will have a more consistent notification system to inform users when new products are added or updates are applied.ftech wrote:Now back on track, I haven't seen any info on what is happening to people who bought into the subscription deal earlier this year, so.............
Steven
We have already begun discussing the layout with Michael, and yes, he will remain the lead developer of the project. As for the extent of the redesign, we would like to refrain from such conversations until we can give you a definite answer so that we can avoid making any promises that are not confirmed 100%.JasonSpatola wrote:Is any of Michael Olsen's work being ported over to this new product? Is he still involved?
Or is this going to be a *completely* new thing entirely?
This is also something we are discussing currently. We cannot say for sure, or to what extent, but our desire is indeed to make it backward compatible. Our main problem with that is, we may be removing the limiter altogether from the new project. I'm no developer in any sense of the word, and wouldn't feel comfortable evaluating that possibility until it has been addressed.geroyannis wrote:Will the replacement of MixControl be backwards compatible? Will old projects continue to work with the new version? Maybe it's a little early to ask but if there's already an answer I'd like to know.
Essentially there are two things we can do, which are removing the limiter so that we can focus efforts on fleshing out more important features of the new design, or we can divert some of that time on building a brand new, much more flexible limiter.Nielzie wrote:Why would you want to remove it?
Thank you for the feedback, we will also open a conversation in our new forum shortly to discuss the possibilities with current users and gather more information on feature requests and such. We're still outlining a large number of pressing issues such as copy protection, metering and module layout which we would like to hear from users on.geroyannis wrote:Well, I don't use the limiter that much but if it's removal would break backward compatibility I'd say keep it there.
Ohhh, f**k yes! I'm satisfied.DNR Collaborative wrote:We have already begun discussing the layout with Michael, and yes, he will remain the lead developer of the project. As for the extent of the redesign, we would like to refrain from such conversations until we can give you a definite answer so that we can avoid making any promises that are not confirmed 100%.JasonSpatola wrote:Is any of Michael Olsen's work being ported over to this new product? Is he still involved?
Or is this going to be a *completely* new thing entirely?
Steven
+8985869786975954654654645Nielzie wrote:Yes!DNR Collaborative wrote: Is there anyone who feels the limiter is really necessary?
Why would you want to remove it?
Yes - what would be the point of a comprehensive mixing tool that doesn't have a limiter?Nielzie wrote:Yes!DNR Collaborative wrote: Is there anyone who feels the limiter is really necessary?
Why would you want to remove it?
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2026
