Bazille rev2435

[elxsound]

Is there a way to make Bazille always open at a specific zoomed level? I'd love for it to default at 170%

I'm also experiencing an issue with the preset dropdown. When I'm on my last saved preset, if I right click on the preset name, no presets are displayed. If I arrow back, to another preset, then my list appears again. I'm using AU in Live 9.1.3 on OSX 10.9.3

And lastly... a question. I just bought my license. How can I overwrite the beta license?

[Gone soft]

How can I overwrite the beta license?

I'll quote myself (and Urs) on this one :

You can do as Urs explained in the Bazille Public Beta thread to clear your userinfo first:

just delete the following file to "unregister":

Win: Vstplugins/Bazille.data/Support/com.u-he.Bazille.user.txt
Mac: MacHD/Users/You/Library/App…Support/com.u-he.Bazille.plist

- Urs

Now that you've emptied the userinfo you can just (re)load the plugin and enter your own.

It should also be possible to manually edit the mentioned file and replace your userinfo there.

[elxsound]

How can I overwrite the beta license?

I'll quote myself (and Urs) on this one :

You can do as Urs explained in the Bazille Public Beta thread to clear your userinfo first:

just delete the following file to "unregister":

Win: Vstplugins/Bazille.data/Support/com.u-he.Bazille.user.txt
Mac: MacHD/Users/You/Library/App…Support/com.u-he.Bazille.plist

- Urs

Now that you've emptied the userinfo you can just (re)load the plugin and enter your own.

It should also be possible to manually edit the mentioned file and replace your userinfo there.

Thank you!

[AtomOfScent]

This will likely be the only feature request I ever make, but one thing that I've always found frustrating with U-He synths is the patch management and Bazille is the same.

It's not so much of an issue when only using the factory presets, but in my opinion there REALLY needs to be an option to show ONLY favorite patches. Ideally, they would be shown in their respective originating folders, but also in a global parent section so they ALL show up in one big folder.

The reason the second part is important is for easy browsing and also because some sub folders may only have a few favourites it could lead to a lot of unnecessary folder changes and not being able to see them together.

I think all products in the U-He line could use this improvement, but I would assume Zebra is in the greatest need for it due to the number of third party patches available for it.

Thanks for the consideration.

[Kindred]

<solved>

[Urs]

This will likely be the only feature request I ever make, but one thing that I've always found frustrating with U-He synths is the patch management and Bazille is the same.

It's not so much of an issue when only using the factory presets, but in my opinion there REALLY needs to be an option to show ONLY favorite patches. Ideally, they would be shown in their respective originating folders, but also in a global parent section so they ALL show up in one big folder.

The reason the second part is important is for easy browsing and also because some sub folders may only have a few favourites it could lead to a lot of unnecessary folder changes and not being able to see them together.

I think all products in the U-He line could use this improvement, but I would assume Zebra is in the greatest need for it due to the number of third party patches available for it.

Thanks for the consideration.

We'll be getting there! I've been a bit absent minded due to a bug hunting marathon during the past few months. As this comes to a resolution, we'll hopefully start crunching on the ever growing list of feature requests. A favourites folder, preset search and meta data is pretty high up on that list.

Cheers,

- Urs

[winds350]

Just please don't make the preset system so complex that the user needs to write a database query to load a single preset.

On that topic, why does the preset tree now start collapsed? The only thing that accomplishes is to make sure that at least one extra mouse click is required to load any preset not at the top level. Is that going to be restored to the proper behavior soon? Or is it configurable?

[Urs]

Just please don't make the preset system so complex that the user needs to write a database query to load a single preset.

Hahaha, no, of course not.

On that topic, why does the preset tree now start collapsed? The only thing that accomplishes is to make sure that at least one extra mouse click is required to load any preset not at the top level. Is that going to be restored to the proper behavior soon? Or is it configurable?

This was a pretty frequent feature request. I guess we'll make it configurable once we manage to implement a proper preferences panel.

[winds350]

On that topic, why does the preset tree now start collapsed? The only thing that accomplishes is to make sure that at least one extra mouse click is required to load any preset not at the top level. Is that going to be restored to the proper behavior soon? Or is it configurable?

This was a pretty frequent feature request. I guess we'll make it configurable once we manage to implement a proper preferences panel.

As I'm sure you are aware, people don't usually submit "Don't change feature" requests, which tends to devalue the views of the people who bought the product and are happy with the way it works.

I know there are a number of people on these boards who advocate for more complex preset handling systems. But from what I can tell, none of the recently released synths are much different from the u-he synths, and a good few aren't even as sophisticated as that. Yet those new synths seem to be doing fine. And it's not like third party preset management products are springing up all over the place, so I really question if there is a positive market impact of sophisticated preset management for a synth. If you are trying to shift the revenue from synths to their presets, like Camel Audio seemed to indicate they wanted to do, then it makes sense. But that's no longer a synth as much as a preset database supporting just one synth variant.

The different views likely stem from workflows. If you tend to select presets with a MIDI controller, then a "Load Bank" system like DUNE2 or Spire are going to work for you, and search based preset systems likely aren't. And if you have millions of presets for a synth, I suspect the zen-based Alchemy database system may be what you want.

[elxsound]

On that topic, why does the preset tree now start collapsed? The only thing that accomplishes is to make sure that at least one extra mouse click is required to load any preset not at the top level. Is that going to be restored to the proper behavior soon? Or is it configurable?

This was a pretty frequent feature request. I guess we'll make it configurable once we manage to implement a proper preferences panel.

As I'm sure you are aware, people don't usually submit "Don't change feature" requests, which tends to devalue the views of the people who bought the product and are happy with the way it works.

I know there are a number of people on these boards who advocate for more complex preset handling systems. But from what I can tell, none of the recently released synths are much different from the u-he synths, and a good few aren't even as sophisticated as that. Yet those new synths seem to be doing fine. And it's not like third party preset management products are springing up all over the place, so I really question if there is a positive market impact of sophisticated preset management for a synth. If you are trying to shift the revenue from synths to their presets, like Camel Audio seemed to indicate they wanted to do, then it makes sense. But that's no longer a synth as much as a preset database supporting just one synth variant.

The different views likely stem from workflows. If you tend to select presets with a MIDI controller, then a "Load Bank" system like DUNE2 or Spire are going to work for you, and search based preset systems likely aren't. And if you have millions of presets for a synth, I suspect the zen-based Alchemy database system may be what you want.

I think the Dark Zebra was a good example of how and why a more complex preset management system *could* be more helpful. The patches are extremely varied by type and purpose, but still lumped together in large categories. For a utilization beyond music production (but of course, capable of inclusion depending on user workflow), an expanded meta data option could further aid those using u-he synths for film, television, gaming, performance as well as music production (in all it's forms). When compared to using samples (for production), there are 3rd party options like Soundminer and Basehead (as well as many other and still powerful programs). On the synth side, there's Kore 2, which is no longer officially supported by Native-Instruments, so it becomes difficult to justify spending time to organize content in a system that may lose functionality as new computer hardware and new OS iterations are made available.

Anyway, I wouldn't fear of losing an easy system for an overly complex system. Urs and team seem to be straddling the line very well between the larger part of their user base and those with specialty needs, and in most cases from what I've seen both camps benefit well from the changes made so far to respective U-he software (my 2 cents anyways on what I've seen so far).

[winds350]

I think the Dark Zebra was a good example of how and why a more complex preset management system *could* be more helpful. The patches are extremely varied by type and purpose, but still lumped together in large categories. For a utilization beyond music production (but of course, capable of inclusion depending on user workflow), an expanded meta data option could further aid those using u-he synths for film, television, gaming, performance as well as music production (in all it's forms). When compared to using samples (for production), there are 3rd party options like Soundminer and Basehead (as well as many other and still powerful programs). On the synth side, there's Kore 2, which is no longer officially supported by Native-Instruments, so it becomes difficult to justify spending time to organize content in a system that may lose functionality as new computer hardware and new OS iterations are made available.

Anyway, I wouldn't fear of losing an easy system for an overly complex system. Urs and team seem to be straddling the line very well between the larger part of their user base and those with specialty needs, and in most cases from what I've seen both camps benefit well from the changes made so far to respective U-he software (my 2 cents anyways on what I've seen so far).

The complexity of the Dark Zebra and it's non-traditional categories has always made me confident that u-he wouldn't come up with half-way solutions that made things difficult with no real value. And that they would come to realize a real complete solution would likely take more than a doubling of number of developers in the company. Anything done would have to be extremely flexible and powerful. But then all the little support features, like backups, like two-way synching of meta-data changes between a desktop and laptop without being able to assume internet access, like refactoring when a user decides their initial attempt at categories really doesn't work. Frankly, I think that any realistic solution is outside the scope of a single VSTi. A company like u-he, because of the number of products they have, might be able to pull something off if it covered all their effects/synths and had a separate management entity. But without the management features, I really think things like meta-data are more marketing check box than reliable, useful functionality.

Anyway, I guess I was just surprised by the collapsed directory tree. I really thought that was a bug. It's such an irritating thing to always have to go click on it to open it up. And while I don't think preset systems really impact synth sales that much, that change seems like it would have a negative impact on the demo experience. A user not used to u-he synths, but demoing one, will see some presets in the dropdown in the main window. If they then go to the patches page they see the same presets, and really nothing more. Unless you know to click on 'local' to expand it, you would think that's all the presets the product has. I don't sell soft synths for a living, so maybe it doesn't matter, but I had the impression that demos and preset counts were important sales tools. Maybe not so much for u-he, given their strong reputation.

I have to admit that it may well be me, since I can see absolutely no benefit to the collapsed tree such that it would be a feature requested by anyone, yet clearly it was.

[elxsound]

I think the Dark Zebra was a good example of how and why a more complex preset management system *could* be more helpful. The patches are extremely varied by type and purpose, but still lumped together in large categories. For a utilization beyond music production (but of course, capable of inclusion depending on user workflow), an expanded meta data option could further aid those using u-he synths for film, television, gaming, performance as well as music production (in all it's forms). When compared to using samples (for production), there are 3rd party options like Soundminer and Basehead (as well as many other and still powerful programs). On the synth side, there's Kore 2, which is no longer officially supported by Native-Instruments, so it becomes difficult to justify spending time to organize content in a system that may lose functionality as new computer hardware and new OS iterations are made available.

Anyway, I wouldn't fear of losing an easy system for an overly complex system. Urs and team seem to be straddling the line very well between the larger part of their user base and those with specialty needs, and in most cases from what I've seen both camps benefit well from the changes made so far to respective U-he software (my 2 cents anyways on what I've seen so far).

The complexity of the Dark Zebra and it's non-traditional categories has always made me confident that u-he wouldn't come up with half-way solutions that made things difficult with no real value. And that they would come to realize a real complete solution would likely take more than a doubling of number of developers in the company. Anything done would have to be extremely flexible and powerful. But then all the little support features, like backups, like two-way synching of meta-data changes between a desktop and laptop without being able to assume internet access, like refactoring when a user decides their initial attempt at categories really doesn't work. Frankly, I think that any realistic solution is outside the scope of a single VSTi. A company like u-he, because of the number of products they have, might be able to pull something off if it covered all their effects/synths and had a separate management entity. But without the management features, I really think things like meta-data are more marketing check box than reliable, useful functionality.

Anyway, I guess I was just surprised by the collapsed directory tree. I really thought that was a bug. It's such an irritating thing to always have to go click on it to open it up. And while I don't think preset systems really impact synth sales that much, that change seems like it would have a negative impact on the demo experience. A user not used to u-he synths, but demoing one, will see some presets in the dropdown in the main window. If they then go to the patches page they see the same presets, and really nothing more. Unless you know to click on 'local' to expand it, you would think that's all the presets the product has. I don't sell soft synths for a living, so maybe it doesn't matter, but I had the impression that demos and preset counts were important sales tools. Maybe not so much for u-he, given their strong reputation.

I have to admit that it may well be me, since I can see absolutely no benefit to the collapsed tree such that it would be a feature requested by anyone, yet clearly it was.

I think a user selected option for defaulting to open or closed preset branches would be most useful. I actually like that it closes by default on the next open and I'm sure users with large/growing presets probably feel the same way, or otherwise there's lots of scrolling involved, but different people have different workflows and preferences.

I could be wrong, but I think metadata would have little to no marketing appeal. It's a useful feature for those that actually use it and I'd imagine it's a minority of the user base because it requires commitment to organization (probably more for OCD types).

I also think we're talking about two different things here... I know it's my fault for mentioning Kore 2, but I was actually referring to the possibility of metadata options unique to the instrument (as opposed to another Kore). Alchemy and Native Instruments (Massive, Absynth, FM8) have this feature and (IMO) it'd be great to have something like this built into Bazille and of course the rest of U-he product line.

[pdxindy]

I also think we're talking about two different things here... I know it's my fault for mentioning Kore 2, but I was actually referring to the possibility of metadata options unique to the instrument (as opposed to another Kore). Alchemy and Native Instruments (Massive, Absynth, FM8) have this feature and (IMO) it'd be great to have something like this built into Bazille and of course the rest of U-he product line.

I've found the database managers in the NI synths to be frustrating and about as much trouble as they are worth. Maybe it is because I don't use them often.

[Urs]

It's like everything in the plug-in world. Some want more of something, some want less of it.

We have a pretty good idea about what we can do and what we won't. Takes time though.

[Kaboom75]

So the OSC PM is based on DX7
PD and Fractal based on Casio CZ

Are the filters based on any particular hardware?