Let's discuss the DAW market right now (Logic, Studio One, FL Studio etc)

[antic604]

Other than what we've discussed already, I think the DAW market will stagnate for a bit in terms of adding new features, because - I can imagine - dev teams have been and will continue to be busy with MIDI 2.0 and ARM migration. It's gonna be interesting to see who pulls ahead delivering product ready for the market: small, nimble teams like Reaper & Bitwig or big, resourceful teams like Apple, Steinberg or Ableton.

[andypryce]

Other than what we've discussed already, I think the DAW market will stagnate for a bit in terms of adding new features, because - I can imagine - dev teams have been and will continue to be busy with MIDI 2.0 and ARM migration. It's gonna be interesting to see who pulls ahead delivering product ready for the market: small, nimble teams like Reaper & Bitwig or big, resourceful teams like Apple, Steinberg or Ableton.

I only see Studio One, BWS and maybe Waveform developers enthusiastic and excited for innovation. The rest is just too cool

[oneway]

Slightly OT but since a few folks were discussing the utility of features like NRPN and “legacy” stuff like MIDI Translation-

Anyone ever seen Omnisphere’s Hardware Synth integration? That would be easier to do for any soft synth with these features. NRPN would allow mapping hundreds of high-resolution parameters to soft synths and Midi Translation could scale it down where needed.

If more DAWs fully supported this stuff and had systems like Studio One’s Control Link with easy device template sharing, it would be markedly easier for companies to provide this kind of integration.

[machinesworking]

...
Anyway, they're useful, ...

For the few people in the need of those...

Tbh the most (apart from the different timecode options) are relicts of the past, never worked well and never will but there are some who don´t want to let them go...

Name another way to store presets from a hardware synth in a DAW besides SysEx.

Same with MTC or MMC. Those more or less survived because the other solutions are abandoned or worse. Rewire is gone, Ableton Link is specifically for live jamming really, not for syncing two DAWs etc. NRPN is going to be brought into MIDI 2.0, in no way are the features it was used to bring going away.

Yes things change, but to deny the usefulness of something because it's being depreciated is missing the point a bit. Kore and rewire did not get replaced by better solutions, period.

[machinesworking]

Other than what we've discussed already, I think the DAW market will stagnate for a bit in terms of adding new features, because - I can imagine - dev teams have been and will continue to be busy with MIDI 2.0 and ARM migration. It's gonna be interesting to see who pulls ahead delivering product ready for the market: small, nimble teams like Reaper & Bitwig or big, resourceful teams like Apple, Steinberg or Ableton.

MIDI 2.0 alone is going to bring innovation. As far as who gets there first, the other factor is whether a DAWs particular MIDI 1.0 implementation gets in the way of 2 or not. Hard to say whether having to rewrite from scratch or having to adjust your almost there MIDI 1 implementation will be easier. I'm betting Live, Bitwig, Cubase all transition first. Simply looking at history the only stop gap in Ableton's run were MPE currently and clip record automation. Steinberg are always first in line, and Bitwig was developed when most of the ideas for 2.0 were already out there.

[oneway]

...
Anyway, they're useful, ...

For the few people in the need of those...

Tbh the most (apart from the different timecode options) are relicts of the past, never worked well and never will but there are some who don´t want to let them go...

Name another way to store presets from a hardware synth in a DAW besides SysEx.

Exactly. Nobody’s come up with a better system than SysEx for hardware patch recall, and brand new synths still use it. And even if one wanted to make the argument that hardware is a relic of the past and should be let go, OK- where is the standard patch recall for software?

This stuff may look like old relics but modern devs haven’t come up with much like it. I can not understand why over all these years nobody settled on a way to easily transfer patches from a soft synth into a host’s browser without having to load up apps like Komplete Kontrol, Nektarine, Kore, and VIP which honestly do a poor job anyway.

[machinesworking]

...
Anyway, they're useful, ...

For the few people in the need of those...

Tbh the most (apart from the different timecode options) are relicts of the past, never worked well and never will but there are some who don´t want to let them go...

Name another way to store presets from a hardware synth in a DAW besides SysEx.

Exactly. Nobody’s come up with a better system than SysEx for hardware patch recall, and brand new synths still use it. And even if one wanted to make the argument that hardware is a relic of the past and should be let go, OK- where is the standard patch recall for software?

This stuff may look like old relics but modern devs haven’t come up with much like it. I can not understand why over all these years nobody settled on a way to easily transfer patches from a soft synth into a host’s browser without having to load up apps like Komplete Kontrol, Nektarine, Kore, and VIP which honestly do a poor job anyway.

In a way, DAWs do though, most soft synths in most DAWs recall their tweaked settings in a song, not the saved patches.

Now it being taken a step further like you're suggesting is what I would like to see, a default set of patches loaded into a DAW for instant program changes based on the name of the patch. That requires cooperation across the 20+ odd DAWs out there though. Plus hardly anyone works like that anymore, they just load additional soft synths for each sound etc. Probably didn't happen because ten years ago computers weren't fast enough to change patches in a have duty soft synth without glitching.

[Trancit]

Name another way to store presets from a hardware synth in a DAW besides SysEx.
...

Rant mode: on!!

The lack of something better isn´t a reason nor an excuse for demanding every DAW offering wonky methods which do not work most of the time anyway...

1. There was never any 100% reliable way to communicate between hardware and and computer...
Midi was always unuseable and will ever be... this includes the whole midi protocol, it´s nice timing issues, MMC and all this nonsense which caused 90% more trouble than it was ever working...

2. Because of the first point alone there is for me not a single acceptable reason to even consider to work with hardware anymore not to speak that there isn´t any single evidential advantage compared to nowadays technology apart from subjective impressions, fanboism and some nostalgia...

When I only read statements like "My Moog has a much bigger bottom end than any softsynth" and similar bollocks I always start to reach out for my phone to call the men in white...
In the 80 and 90´s we would have killed our mom for the technology available today ...
I can work sample accurate inside the box without worrying much about anything else and have cheap technology which offers 100 times better quality than all hardware units ever had...
and now I shall go back to this misery because the noise floor and the cheap components of my old synths and FX sounded somewhat more musical and more "alive" than the bad bad oversteril recordings of our nowadays recordings???

You want to live in the past??? Then take the past as it was... full of not working stuff, difficulties and human futile tries of working around these restrictions...
Best way: Go the Jean-Michel Jarre way!! Throw your computer out of the window... record everything live into multitrack tape machines and mix it down the old way... Wohooo...the old tape brought the groove back and geled everything together so nicely... what a bullsh*t!!

I didn´t want to rant here but I was there ... I had to work with that sh*t and this is what I think about ancient technology from the last century and any claim of implementing 50 year old stuff (which was already shitty as it was new) into modern tools ...

Rant mode: off!!

Peace!!

[oneway]

Plus hardly anyone works like that anymore, they just load additional soft synths for each sound etc.

I think perhaps I didn’t explain it so well. I don’t want to switch between presets on a track; that would be silly. I want a standard container format for patch settings- as in, purchase a pack of 64 presets for Serum and have them show up, hopefully tagged, in my DAW. Whatever DAW I use. The FXB format or whatever never worked that great and nobody uses it.

As you mentioned, the framework is already there for the DAW to store cached plugin settings from VST or AU plugins. But, perhaps because the alternative is just organizing cr*p yourself, it isn’t as ridiculous as the alternative to MIDI was in 1980 (dozens of proprietary formats). Guess that’s why nobody ever got together to make this a thing.

When I think of the DAW market today, this is a huge hole in the collective feature set. Komplete Kontrol only works well for NI’s stuff. Heck, VIP doesn’t even work well for AIR’s synths and they freakin made it

I organize what I use most, of course, but I can’t help but think that there could be a much easier way to do all this.

[Tj Shredder]

1. There was never any 100% reliable way to communicate between hardware and and computer...
Midi was always unuseable and will ever be... this includes the whole midi protocol, it´s nice timing issues, MMC and all this nonsense which caused 90% more trouble than it was ever working...

2. Because of the first point alone ....

You, or the devs of your DAW must have done something wrong. I could rely on Midi 100% reliably since 1984. Ok, back then I‘ve programmed my tools myself... And still today, if I need something special regarding Midi, I fire up Max and cobble it together in a few minutes...
In the beginning hardware manufacturers would happily tell all details about their Midi implementation. Somehow they don‘t do that anymore...
Midi is one of the most stable protocols in this fast changing world because it had been the only one you could rely on across any manufacturer despite its age...

[machinesworking]

1. There was never any 100% reliable way to communicate between hardware and and computer...
Midi was always unuseable and will ever be... this includes the whole midi protocol, it´s nice timing issues, MMC and all this nonsense which caused 90% more trouble than it was ever working...

2. Because of the first point alone ....

You, or the devs of your DAW must have done something wrong. I could rely on Midi 100% reliably since 1984. Ok, back then I‘ve programmed my tools myself... And still today, if I need something special regarding Midi, I fire up Max and cobble it together in a few minutes...
In the beginning hardware manufacturers would happily tell all details about their Midi implementation. Somehow they don‘t do that anymore...
Midi is one of the most stable protocols in this fast changing world because it had been the only one you could rely on across any manufacturer despite its age...

I agree, I think people just got turned off by bugs in their systems, and lose interest in fixing them. SysEx, does exactly what it says it will do, but sometimes your system will get in the way, MIDI is susceptible to issues from your computer. I had Beat Clock issues caused by a Logitech driver, it didn't affect any other part of my DAW, so at first I'm flipping out at Ableton, and thinking about how terrible Beat Clock is, then removing the driver and everything is dandy.

[Trancit]