Everything you want to know about Studio One 3.2

[ghettosynth]

I'm just not convinced that it's modeling anything in particular, there are really too many variables in how crosstalk manifests in real analog hardware that I don't think that it's worth the effort to model it accurately.

There are simple usability issues. Can you imagine the confusion if you made the crosstalk variable based on 'distance' from the largest aggressor channels or pre-fader? "Hey, this DAW sucks, I can hear drums in the mix but they're all muted" etc etc. You're back to the Waves "why is there is a noise generator in this plugin?" discussion. Well, it's like this....

Agreed, but, you could model it after a specific console. I've had small mixers that had this issue, notably, a small spirt mixer and a Fostex 8-bus. Their behavior was quite different.

I'm not really hip to what's on the market for "summing" mixers, but, I do find this advertisement interesting on the first one that pops up on Sweetwater.

It raises the bar on its legendary 2-BUS predecessor with even lower crosstalk, distortion, and noise-floor performance

Maybe when analog performance gets better we'll see someone talking about the ideal level of crosstalk and noise.

[LawrenceF]

Product management is all about determining the most important features to meet the business goals of an organization. Developers implement the features that management wants, not the other way around.

Edit: Let me keep this short so it won't keep going on and on. Again, your theory is likely flawed, the product manager there in Hamburg is one of the developers, not a separate entity calling the shots from somewhere else. As far as I know, what they actually directly said themselves in a live interview is that they, as a team, do that, collectively, sit down and determine what features will be in the product next.

Here you go. No point speculating about something that's on the public record...

[ghettosynth]

Product management is all about determining the most important features to meet the business goals of an organization. Developers implement the features that management wants, not the other way around.

Edit: Let me keep this short so it won't keep going on and on. Again, your theory is likely flawed, the product manager there in Hamburg is one of the developers, not a separate entity calling the shots from somewhere else. As far as I know, what they actually directly said themselves in a live interview is that they, as a team, do that, collectively, sit down and determine what features will be in the product next.

Here you go. No point speculating about something that's on the public record...

And in the first five minutes of the interview he tells you that 1) a team decides, he didn't say that they were all developers, and 2) that they use a market driven approach. They are trying to reach specific customer segments, they say that, point blank. He told you that AS CTO, it's not his decision, it's a team decision. He's the CTO, he's going to have a business as well as a technical focus and if he's in the room so are other executives.

In 2006, KristalLabs Software Ltd., a startup company founded by Wolfgang Kundrus and Matthias Juwan, began working on Capture™ and Studio One® in cooperation with PreSonus. The partnership brought great results and was further strengthened when PreSonus Software Ltd. took over all assets of KristalLabs, including the personal expertise of its founders and the whole development team.

I can almost guarantee you that PreSonus has input on who these market segments are. To me, that entire exchange was code for, "we're trying to grow our market share and that's what defines the new features."

It doesn't matter what hats you wear, if you are using a market driven approach, if money is your focus first and foremost, it will flavor your efforts. Cockos is an anomaly. Frankel claims to run the project as a business, but he doesn't have the same pressures to produce growth that many/most firms do. To me, that difference manifests itself in the approach to creating software.

YMMV.

[incubus]

Frankel was a f**king gazillionaire BEFORE he decided to start reaper

[SLiC]

Comping (subtle subject change.....)

I am realy impressed with s1s new comping update, it's realy fast and logical, excellent small usability changes. I realy think this is one area that S1 realy excels. I still love BITWiG (as I am a modular user and realy treat it like a big synth workstation) but for recording and editing live instruments, the comping, simple one screen layout and intigration melodyne make S1 the best choise for me (and I have now sold my Cubase 8 licence, so I am committed!)

I didn't get in to S1 until V3, so have been impressed with this free update (with stieny we paid for updates like this), what's presonus normal Pattern on updates, is 3.5 likely to be a bigger paid update?

I am using S1 with my X32 desk at the moment and the makie remote works fine, but the presonus desk intigration looks quite impressive - anyone here using S1 with the new presonus desks?

[Gamma-UT]

Well, if you say so. Could you supply a diagram of where you put the converters in an analogue recording and mixing chain?

It's quite simple actually, it's right before your DAW, known as your interface, probably what you're recording through. There are crappy ones to great ones, like Burr-Brown converters.

A DAW in an analogue recording and mixing chain, you say. Interesting. What was that you were saying about knowing the basics?

[nIGhT-SoN]

... I didn't get in to S1 until V3, so have been impressed with this free update (with stieny we paid for updates like this), what's presonus normal Pattern on updates, is 3.5 likely to be a bigger paid update.

With v1.5 and 2.5 they were free and they were big updates, almost like a whole new release. Now about 3.5, I don't know if it will be free, but judging from previous experiences it could be.

[aMUSEd]

Better be, if they start charging for halfway updates I'm out, that's a shitty practice of Steinberg's that people shouldn't accept.

[ghettosynth]

Frankel was a f**king gazillionaire BEFORE he decided to start reaper

Exactly. Moreover, he decided to start it and runs it the way that he does because he doesn't like having corporate overlords. Look it's not criticism of most business to recognize that they can't afford to run like a giant hobby. To deny that this has any impact on the choices that they make with their product releases, however, is just unrealistic.

Better be, if they start charging for halfway updates I'm out, that's a shitty practice of Steinberg's that people shouldn't accept.

No doubt. They charge quite a bit for almost nothing. Their update policy is a page out of last century.

[nIGhT-SoN]

For sure there is marketing involved, but the in the end is the user that decides if their way of doing business is the good one or not. I must say Cockos is doing marketing too, but in a different way. Also, every developer, well almost, is implementing the most requested feature, they are listening to the masses. If today I say I want all faders to be pinkish green, for sure that won't be implemented, but if the most part of users ask for it, there is a very big chance to be changed in next release.

IMPORTANT: I don't want faders to be pinkish green, just to make it clear if PreSonus is watching this thread.

[woodsdenis]

In 2006, KristalLabs Software Ltd., a startup company founded by Wolfgang Kundrus and Matthias Juwan, began working on Capture™ and Studio One® in cooperation with PreSonus. The partnership brought great results and was further strengthened when PreSonus Software Ltd. took over all assets of KristalLabs, including the personal expertise of its founders and the whole development team.

Cmon a bit of common sense here, Presonus bought the company out, do some people really believe that Presonus have no input into what they are doing ? They just continue on in Hamburg doing whatever they want and Presonus pick up the bill, reality check here. It is a business and some kind of roadmap must be in operation, Reaper is quite unique in its development and there is no comparison.

S1 is in competition with the big boys and judging by their recent marketing they are targeting ProTools users. Do I have actual proof of this, do I work for the company, no, but as a reasonably intelligent person I can draw assumptions from the information I digest. This isn't rocket science. On a separate note I think the departure of Wolfgang Kundrus was a big blow.

[LawrenceF]

And in the first five minutes of the interview he tells you that 1) a team decides, he didn't say that they were all developers, and 2) that they use a market driven approach. They are trying to reach specific customer segments, they say that, point blank. He told you that AS CTO, it's not his decision, it's a team decision. He's the CTO, he's going to have a business as well as a technical focus and if he's in the room so are other executives. YMMV.

It's amazing the lengths people will go to argue on the net. He said they can only please one user group at a time. so they choose which user they want to please in a given update and pick then pick features from a large list based on that. I didn't hear anything suggesting it was "driven by marketing" but I'm sure you'll keep arguing that anyway.

Here is "the team"... http://www.presonussoftware.com/en_US/i ... mpany-team

The main point I was making that you can't seem to grasp is that not every company works the same way so despite what you experienced before, that doesn't mean every software company on the planet works the exact same way.

[LawrenceF]

Cmon a bit of common sense here, Presonus bought the company out, do some people really believe that Presonus have no input into what they are doing ?

Nobody here ever suggested that. On the contrary.

[ghettosynth]

And in the first five minutes of the interview he tells you that 1) a team decides, he didn't say that they were all developers, and 2) that they use a market driven approach. They are trying to reach specific customer segments, they say that, point blank. He told you that AS CTO, it's not his decision, it's a team decision. He's the CTO, he's going to have a business as well as a technical focus and if he's in the room so are other executives. YMMV.

It's amazing the lengths people will go to argue on the net. He said their team, their team in Hamburg, makes that decision. He said they can only please one user group at a time. so they choose which user they want to please in a given update and pick then pick features from a large list based on that. I didn't hear anything suggesting it was "driven by marketing" but I'm sure you'll keep arguing that anyway.

The main point I was making that you can't seem to grasp is that not every company works the same way so despite what you experienced before, that doesn't mean every software company on the planet works the exact same way.

As I said, the hats that someone wears are constrained by the size of the company, they're pretty small so product management may not be a stand-alone title. I told you that I don't work for them so I'm not privy to details, but you are still confused as to what that video is telling you.

I think that you are reading way too much into an interview with a CTO and GM and don't have enough experience with software to know what he meant by that. That makes naive users like you happy, it's not what happens. What he meant by types is "market segments."

My god man, he even uses the phrase "target customer."

He does not say "my team makes a decision", specifically says "it's A team that makes the decision." He's very careful with his language, as you'd expect, and, in fact, the entire interview is structured to have you believe that the input is from feature requests, it isn't.

That interview is marketing targeted at YOU.

Yes, management will listen to feature requests and implement them if they are in line with their business and product goals, this is just a win win. However, I'm sure that everyone here has experienced popular feature requests that make sense but go ignored for years.

The only sentence you need to hear is "we start by defining the target customer and tells us which set of features goes into a version. "

Cmon a bit of common sense here, Presonus bought the company out, do some people really believe that Presonus have no input into what they are doing ? They just continue on in Hamburg doing whatever they want and Presonus pick up the bill, reality check here. It is a business and some kind of roadmap must be in operation, Reaper is quite unique in its development and there is no comparison.

[S1 is in competition with the big boys and judging by their recent marketing they are targeting ProTools users. Do I have actual proof of this, do I work for the company, no, but as a reasonably intelligent person I can draw assumptions from the information I digest. This isn't rocket science.

Exactly. Good insight on protools users. LawrenceF, pay attention, that's what was meant by "which types of customers we can make happy", in their case, it's code for "which types of users can we obtain new market share with." It is completely a business driven decision and undoubtedly takes input from marketing and management at Presonus.

Cmon a bit of common sense here, Presonus bought the company out, do some people really believe that Presonus have no input into what they are doing ?

Nobody here ever suggested that. I only suggested that the features they put into the product may not be "driven by marketing" (the common net implication that people who have no clue what a company does behind closed doors toss around on forums like this), but may indeed also be driven by what they actually personally want to do with it at any given time.

Uh, no, you've been arguing that devs alone make the decision. I point blank stated that there is a spectrum of balance that some companies are more driven by business interests than others. Remember you responded to my assertion that Reaper is LESS business driven in the way that S1 is and that people who are annoyed by marketing might prefer Reaper's approach.

Some people seem to think that's it's not possible for a small software company to do that, that if you're owned by a larger company you cannot have any say at all into what you create and when.

You're the only person here creating black and white scenarios, dismissing other arguments if they don't have some smoking gun proof. You have misinterpreted what I've written to suit whatever it is you're trying to argue. You have resisted all along that Presonus has input, please see above where you attempt to claim that "team" does not include Presonus.

Not sure why that is ... except to support a previous argument. Either thing, or variations of either thing, can possibly be true, but since - literally none of us here know - we don't know, so we just speculate and argue based on our speculations.

No, "you" don't know. However, there is plenty of evidence, some provided by you, that tells a reasonable persone everything that they need to know to draw a reasonable conclusion.

The S1 roadmap is driven largely by Presonus' business needs. That doesn't meant that devs wont' contribute to the process, but it's naive to think that it's comparable to a company like Cockos who doesn't have to answer to a corporate overlord and perhaps other investors/shareholders.

[LawrenceF]

Uh, no, you've been arguing that devs alone make the decision.

Not really. I've been saying that none of us here know how much of any of that happens or not there because none of us work there. It's you who have been arguing that you know exactly how all of that happens there while I have been saying...

"Anything is possible, but none of us know that for sure do we?"

I even said what you believe may be true, but you don't know that for certain... even though you continue to suggest that you do.

I'm not even sure of your root point. What is the potential downside of being "driven by marketing", that someone who doesn't want that should avoid companies that do whatever you mean by that? The companies you apply that phrase to seem to be doing rather well in every way I can see.

Reaper, a great daw, isn't "driven by marketing", but has no more or less happy or unhappy users than anyone else afaict so I don't understand what point you were making.

Anyway, it's one of those random phrases people toss around in places like KVR & GS, like "development resources", while having no actual idea of how many resources there are in a given place or how they're even being used, it's mostly just things users toss around to support whatever argument they're making at any given time.