The All In One Source Bitwig Information & Speculation Thread

[Ogopogo]

Thanks Thomas. I'm not trying to say the info view/inspector as a whole isn't important.

First of all, from what I gathered from some videos, when you have a track selected the inspector shows the controls for that track, and when you have a clip selected, the inspector shows the clip properties and editing tools, correct?

All I meant was that when you are using it in the track mode it doesn't seem to have much that you couldn't edit pretty easily on the track itself in the mix or arrange view, right?

Contrast that with the cubase inspector which can show a lot of info for the selected track that you actually can't see or edit right there on the track in the arrange. For example you edit eq settings, inserts, volume, pan in the inspector when all that stuff is missing from the arrange track view. So basically it's like the track has a few shortcuts for you but the real mixing and tweaking is done with the inspector. Similar to logic. But Bitwig isn't really like that afaik.

[Ogopogo]

re audio editing I wasn't thinking of anything specific, just wondering if there's any cool stuff to be seen.

[Redukt]

First of all, thank you so much Tom for taking the time and actually answering all of these questions - much appreciated.

@Reduct:

1. I would have sworn there were audio fade handles but now I can no longer find them. Either I'm getting old or the latest beta removed them. It's easy enough to automate it, but those handles feel much more direct....

Someone posted this picture on page 94 a while back - it mentions "Default Fades", are those what you are looking for? Like in Live, where you don't have handles until you switch them on in arrengement view...and if yes, is there a general setting that always allows default fades?

3. Not sure I understand the question, you arm the tracks you want to record and then you record?

I'm a FL Studio user, if only it would be so easy there...
So parallel recording of audio and MID from different sources is in? That's great.

4. It's a different approach: Since it's internally modular, each drum pad is a device chain and you are free to create whatever you fancy. There are no such "built in" functions AFAIK, but you could for instance put those different hihats in the sampler as velocity layers and then randomize the velocity of your clip. Or put in a VST that can do this?

That sounds like an incredibly clever way to do this - you can put a sampler on a drum pad?
Was this possible in Live or any DAW before? Because this is a sound designers wet dream...

[hibidy]

I dunno. But there are times when as A CONSUMER I think "wow, there are some cool things here" and others where I'm glad I'm not just waiting in line

Some of bitwigs detailed options are indeed very appealing.

Now, release it, with the fully functional demo, so I can give the yay or nay

[tooneba]

Live has a rack which shows pads for each key and you can insert instruments(sampler, vst, etc) on those rack.

[Ogopogo]

^yes, you can put just about anything on a drum pad, so besides samples if you have a synth with a bd preset you like you can just drop it into a pad. Each pad can have an effects chain as well. Yes, this was possible in Live. "Racks" are flagship Live features. Besides drum racks you have instrument racks which let you layer instruments, and fx racks which let you layer (parallel process) effects. In Live instrument racks allow a lot of cool stuff like velocity and key range splitting, so combining everything gives you lots of options.

Bitwig seems to have its own version of each sort of racks.

Actually though, I don't think the beta testers have talked about fx grouping (fx racks) specifically. That is in there right? I would assume it is.

[Cyoon]

What i don't like in lives audio editing is the lack of a tool box with scissors etc, all has to be done with shortcuts. then for deeper audio editing you would need to load an external audio editor wich is a PITA imo.

Just compare all the cubase audio editing tools to lives and you see what i mean.

Sure i can imagine that BWS won't offer that much tools in the first place but there is still hope that it will be focused..


Also what interests me, is how the timestreching sounds, and if BWS also works with this warp engine, and if it sounds better than lives one..

[MuTools]

That sounds like an incredibly clever way to do this - you can put a sampler on a drum pad?
Was this possible in Live or any DAW before?

Sure, check out the MuDrum in MuLab and MUX Vst. You can do anything inside a MuDrum pad. You can go from using a simple sample player to building a complete modular patch per drum pad, thus also building VA drum sounds. And each and every parameter is controllable and automatable. And the MuDrum also includes sub-mixing so that the output of the MuDrum can be made ready for going to the master mix, so things stay organized. A wet dream indeed, but real! More info on http://www.mutools.com/

[Ogopogo]

A wet dream indeed, but real!

[LawrenceF]

The inspector looks good.

I think the value there is having the choice, when it's beneficial. A lot of that stuff is (typically) redundant on the clip or track but there will be times when getting to it from the Inspector will be a more fluid workflow. That shows up in hosts like Reaper where that particular workflow choice doesn't exist.

[ThomasHelzle]

sl1914: #5 Yes, you can assign whatever amount of signal you want with clip automation - absolute or relative.


As for the inspector: The last time I used Cubasis AV was in the 199x years I learned to hate it deeply.
So I can't compare it to the inspector in BWS. I still don't think I agree with you about it containing little additional value, but that may be just my impression.


And there it is in the screenshot. The last Beta contained those Fade-In and Fade-Out times and I think there were handles too, now there is just two buttons called "In" and "Out" that are supposed to get rid of clicks and add a very short fade to audio clips or -events. Curious. I think I will miss those, even thought the automation can do it just as well if not as direct and fast.
Maybe the system got too complicated with all those automations going on at the same time.


As for the Drum Machine/Drum Rack: Live does this for quite a while - can't even remember when the feature first showed up.
Of course while this has huge potential, you can easily bog down your machine if you put a Kontakt Sampler on each and every drum pad But the built in sampler and the small E-Drum Synths should go a long way for "normal" use.
For real heavy lifting I'd guess you'd go for a dedicated Plugin anyway.

I personally no longer enjoy relying too heavily on factory tools as much ad I did no matter what the host, since it makes things non-portable. Although in BWS' case there are some tools I definitely will use a lot.


hibidy: yeah, I guess we reached the point where only everybody can decide for himself in front of a demo if it clicks or not. For every nice tool in BWS you can come up with two that are missing that are in some other host. In the end the whole package must feel good to you personally. I hope it will not be to long before everybody can get his/her hands on it!


Ogopogo: Yes, FX racks are in there, either just stacking effects or have them split by Frequency, Mid-Side or combine 4 of them via the XY pad. Pretty nice options there.


Suloo: Well, Bitwig has the toolbox with the standard select and modify tool, time-select, pen, razor and scissors (knife in this case).
Again, I used Cubase seriously the last time in the 1990ies so no, I can't compare them.
I personally don't do much audio editing in a DAW anyway but mostly arrange things. Any destructive stuff I do in Audition 3.


I tried out the timestretching recently and though it sounded astonishingly good even with extreme settings on a clear female voice. There's Raw (unprocessed), Stretch, Stretch HD and Repitch algorithms on offer). If you go totally overboard even Stretch HD is getting grainy at one point, but that is in the sound design-range, not in the bread and butter range.
I don't know what is considered the top-of-the-line Timestretching ATM.?
I will definitely use the one in BWS happily.


mutools: yeah, mulab/mux have a lot of great concepts but one still has to agree with the GUI paradigm you have chosen and I personally don't. I'm using menus and right-click stuff a lot and happily so, but your software has shown me where my personal line is overstepped. Although I bought mux at one point and demoed mulab several times over the years, I always find myself annoyed after a relatively short while.

BWS on the other hand has close to the perfect GUI for my needs.

Another great less-known DAW I love is Podium, it does so many things just right (including surround) and sounds the best to my ears of any DAW I ever used (can a DAW sound good? I don't know really, but Podium does ). But it has one single feature missing that kills it for me: Bitrate adaptation. I'm not even talking about timestretching but simply playing a clip faster or slower so that it sounds correct in a give project at a given bitrate. ATM it seems you are supposed to convert all your audio to the project bitrate externally - which for me just doesn't work. I love to just try out stuff and this kills the flow.

It's fascinating that with most of the less-known DAWs there is an actual reason why they only work for a limited group of people.
It will be interesting if BWS can break out of that kind of bind - I personally think it will

Okay, long enough ramblings

Cheers,

Tom

[LawrenceF]

It's fascinating that with most of the less-known DAWs there is an actual reason why they only work for a limited group of people.
Tom

Yes it is.

I personally find - and mileage indeed does vary on this - it's not so much "what" a thing does, but "how" it does it. A lot of these modern products have a good range of feature overlap, doing much the same things, but they approach some those things very, very differently.

So like Hibidy says, feature lists only tell you so much. You kinda have to use something to really get a feel for it.

Coincidentally, for me, a lot of the smaller boutique products seem to miss the things that happen to annoy me a lot. Like when I demoed Orion, great product, but not being able to tab through track names drove me nuts.

[ThomasHelzle]

The inspector looks good.

I think the value there is having the choice, when it's beneficial. A lot of that stuff is (typically) redundant on the clip or track but there will be times when getting to it from the Inspector will be a more fluid workflow. That shows up in hosts like Reaper where that particular workflow choice doesn't exist.

Yeah, what he said
And it nice to have all that information and tools in one place...
It's easily hidden if it isn't your thing.

Cheers,

Tom

[MuTools]

I'll keep this reply short in order to not go OT. Ok, i understand what you mean Tom. Not everyone is fan of MuLab/MUX's clean UI where most functionality is 'hidden' in context menus etc. (eventhough you can access them immediately using shortcuts) I admit that i've learned from that the last years and step by step i'm rebalancing some aspects so to keep that clean UI but also provide the optional 'dashboards' some power users need. That challenging balance is a continuous ongoing creative process.

[ThomasHelzle]

It's fascinating that with most of the less-known DAWs there is an actual reason why they only work for a limited group of people.
Tom

Yes it is.

I personally find - and mileage indeed does vary on this - it's not so much "what" a thing does, but "how" it does it. A lot of these modern products have a good range of feature overlap, doing much the same things, but they approach some those things very, very differently.

So like Hibidy says, feature lists only tell you so much. You kinda have to use something to really get a feel for it.

Coincidentally, for me, a lot of the smaller boutique products seem to miss the things that happen to annoy me a lot. Like when I demoed Orion, great product, but not being able to tab through track names drove me nuts.

I guess it's often the result of a smaller (if not single-person) developer team.
Everybody who is dedicated enough to create such a software needs a lot of stubbornness and dedication as well as a vision.
Which almost always also results in some views and believes or ideas that may not work for a larger group of people.
This on one hand can bring about very original concepts and approaches (and often does) but on the other hand can lead to certain blind spots that kill the total sum, as cool as the individual parts may be.

Some of those tools are meant to be specific and happily stay small.

Problems only arise if a developer starts to feel irritated because he thinks he's unappreciated and underrated and works his ass off with little return, always fighting an uphill battle. If he changes his tools too much to appeal to more people, he will not only alienate those who do enjoy them but may also work against himself, which can be destructive in the long run. Quite a bind.

And often it's pretty small things, like you say with the tab key (which I personally never use ).

Usine is another such case: Brilliant software, the best nodal tool I have found in all my years of searching. Not only do you have nodes with access to every parameter of for instance VST plugins (as opposed to those nodal systems that have just a "midi" connector or some complicated means to access parameters), you can also build a beautiful GUI for performance and usage and create your own nodes either with scripting or C++.
But it has some small niggles that in the end often bring me back to working much more limited and complicated in Live.

Hope dies last

Cheers,

Tom