IS Tracktion really better than Nuendo 3 ???

[james0tucson]

Timecode sync to pro film editing systems? Slave to video editing with system link? Seamless integration with Pinnacle Liquid? Security for delegating authority among a crew? Support for the ID controller?

None of this is useful anywhere except a production shop doing film or broadcast video. A shop like that can afford a PC and a copy of Tracktion with the money they find in the couch cushion, if they decide they need Tracktion for anything.

[LIMITAPROACHINGINFINITY]

lol

[dealwithit]

Nuendo is Cubase with video.

That's a nice oversimplification, isn't it?

It wasn't meant as such, but it is basically true. Nuendo shares much of Cubase's workflow and features, and if you're proficient in Cubase, Nuendo is a natural fit. Plus it does video.

[ross g]

i think it would be great if developers started making T2 specific plugins

well the easiest place to locate T specific features would be on the filter surface itself (ala the vol pan filter).

It'd be sweet if that was opened up for development, but Jules has always firmly resisted creating a plugin framework for T, and to be fair I can understand why, as it is a lot of hard work with no clear return.

i can tell you know what i'm talking about, even though i don't exactly know myself.....i'm thinking it would make T2 huge if one could buy the basic T2 app as is (and as a former PT user, i think it's great as is), and add different mnfg or third party plugin mods that connect like a virtual mixer and patchbay and fx in a rack ala reason, maybe more realtime stuff or an offline editor, or even better video support....and within the virtual mixer one could add or patch in other plugs, or vst plugs...it's just the idea of taking the plugin format a little more app specific, like protools, but in a less expensive way....

the more i try to explain it, it just sounds like vst...i'm having a real hard time explaining it....


rg

[seamoss]

actually greg,
I don't really have an opinion one way or the other.

I have never used T2, so I have no reason to debate about the two apps. It's obvious T2 is doing something right because I have watched their fan base grow and grow.


and to be completely honest.....lately...I have really been loving ableton. i USED to think Cubase was everything I could ever want - then I met ableton.

and let's not forget energyXT - another great fuckin app

....the list goes on and on....

[Improv]

Nuendo has...a higher quality audio engine

How does that work, then?

voodoo. The same way it always works.

So that would mean that Nuendo works alternate Tuesdays and every third Friday?

(Just asking-hey!!!!)

[valley]

the more i try to explain it, it just sounds like vst...i'm having a real hard time explaining it....

what you are basically asking for AFAICT is a modular sequencer, where whole sections of the application could be replaced with new modules.

Whilst this is an interesting idea, it tends not to work in practise. To make the system open enough to support the replacement of user interface components, and mixing/editing tools, the software interface through which they integrate into the application will inevitably become either so over engineered as to be unusably slow, or too restrictive to allow for anything beyond what we already have.

That's why the concept of plugins is so widely used (and not just in audio apps).

There are a lot of things that the VST spec lacks that a Tracktion native plugin SDK could offer (cross track plugins for a start), but unfortunately there is only so far you can take this before you start impacting negatively on performance (and ironically expandability).

[valley]

Nuendo has...a higher quality audio engine

How does that work, then?

voodoo. The same way it always works.

So that would mean that Nuendo works alternate Tuesdays and every third Friday?

(Just asking-hey!!!!)

that went way over my head.

[ross g]

the more i try to explain it, it just sounds like vst...i'm having a real hard time explaining it....

what you are basically asking for is a modular sequencer, where whole sections of the application could be replaced with new modules.

Whilst this is an interesting idea, it tends not to work in practise. To make the system open enough to support replacement user interface/mixing etc tools, inevitably the interface through which they integrate into the application becomes so over engineered as to be unusably slow, or too restrictive to allow for anything beyond what we already have.

That's why the concept of plugins is so widely used (and not just in audio apps).

There are a lot of things that the VST spec lacks that would a Tracktion native plugin SDK could offer (cross track plugins for a start), but unfortunately there is only so far you can take this before you start impacting negatively on performance.

i understand what you're saying about the problems of an expanded modular format past that idea, it's not lost on me... seems like lots of it comes down to cpu power...i can't believe what's possible now compaired to the past...people constantly compair the functions of one sequencer (or graphic program) to another, it would be nice to get a really solid , basic program and then add the few things you want/need (like a dynamically assinged mixer as far as channles/eqs/fx/etc) it ain't a bad idea to dream the shit up first, and it's cool that T2 actually inspired me to think of some other stuff that someday MIGHT be possible, i've never really done that before...so someone go ahead and build that now, will you?



rg


(goddamn, i really need to go in there and fix my spelling...pisses me off!!!)

[valley]

seems like lots of it comes down to cpu power...

some, not all.

Generally speaking it is true that to make data 'elastic' enough that it can be utilised effectively by a bunch of different applications, one tends to end up with a form of the data that is greatly less efficient than raw data formatted for just one task.

Modularized applications present another challenge though in that the modules need a way to communicate with each other, which means they need to know a lot of things about each other ahead of time. A software module can't simply drop into a host unless it has some agreed way of telling the host what it needs, and delivering to the host what the host expects. The design descisions you make here very quickly define the shape and form of all modules, and consequently the "modularity" of the system is somewhat illusory.

The CPU heft, as you suggest, is only a problem in the short term. The software challenge is greatly more tricky though, and presents a tough compromise beween usability, flexibility, and functionality that frankly makes my brain itch.

so someone go ahead and build that now, will you?

Have you ever looked at Plogue Bidule BTW? Probably way lower level than you have in mind, but an interesting concept.

[ross g]

without a quote, to valley:

why not just a multi-channel vst, is that possible?

i really understand what your saying, and you know, maybe it really ain't that good of an idea (although it seemed like one at the time)

i guess i'm looking at it as a plugin format for T2, the f with the others...is it impossible for third party developers to build a dynamic assigned mixer at least? if there was a multi-channel vst format, honestly, that might just do it....

i need to put more thought into this before i can make an intelligent comment...but i MIGHT be back to this


rg

[Lunch Money]

Quit saying the "m" word... you're creeping me out.

[ross g]

well i might not...does that creep you out as well?

hahahaha...

i'm tipsy, don't mind me.....

rg

[Lunch Money]

<lame Lion King reference>"Mixer"... brrr brr... "it gives me chills just saying it!"... "Mixer!"...."Say it again!"</reference off>

Greg

[TotcProductions]

one answer for this whole question. HEELLL NOOOOOO.


peace!